FGFA vs J-XX

[lockh33d]

Thats a general statment... do you actually think Janes pulled some random guy off the streets and interview him? Anyways you wana talk about trust lets talk about how China, a suposed allie of the Soviet Union attacked Russian troops on their own territory.





And again, for the millionth time, how would you like me to give you a link? You want me to pull it out of thin air? I told you search Janes. I wish the site allowed me to post links but i can't.



Stop puting words in my mouth, when did i say Russian avionics are superior? The fact is Russia makes some damn good systems For example:

The X-band multimode phased array Irbis-E radar is supplied by Tikhomirov Scientific-Research Institute of Instrument Design (NIIP), based in Zhukovsky. Irbis-E is a high-performance radar designed for the Su-35 aircraft.

The 900mm passive phased array antenna is mounted on a hydraulic actuator for mechanical steering. The electronic steering provides azimuthal and elevation coverage of 60°. With both mechanical and electronic scanning the coverage is 120°.

The radar can detect low-observable and stealth aircraft, unmanned air vehicles and missiles with a radar cross section of 0.01m² at ranges to 90km. Radar modes include air-to-air, air-to-ground, air-to-sea, mapping, Doppler beam and synthetic aperture radar modes. It can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets with a radar cross section (RCS) of 3m² at ranges of 400km using track-while-scan mode.

The infrared search and track fire control system, OLS-35 IRST, includes an infrared sensor, laser rangefinder, target designator and television camera. The accuracy of the laser rangefinder is 5m CEP (circular error probability), to a maximum range of 20km against airborne targets and 30km against ground targets. The OLS-35 is a high-performance system with ±90° azimuthal and +60°/-15° elevation coverage.

"Irbis-E is a high-performance radar designed for the Su-35 aircraft."The system's acquisition range against a non-afterburning target is 50km forwards and 90km rearward. The Su-35 can also be fitted with a UOMZ Sapsan targeting and laser designation pod.

-Airforce technology.com



You're basing your opinion on the fact that American pilots shot down outdated Russian aircraft flown by incompedent morons. If MODERN Russian aircraft such as SU-35bm went to war again OLD American F-4's and A-4's flown by monkeys the Russian aircraft would come out victorious too.




Most American companies such as Lockhead are not know outside the US. General Electric is a recognizable company because they built all sorts of civilian applications, Russian companies, on the other hand, are strictly military, so no dishwashers anytime soon....




I hate to rain on your parade but google J-10 cockpit, then talk analog. The SU-34, SU-27SK, SU-30, SU-35, Mig-29K, and Mig-35 all use LCD technology and some fighters listed above have zero analog. Google is your friend.

Know the facts before you post trash, you'll spare yourself the humiliation.......



Those analog systems were put in place because the pilots felt comfortable having a backup, btw my brother is a piliot. The aircraft would function just as well with out them. just an fyi, modern Russian cockpits look quite different to the pic you posted above.



I tryed that the other day, it didn't work! However, it appears i can finally use a real URL.


Chinese J-10 'benefited from the Lavi project' - Jane's Defence Systems News

For starters, thanks for providing a credible link for the first time. Now, jumping to the original argument, it was that Isreal provided parts for the J-10, now in your article, although there was a Lavi proto for inspection, nowhere in the article does it say we used anything stolen from the Lavi nor did it say we took the suggestions the Israelis offered in their aeronautical designs. Maybe, and ONLY perhaps, if Jane's is right, that Israel sent over the designs, but it didn't say the J-10 actually FOLLOWED it.

And as for the J-10 analog avionic system:



Lastly, whatever you try to do to humiliate me, it won't, because I learn from other people, not get arrogant and brag about anything that comes up to my head. Thanks for your lessons

 

[ptldM3]

For starters, thanks for providing a credible link for the first time. Now, jumping to the original argument, it was that Isreal provided parts for the J-10, now in your article, although there was a Lavi proto for inspection, nowhere in the article does it say we used anything stolen from the Lavi nor did it say we took the suggestions the Israelis offered in their aeronautical designs. Maybe, and ONLY perhaps, if Jane's is right, that Israel sent over the designs, but it didn't say the J-10 actually FOLLOWED it.

China's Chengdu J-10 fighter aircraft benefited from significant, direct input from Israel's Lavi programme - including access to the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) Lavi aircraft itself.

