J-10B - Information

[Mosamania]

why china is not installing Conformal fuel tanks

i past china use j-7g
which had cft

It depends on requirements these things are not like "chrome rims" or "rear camera" in cars.

For instance Israeli desperately needs those to increase the F-16 operational range the UAE installed the same thing on their F-16s to increase it's operational range. The US didn't install these things on their own F-16s because the F-15E can handle that job perfectly. I think the J-8II can handle the deep strike role in PLAAF.

 

[Pak47]

Which western plane is it most comparable to?

F-16 block 60

 

[amalakas]

Says who? If you'd like to debate this.... I'm up for it!
All i have to do is search up the 500+ replies I've posted on IDF, arguing against the same BS you post here.

I don't much care what you do elsewhere.

What like the useless Cobra?

Cobra? requires a certain situation.... you can't just cobra for the hell of it.... secondly.... cobra requires a clean airframe....thirdly if not done right, it can put you in some serious sh*t also it requires pilots with great skill. Cobra? maybe just maybe it will be used one day.... for now... it's useless!

I can tell you that the useless cobra was a subject of study when it first became apparent that the russians could do it. I have attended the seminar .. i know.

If you are talking about overall maneuverability... J-10A had decent wing loading, lower then the F-16's, F-15s wing loading, it pulls about the same level of G's as other aircraft and in terms of AoA, I can tell you this by just from watching videos of the J-10 that the AoA is at the very least comparable to the F-16A if not better!

please don't let me stop you .. watch more videos.

And note that these airshows, the J-10s had some good speed on them too, they were flying at around 400-500 knots.
I urge you not to talk about things you don't know about!

I have actually served ..I have flown in an M2000 .. have you?

Secondly, gone are the days where in a dogfight only pilot skill and maneuverability counted.
A J-10, with a Good HMDS and Pl-5eII will make quick work of any maneuverable jet that lacks the same capability.

Systems like JHMCS are built to neutralize the advantage of super maneuverable aircraft.

I have monitored a lot of launches in my day.. most western and some russian weapons, and twice an israeli one and a Norwegian one, I have never seen a chinese weapon launched and I don't know what it can and what it cannot do. I will not drool over released press info, because I have seen that for the weapons I did monitor and it was miles from the truth.

Well take this into account... The J-10B's AESA is said to have 1200 T/R modules and LPI features...
Next the Radomme should be larger than the JF-17's... therefore larger then even the Eurofighter's Captor, further justification of this view is the larger nose made to accommodate DSI. Not to mention it will have an outstanding power output to go along with it...

Please mate, if you'd like to learn about AESA or other radars, please just ask, don't talk about things you don't understand.

I have forgotten more about AESA than you will ever learn. My degrees are testament to that, for you I don't know you, you could be anything from 12 to 112. Who knows.

The J-10A, I'd say is at least as capable as the Block 40 F-16. In terms of airframe, powerplant, avionics and weaponry.
My estimates are that the J-10B will outclass even the F-16Block 60/IN. Please prove me wrong if you can!

I can prove you wrong. The F-16 radar is amongst the most reliable I have seen. Inferior in some modes to the French RDY in the M2000 but overall, reliable. .a system you can count on.

The F-16 is a very agile aircraft ..in ways you cannot imagine. there is more to agility than wing loading. And you tell me to not talk about things I do not understand. right.
The AESA radar since you are so keen on, on the F-16 is state of the art. I was amazed when I saw a demonstration of it. And I still am. It is a fine piece of work. The J-10 AESA I have not seen and hence I have no real reason to praise it.


The F-16s in my base were up against other F-16s of a ''friendly'' neighbour 8 times a day.. in heavy dogfighting.. once your beloved J-10 proves it can do that .. then we'll talk.

They are more or less the same in terms of cost, the J-10A being comparable to the Block 40 is slightly cheaper, what makes them really different in terms of price are the price of the weapons and avionics packages.

Take PAF's Block 52s, together with weapons and avionics, we payed $80 million a piece for the F-16s.
The J-10A/B is equal if not better then it's counterparts while still being affordable.

if they are the same in terms of cost, then there is no comparison, the F-16 wins every time.

Track record, reliability, support, avionics, weapons, CFTs, AESA, IRST, JHMS, and more than 4000+ planes around the world to make a comprehensive manual of experience of what to do and what not to do in every possible scenario.

you want to go to war in a J-10? you obviously have no understanding of what i just typed.... be my quest

 

[Jungibaaz]

I don't much care what you do elsewhere.

