J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

[Blitzo]

The key question here is: is this radar newly developed or has it already been tested?

If it is new, then there is no way the J-10B is going to use that radar. Huitong posted that the J-10B will be entering production this year. If the radar is new, it would have to go through years of testing and fixing.

Here's also a thought: wasn't the purpose of the J-10B to test 5th generation avionics? This could mean multiple things. It means that one or two J-10Bs would be converted to testbeds (possibly the one that was pictured recently), or it could mean that the J-10B would get AESAs.

I think the easiest explanation is that J-10B would test and use some 5th gen technologies just like other 4+ gen aircraft as part of its natural evolution. That's how I interpret the idea that "J-10B will be a testbed" -- a real testbed would be one of those Y-8 aircraft with the modified radome to test radars and the like.

The J-10B photographed is also in yellow primer; considering that the other J-10Bs are in PLAAF grey, it leads me to think that it might be a testbed.

I think that the plane we're seeing now could be the 1032 static testbed which is why all the panels look open and done up etc.

A Chinese military official commented that the J-15 and J-11B may get AESA. If the less capable J-11B and J-15 could get it, then why not the J-10B? It's obviously not about the price anymore.

In short, I think that this particular J-10B is a testbed.

Less capable J-11B and J-15? Hmm the problem is that news of the PLA flankers getting AESA came years after rumours saying J-10B would get AESA.
Also, to clarify, what do you mean by this particular J-10B is a "testbed" -- do you mean a general prototype testing the J-10B's radar (and presumably other avionics), or that it's testing J-20 technologies only, or that it's only testing the radar? Because I only agree with the first one.

 

[Red___Sword]

@ Bltizo, I guess when people use the term "testbed", they are using it loosely. It would simply means "J-10B is going to MOUNT SOMETHING on it, which is to be used on J-20 kind of super-hot-shot" to test run, before it is FINALLY standard issued (to J-20 or J-10B or any others, dose not matters).

Rumors DOSE spread among Chinese forums that this pic indicating it is PESA. But given the QUALITY of usuall Chinese fans, that how many can actually tell the difference of PESA and AESA...

I simply sit back and wait for some more "formal hints" by the respective authorities. - Authorities do not PUBLISH formal stuff, at all! But if you know "how to read", you can read "formal hints", when time gose by.

 

[Quickie]

Tphuang, can you make a judgement with this picture?

What do you think about all the talk over on the Chinese sites about the radar actually being PESA, what's your take on their credibility?

The element arrangement in this radar has a mix of 2 patterns in alternate rows. Overall the pattern looks more irregular than the regular pattern of the PESA radars, like those in the pictures posted by TPHuang. The AESA examples in the same pictures also have a seemingly more messy element arrangement than the PESA. So, it should follow that this Chinese radar is more likely to be an AESA, too.

 

[Inst]

It can't be circular because the way the J-10's nosecone is built precludes a circular radar.

But if you look at the AESAs, most of them have protruding elements, whereas in the case of the PESAs the planar array is flat, and if there's a feature in the array, it's a receding element.

Besides, the radar that most resembles the J-10B radar in surface features is the Irbis, not any of the AESAs.

 

[Quickie]

It can't be circular because the way the J-10's nosecone is built precludes a circular radar.

But if you look at the AESAs, most of them have protruding elements, whereas in the case of the PESAs the planar array is flat, and if there's a feature in the array, it's a receding element.

Besides, the radar that most resembles the J-10B radar in surface features is the Irbis, not any of the AESAs.

The J-10 radar is covered by a layer of yellow translucent material. That's the reason why the protruding elements are not visible.

 

[i.e.]

J-10B is not a "cheap fighter" in the line up.

it is prob going to be part of the backbone of interceptor force.

J-10 units nails J-11/Su-27sk in internal exercises all the time.

 

[Inst]

As far as translucent material goes, we've seen a PESA that sufficiently resembles the radar we saw on the J-10B.

That IS the array in itself.

As far as the J-10B being the cheap fighter in the line-up, it's the high-low mix used by many other air forces. The J-7s and J-8s are legacy fighters, the J-10B provides most of the air combat capability, but when you need air superiority you take the J-11s and the Su-30MKKs for their superior BVR capability. If it beats the J-11s and the Su-30MKKs, sure, the F-16 beats the F-15 in dogfights as well, but from range the Su-30MKKs are more likely to pick off quite a few of the J-10s with BVR missiles before they even get into close range.

 

[Centrist]

Deleted

 

[siegecrossbow]

As far as translucent material goes, we've seen a PESA that sufficiently resembles the radar we saw on the J-10B.

That IS the array in itself.

As far as the J-10B being the cheap fighter in the line-up, it's the high-low mix used by many other air forces. The J-7s and J-8s are legacy fighters, the J-10B provides most of the air combat capability, but when you need air superiority you take the J-11s and the Su-30MKKs for their superior BVR capability. If it beats the J-11s and the Su-30MKKs, sure, the F-16 beats the F-15 in dogfights as well, but from range the Su-30MKKs are more likely to pick off quite a few of the J-10s with BVR missiles before they even get into close range.

Not if the J-10B could detect the Su-30MKKs and J-11Bs before they could detect the J-10B. J-10B will have a much smaller RCS than any sino-flanker variant.

 

[Inst]

That's true, we're expecting around .5m^2 RCS on the J-10B, right? The J-11Bs are currently at 3m^2 RCS, and the Chinese are sufficiently dissatisfied with it that they want to upgrade and improve it. The radar on the flankers should have about 30% more range than the J-10B radars, independent of technology, based on size only, and a reduction of 10 times RCS results in a reduction of detection range by 50%.

Besides, loading on external weapons increases RCS significantly, so the RCS advantage will be more there if the fighters decide to jettison weapons and flee.

Still, one of the key advantages of the J-10 is its relative cost; the J-10B should cost around 40 million USD, the J-10A should cost around 27 million USD. There's no reason to install 10 million USD radars when that makes up a quarter of the plane's cost.