J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Inst said:
IIRC, the engine situation came up because the WS-10A was touted as being superior to the AL-31FN, but the WS-10A engine, mainly, took longer to spin up than the AL-31FN and thus would be dangerous if employed in the single-engined J-10. It also had less thrust than the AL-31 engines, unfortunately, but we'll see if anything comes out of the WS-10B/Gs.
Click to expand...

Yeah but I think that was from around 2008...I never really bought into the less thrust and spinning up thing -- the only problem I remember was/is reliability. I thought WS-10 had slightly greater thrust and mtbo time compared to al-31 as well?
 
I

Inst

Captain
Well, I was watching the J-10 since 2004, so it's been quite slow. But then again, the people following the F-35 must have the same headaches as it's been a boondoggle for quite some time.
 
I

Inst

Captain
Maya indicated that the WS-10A had lower thrust than the AL-31, but he also claimed that the J-20 silver nozzles was running AL-31, when we're fairly sure it's either a WS-10G or a WS-10B.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Inst said:
Maya indicated that the WS-10A had lower thrust than the AL-31, but he also claimed that the J-20 silver nozzles was running AL-31, when we're fairly sure it's either a WS-10G or a WS-10B.
Click to expand...

Hmm he hasn't come on for a while now, but even then, there are quite a few conflicting stories and theories and reports on WS-10 it's hard to know what's the truth.

Wait and see as always.
 
C

Centrist

Junior Member
Inst said:
Maya indicated that the WS-10A had lower thrust than the AL-31, but he also claimed that the J-20 silver nozzles was running AL-31, when we're fairly sure it's either a WS-10G or a WS-10B.
Click to expand...

Maya has said a lot of things that turned out to be false.
 
N

no_name

Colonel
Both PESA and AESA can do scanning without needing to be steered mechanically, but they can be mechanical steered on top of electronic steering if the designer wanted.

The main difference between AESA and PESA, is that each element on the AESA can act as a separate transmitter module, whereas for PESA you have a central transmitter and each element can only alter the phase (ie steer the beam).

AESA are therefor more complex and expensive than PESA, but it is more redundant and damage resistant in that if a few transmitting modules are damaged it may still provide some function.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top