Of course not, my point was that many a people elsewhere tried to debate this with me, from noobs to the fly boys and Think Tanks. None have succeeded.

I can tell you that the useless cobra was a subject of study when it first became apparent that the russians could do it. I have attended the seminar .. i know.

Well what do you have to say about the points I raised, it seems you're unwilling to debunk the points I raised while you disagree with them. Please Prove me wrong, instead of beating around the Bush.

please don't let me stop you .. watch more videos.

What about the points I raised?

'If you are talking about overall maneuverability... J-10A had decent wing loading, lower then the F-16's, F-15s wing loading, it pulls about the same level of G's as other aircraft and in terms of AoA, I can tell you this by just from watching videos of the J-10 that the AoA is at the very least comparable to the F-16A if not better!'

Have you chose to ignore them?

I have actually served ..I have flown in an M2000 .. have you?

Would you like a medal from me mate? anyway... you of all people should know what low wing loading, high AoA, and a good turn rate despite being a delta wing configuration means in terms of maneuverability.

If you have flown and served, I expect your knowledge to be above mine, so far your post haven't suggested anything of that order. So please prove me wrong instead boasting about what you've done and how that means anything about this debate.

I have monitored a lot of launches in my day.. most western and some russian weapons, and twice an israeli one and a Norwegian one, I have never seen a chinese weapon launched and I don't know what it can and what it cannot do. I will not drool over released press info, because I have seen that for the weapons I did monitor and it was miles from the truth.

Ah... so you've never witnessed them in that way now have you... tell me what kind of grounds do you hold to criticize things you don't understand?

And please don't go on to what your experiences with everything taught you, that has nothing to do with anything we are debating.

Please prove me wrong...

I have forgotten more about AESA than you will ever learn. My degrees are testament to that, for you I don't know you, you could be anything from 12 to 112. Who knows.

Ah more Chest thumping... then you of all people could tell me...

OF what we know about the J-10B's radar, why can't it face up to it's Russian/Western counter parts?

Going back to these points.

'The J-10B's AESA is said to have 1200 T/R modules and LPI features...
Next the Radomme should be larger than the JF-17's... therefore larger then even the Eurofighter's Captor, further justification of this view is the larger nose made to accommodate DSI. Not to mention it will have an outstanding power output to go along with it...'

I can prove you wrong.

Please do so.

The F-16 radar is amongst the most reliable I have seen. Inferior in some modes to the French RDY in the M2000 but overall, reliable. .a system you can count on.

The F-16 is undoubtedly one of the most reliable jets in the world, it's a reliable and proven machine... I'm not debating that.

The F-16 is a very agile aircraft ..in ways you cannot imagine. there is more to agility than wing loading. And you tell me to not talk about things I do not understand. right.

Well you tell me then... G limits, Turn rates, AoA, wing loading, control surfaces, thrust/powerplant, drag weight, inertia.
Tell me which the J-10B lacks and please by all means if you know more then i do, then kindly enlighten me.

The AESA radar since you are so keen on, on the F-16 is state of the art. I was amazed when I saw a demonstration of it. And I still am. It is a fine piece of work. The J-10 AESA I have not seen and hence I have no real reason to praise it.

Well mate, just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, judging from the specs and overviews i've given of what we do know, you must admit that it seems formidable!

The F-16s in my base were up against other F-16s of a ''friendly'' neighbour 8 times a day.. in heavy dogfighting.. once your beloved J-10 proves it can do that .. then we'll talk.

China's yet to use them that way.... but please do ask some of the Chinese members here the history of the J-10A in the PLAAF, it's performances in PLAAF exercises against Chinese Migs, Russian and Chinese Flankers.

By this measure you would also doubt the F-35, the F-15 Silent Eagle?

if they are the same in terms of cost, then there is no comparison, the F-16 wins every time.

Disagree.... matching J-10A to Block 40, they are quite similar and have equal capabilities.
IMHO the J-10B will probably be superior to the F-16 Block 60.

Track record, reliability, support, avionics, weapons, CFTs, AESA, IRST, JHMS, and more than 4000+ planes around the world to make a comprehensive manual of experience of what to do and what not to do in every possible scenario.