And as for the J-10 analog avionic system:

Broken link. Here is a pic of a J-10 with some anolog: http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/1_F-10_COCKPIT.jpg

I'm sure the J-10B has a full glass cockpit, but so do Russian fighters, so it was unfair of you to point out the analog that some Russian fighters use. Also like i said the analog was just meant as a back-up, having some anolog doesn't mean your aircraft is less capable, it's just a precautionary measure.

Just proof that not all Russian fighter use anolog:

http://i41.tinypic.com/20qxldt.jpg

http://e.imagehost.org/0945/Su35_cockpit-2.jpg

http://www.ausairpower.net/Su-34-FRP-Cockpit-4S.jpg

-Regards

 

[lockh33d]

China's Chengdu J-10 fighter aircraft benefited from significant, direct input from Israel's Lavi programme - including access to the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) Lavi aircraft itself.







Broken link. Here is a pic of a J-10 with some anolog: http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/1_F-10_COCKPIT.jpg

I'm sure the J-10B has a full glass cockpit, but so do Russian fighters, so it was unfair of you to point out the analog that some Russian fighters use. Also like i said the analog was just meant as a back-up, having some anolog doesn't mean your aircraft is less capable, it's just a precautionary measure.

Just proof that not all Russian fighter use anolog:

http://i41.tinypic.com/20qxldt.jpg

http://e.imagehost.org/0945/Su35_cockpit-2.jpg

http://www.ausairpower.net/Su-34-FRP-Cockpit-4S.jpg

-Regards

Yes we had access to the tech, but we didn't implement it the way it was in the Lavi. It just gave us ideas, from the way I see it. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. It's not like the USSR, which stole the blueprints for the atomic bomb right after WWII and copied everything part after part. We BENEFITTED, which I see it as GAINING KNOWLEDGE.

-Regards

 

[Moscow]

ptldm3 mate not point arguing with idiots as my friend here leon famously quoted


first they will bring you down to their level and beat you in their own game

 

[Moscow]

Everyone, I don't know you

turn your page and go through your last few posts and the mod warning in it thats it

 

[lockh33d]

turn your page and go through your last few posts and the mod warning in it thats it

-No idea what you're talking about.

 

[grey boy 2]

-No idea what you're talking about.

He was talking about post #39.

 

[TaimiKhan]

All Chinese Members: Plz stop using the double ID discussion / blame game with A.V & ptldM3. If you have any query or ambiguity plz contact Webby for clarification or PM any Sup Mod to get clarified.

Hope this issue is not repeated again.

 

[aakalim]

In my opinion, comparing FGFA and J-XX is just like comparing two unborn babies.

We may discuss and compare as much as we want, but the final outcome can be very different, specially when there is little reliable info about these birds.

 

[booo]

-Regards

Su-35 is HOTAS right?

 

[Moscow]

Ïóáëèêàöèè ñàéòà

check the link above its dated 20.11.2009 and is from zhukovsky news a journal detailing news from zhukovsky the air base near moscow where static tests for pakfa are on
it claims that pakfa will fly before new year

my personal view is even if it flies it might or might not be revealed to the press because sukhoi is very guarded after the april accident on the su-35 BM 004 prototype they would want to make sure that all goes well with pakfa before opening the press for dissection

 

[ironman]

Then you have heard wrong. The last batch of AL-31F was purchased in 2007. The only other contracts at the moment are the sales of IL-76, Ka-28 and Mi-17. WS-10A has already seen service with J-11B and is currently in the process of being certified for J-10B.

Some reality check.....

Chinese AVIC Top Head admits the Poor Quality of Jet Engine​

Posted on 02 April 2009 by admin

Apr.2 (China Defense Mashup Reporting by Johnathan Weng) — Mr. Lin Zuoming (林左&#40483, the top head of ACIC (Aviation Industry Corporation of China), has to admit that China’s “Taihang” WS-10 Turbofan Engine is still unsatisfactory in its quality.

In one of his opening letter, he says that the military aircraft engine production has been the “chronic illness” in Chinese aviation industry and he urges that the solving of “Taihang” WS-10 Turbofan engine is the key step to reinforce the Quality Control Procedure in AVIC.

Now PLA Air Force has install some WS-10 engine on its J-11B dual-engine heavy fighters for evaluation. But the result is not positive. Some resources report that the quality of WS-10 engine is terrible and PLA Air Force has begun to lose patiency of purchasing more WS-10 engine.