Well with AESA (with LPI), IRST, HMDS, low RCS (composites,RAM,DSI), an excellent ECM/EW suite, an avionics suite to be installed on the J-20, an excellent airframe and powerplant and good weaponry how can you come to such a conclusion?

you want to go to war in a J-10? you obviously have no understanding of what i just typed.... be my quest

Instead of telling me that you are capable of proving me wrong, why don't you just prove me wrong?

 

[Jungibaaz]

yes the F-16. and by the way, the DSI does not equal stealth redesign.

No one was talking of stealth... If you are as experienced as you say you are, someone of your stature should have known not to say that...

I think SinoSoldier meant a low RCS.
Now lets see shall we? In terms of size J-10 is a medium weight, quite close to the F-16 in terms of size, the RCS reduction methods include...

RAM coating (you know the deal), DSI (whereby you conceal the engine blades and cut back on RCS quite a bit), composites, which are said to be there in good quantity, also just by looking at the J-10B, outstanding nuts and bolts have been concealed, the airframe looks a lot stealthier, as in there are no outlying objects that would dd to it's RCS. And one aspect of stealth which you failed to take into account... avionics, the AESA with LPI cuts back on it's detecability, other said silent avionics for 5th gne platforms, which are hard to trace.. Not to mention passive stealth... EW/jamming.

Going by this the J-10B's RCS would be akin to at least that of the F-18E/F if not less. The frontal RCS would also quite small.

 

[gambit]

What like the useless Cobra?

Cobra? requires a certain situation.... you can't just cobra for the hell of it.... secondly.... cobra requires a clean airframe....thirdly if not done right, it can put you in some serious sh*t also it requires pilots with great skill. Cobra? maybe just maybe it will be used one day.... for now... it's useless!

The argument was against canards as a point FOR agility and maneuverability beyond the standard set by the F-16. Simply put, just because an aircraft has canards, or any other features not commonly seen, do not assume that said feature somehow rendered the aircraft superior to another, especially when that aircraft is the F-16 when it comes to agility.

If you are talking about overall maneuverability... J-10A had decent wing loading, lower then the F-16's, F-15s wing loading, it pulls about the same level of G's as other aircraft and in terms of AoA, I can tell you this by just from watching videos of the J-10 that the AoA is at the very least comparable to the F-16A if not better!

Do you know what is the J-10A's instantaneous roll rate?

And note that these airshows, the J-10s had some good speed on them too, they were flying at around 400-500 knots.

This does not really contribute to any understanding as to how the J-10A/B is comparable to the F-16, let alone superior. The F-16 will be surpassed some day, but for many of the world's air forces, that day is not yet here.

Well take this into account... The J-10B's AESA is said to have 1200 T/R modules and LPI features...

Said to have means nothing. The amount of T/R modules that is not accompanied by commensurate software exploitation mean those modules are useless.

Next the Radomme should be larger than the JF-17's... therefore larger then even the Eurofighter's Captor, further justification of this view is the larger nose made to accommodate DSI. Not to mention it will have an outstanding power output to go along with it...

A larger radome only imply a potentially larger antenna.

Please mate, if you'd like to learn about AESA or other radars, please just ask, don't talk about things you don't understand.

I would like to.

The J-10A, I'd say is at least as capable as the Block 40 F-16. In terms of airframe, powerplant, avionics and weaponry.
My estimates are that the J-10B will outclass even the F-16Block 60/IN. Please prove me wrong if you can!

That is not how it works. You cannot make assumptions and demand others prove you wrong. But if you want to go that route, you would still lose the debate because people do not make decisions based upon figures. They make these national defense related purchases based upon experience and records if they are available. To use an extreme example, an aircraft like the SR-71 is too specialized and therefore too expensive for just about everyone else. Moving away from that extreme and down the scale is where people begins to look at accomplishments like combat records and personal testimonies. So the burden of proof is actually upon YOU.

 

[gambit]

No one was talking of stealth... If you are as experienced as you say you are, someone of your stature should have known not to say that...

I think SinoSoldier meant a low RCS.
Now lets see shall we? In terms of size J-10 is a medium weight, quite close to the F-16 in terms of size, the RCS reduction methods include...

RAM coating (you know the deal), DSI (whereby you conceal the engine blades and cut back on RCS quite a bit), composites, which are said to be there in good quantity, also just by looking at the J-10B, outstanding nuts and bolts have been concealed, the airframe looks a lot stealthier, as in there are no outlying objects that would dd to it's RCS. And one aspect of stealth which you failed to take into account... avionics, the AESA with LPI cuts back on it's detecability, other said silent avionics for 5th gne platforms, which are hard to trace.. Not to mention passive stealth... EW/jamming.

Going by this the J-10B's RCS would be akin to at least that of the F-18E/F if not less. The frontal RCS would also quite small.

Another who believes that DSI was designed for 'stealth'. And I have no idea on what are 'silent avionics' and 'passive stealth'.

 

[ptldM3]

Yes, the J-10B is "vastly inferior" due to its stealthier profile, higher thrust to weight ratio, more powerful avionics.

Where do you get off by saying those things? Having a DSI does not make you 'stealthier', i just does not. Is there even any close ups of the J-10's intake proving that the intake compressors are in fact hidden?


Every design element of an aircraft can contribute to RCS. What makes you think that the J-10's refueling probe is not a contributor to RCS? I bet you did not know that even an aircraft's flaps can greatly contribute to RCS and even small things such as antennas can make a big difference. As can pylons and pods mounted on wing.

There is nothing suggesting that the J-10 is ‘stealthier’. In the real world there are countless factors to take into account when talking about RCS--having a DSI means nothing.


And what on earth does ‘more powerful avionics’ mean? There is no official data about the J-10, I bet you can’t even tell me basics such as resolution, or IRST modes, what about a praetorian system? Does the J-10 have something similar and if so what makes it better? Do you have proof showing the PL-12’s seeker is more effective?

Aircraft are made up of dozens of different systems, to say that the J-10 has more powerful avionics especially when there is no hard fact to back that claim just illustrates that your comments are a manifestation of national pride rather than reality.

I have studied the Typhoon and in my opinion it is one of the most survivable platforms around--the Typhoons strong point is its situational awareness in both the offensive and defensive roles.

The J-10B uses more lightweight materials, RAM, and has redesigns to reduce its RCS.

All speculation. And Is there a link that proves the J-10 uses more so called lightweight materials? And are we talking total weight or outer surface?

I was talking about air to air ability, in which the J-10B even excels the Eurofighter in some areas.

What areas would these be? How about posting something to back that claim?

 

[ptldM3]

What like the useless Cobra?

Cobra? requires a certain situation.... you can't just cobra for the hell of it.... secondly.... cobra requires a clean airframe....thirdly if not done right, it can put you in some serious sh*t also it requires pilots with great skill. Cobra? maybe just maybe it will be used one day.... for now... it's useless!

.

The Sukhoi isn't combat proven, it can't do a cobra fully loaded, it can't hold a hover, bla...bla...bla all false.

COBRA MANOEUVRE HEAVILY ARMED SUKHOI SU 35 - YouTube

As for a Cobra being useless, the point of a cobra is to quickly decelerate, British Harriers during the Folkland war used VIFF in dogfights.

 

[sancho]

Let me quote myself here once more, because the basic problem to compare J10 is still the lack of "credible" sources!

Since this is J-10B - Information thread, can we collect some sources and specs of the fighter?

- empty weight
- internal fuel
- content of composites (compared to J10A as a base)
- Dry and AB thrust
- radar detection against certain target size
- EWS sensors

and so on. Maybe also websites or blogs with good/reliable infos.

+ Truthseeker2010 asked, about the payload differences from J10A to B, any infos on that?

 

[Zabaniyah]

DSI does not contribute much to lowering RCS. It just contributes to ease of manufacturing and maintenance. Also, reduces costs.

Note that the F-22 does not have DSI intakes, but it's stealth characteristics surpasses all known aircraft in service.

People really need to get over this hearsay that "DSI intakes are good for stealth"

 

[Zabaniyah]

What like the useless Cobra?

Cobra? requires a certain situation.... you can't just cobra for the hell of it.... secondly.... cobra requires a clean airframe....thirdly if not done right, it can put you in some serious sh*t also it requires pilots with great skill. Cobra? maybe just maybe it will be used one day.... for now... it's useless

Please...tell me you are joking!

The Sukhoi isn't combat proven, it can't do a cobra fully loaded, it can't hold a hover, bla...bla...bla all false.

COBRA MANOEUVRE HEAVILY ARMED SUKHOI SU 35 - YouTube

As for a Cobra being useless, the point of a cobra is to quickly decelerate, British Harriers during the Folkland war used VIFF in dogfights.