In early March 2009, One Chinese PLA Air Force Pilot sucessfully made a forced landing of one J-10 fighter due to the air shut-down of AL-31F engine. As one kind of single engine fighter, J-10 is very dangerous when power system in trouble.

As a result, PLA Air Force has been knowing the stability of Russian engines and just imported AL-31F engines before the finish of WS-10 development. But the fact shows that the WS-10 engine just looks advanced but has no real advantages to AL-31F.

The forced landing accident warns PLA Air Force that the aviation engines has been the killing shortages of its J-10 and J-11 fleets. No combat aircraft after all can fight without reliable engines.

AN interview with NPO Saturn Commercial Director Igor Grigoryev. Look at this part.."Our relations with China often represented the following pattern: we sell a number of engines, whereas the other party uses them for copying."

And lastly here the Jane's article.

Chinese J-10 'benefited from the Lavi project'

19 May 2008

Russian aerospace engineers have confirmed to Jane's that China's Chengdu J-10 fighter aircraft benefited from significant, direct input from Israel's Lavi programme - including access to the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) Lavi aircraft itself.

In a number of interviews Jane's has talked at length with several engineers, designers and technical specialists - some of whom have been working with their Chinese counterparts for decades and have had first-hand experience on Chinese military projects. They have provided detailed accounts of the assistance given to various Chinese manufacturers and their military aircraft projects. This has included extensive design and performance modelling, wind-tunnel testing and advanced aerodynamic design input.

Senior Russian engineers who spoke to Jane's recalled their many visits to Chengdu, and elsewhere in China, some of which began in the 1980s. Jane's was told how Chengdu officials of the highest level stated how they had one of the IAI Lavi prototypes in their facilities. Describing his conversations with Chengdu concerning possession of a Lavi aircraft, one Jane's source commented: "I did not consider that to be a revelation ... doesn't everyone know that already?"

It is not possible to independently verify the Russian comments. The charge of Lavi technology transfer has been made before, but this time the claims come from individuals with sustained personal experience of the programme. Both Chinese and Israeli officials have long refuted any purported links between the J-10 and the Lavi.

 

[BlackenTheSky]

HOW CAN U COMPARE THESE TWO AIRCRAFTS WHICH DO NOT EXIST AND NO PROPER INFORMATION ABOUT THEM...

 

[bilal1219]

HOW CAN U COMPARE THESE TWO AIRCRAFTS WHICH DO NOT EXIST AND NO PROPER INFORMATION ABOUT THEM...

These are the words of my mouth. Comparing 2 birds which didnt even come into prototype as well. this is just like wasting time nothing else. Dont you guyz have nothing better to do than opening up useless threads about unborn fighter aircrafts.

Regards

 

[lockh33d]

Some reality check.....

Chinese AVIC Top Head admits the Poor Quality of Jet Engine​

Posted on 02 April 2009 by admin

Apr.2 (China Defense Mashup Reporting by Johnathan Weng) — Mr. Lin Zuoming (林左&#40483, the top head of ACIC (Aviation Industry Corporation of China), has to admit that China’s “Taihang” WS-10 Turbofan Engine is still unsatisfactory in its quality.

In one of his opening letter, he says that the military aircraft engine production has been the “chronic illness” in Chinese aviation industry and he urges that the solving of “Taihang” WS-10 Turbofan engine is the key step to reinforce the Quality Control Procedure in AVIC.

Now PLA Air Force has install some WS-10 engine on its J-11B dual-engine heavy fighters for evaluation. But the result is not positive. Some resources report that the quality of WS-10 engine is terrible and PLA Air Force has begun to lose patiency of purchasing more WS-10 engine.

In early March 2009, One Chinese PLA Air Force Pilot sucessfully made a forced landing of one J-10 fighter due to the air shut-down of AL-31F engine. As one kind of single engine fighter, J-10 is very dangerous when power system in trouble.

As a result, PLA Air Force has been knowing the stability of Russian engines and just imported AL-31F engines before the finish of WS-10 development. But the fact shows that the WS-10 engine just looks advanced but has no real advantages to AL-31F.

The forced landing accident warns PLA Air Force that the aviation engines has been the killing shortages of its J-10 and J-11 fleets. No combat aircraft after all can fight without reliable engines.

Where's the link to the source of the April 2nd article? Right now, it just looks like another Indian trying to initiate a flame thread again...Where's India's engine? You either don't have the brains to make one(Most likely) or you are too pussy to even try! Lol, can't even get the Tejas straight...