Okay, I didn't know that Harriers can pull off the cobra maneuver!

It is no doubt a good tactic. But if used in the wrong situation, the bird is good as dead.

 

[Mosamania]

DSI does not contribute much to lowering RCS. It just contributes to ease of manufacturing and maintenance. Also, reduces costs.

Note that the F-22 does not have DSI intakes, but it's stealth characteristics surpasses all known aircraft in service.

People really need to get over this hearsay that "DSI intakes are good for stealth"

1-General design.Pretty much everything I could think of falls under General design. (How radar reflects on the Aircraft. materials used, wings, Canopy material and design, Stabilizer design)
2-Weapons load out. (Internal weapon load outs reduces RCS greatly. That's why no 5th gen can call itself that without them)
3-Air Intake and propelling.(Decrease heat coming out of Aircraft, Don't let radar go through it increase surface area but at the same time let radar PASS through it if possible (how did the americans do it I am still thinking about it, Guess when the Aircraft is finally retired they will tell us in a documentary or something))
Pretty much everything I could think of falls under General design. (How radar reflects on the Aircraft. materials used, wings, Canopy material and design, Stabilizer design)

 

[houshanghai]

F22's Caret intake is an old design,
Actually ,DSI has a stealth enhancement.Except for J20 f35,you can see that the design of Boeing F/A-XX new 6th gen fighter Concept will use the technique of DSI intake,SAAB FS2020 5 gen Stealth Fighter Concept even GRIPEN NG will also use DSI.


Boeing F/A-XX new 6th gen fighter Concept with DSI

SAAB FS2020 Stealth Fighter Concept with DSI

SAAB GRIPEN NG with DSI

The first new-build Gripen NG is due to fly in 2012. Reports describe stealth enhancements including diverterless inlets. The enhanced performance (EPE) engine would be a useful addition—at its highest reported rating, its non-afterburning output would be over 90% of the maximum thrust of the C/D’s RM12 engine, although Saab may elect to take a smaller thrust boost combined with longer engine life to reduce ownership cost. GE claims that the EPE is relatively low-risk.

Duels In The Sky | AVIATION WEEK

 

[SQ8]

People fighting over thin air.. funny.

What is known on the J-10B.
Lets start with the pictures.
We see the inlet changed to a DSI design... doesn't automatically imply stealth nor does it take away the possibility.
Changes to the nose that do seem similar to that on the F-16 Block 60.So while that may seem like its designed to take an AESA radar it does not mean that its not hollow and filled with Ballast while the radar may be in development.

We see some changes to the tail and what seem like additional EW receivers. So it has been planned with an uprated electronic suite...otherwise whats the point of adding all that?
Its cockpit ergonomics are also different from that of the original J-10 in that it has a true glass touch screen cockpit... But Ill be the first to tell you that putting pretty graphics on an LCD is as easy as 123.

The Chinese AESA project based on rumors and info has achieved certain hardware and software sophistication.
And despite many doubters , Chinese progress is starting to follow moore's law... and in no less part to their civilian manufacturing industry, and the many Chinese "expats" you are quietly sent abroad to glean all they can out of the west.
Ive worked with both US , European and Chinese equipment in a very short while(and had the headache of having to integrate them together).. and the level of software sophistication with the Chinese is still behind what is offered by the west.
Look at it this way.. A Chinese Autocorr algo implementation will perform the task in 12 cycles as compared to say the American one at 15.. but it will also end up giving me an overflow/divide by zero/general exception warning thrice in 50 calls while its mirror US developed code will give me none in 5000 calls.

The J-10A has been flown by PAF pilots who likes the experience to an F-16. Its that simple.
People may talk about the F-4.. or the Mig-21.. but the true legend of fighter design is the F-16.
There has never been a complaint by any pilot who said that it did not do what was asked of it.
It is still one of the deadliest foes in WVR.. and a threat in BVR. It's the benchmark in multirole design and will continue to be so for another 20 years. Ask those who have flown it, maintained it and fought against it.. its sheer brilliance.
The J-10B is an equation we cannot compare unless we see it at an airshow with an information stand next to it.
Heck people were unsure about the JF-17 till the airshows came up.. those that do get to hear about the inside scoop..are rarely told more than 50%.. of which they leak out 20.
Till then.. what you know as the best will remain the best till proven otherwise.