J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

[Quickie]

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.

No, the translucent material is separate from the antenna elements! Unlike the previous examples, the material is not even merged with the elements but just cover over them. It may be just a temporary protective cover.

 

[Inst]

The protective covers we've seen on AESAs are featureless and flat. This one has horizontal lines and circular holes.

The disturbing thing is that I thought the J-20 was using AESA; if the J-10B is still on PESA it may turn out that the J-20 is also on PESA until Chinese first generation AESAs become ready.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The protective covers we've seen on AESAs are featureless and flat. This one has horizontal lines and circular holes.

The disturbing thing is that I thought the J-20 was using AESA; if the J-10B is still on PESA it may turn out that the J-20 is also on PESA until Chinese first generation AESAs become ready.

J-20 doesn't have any onboard radar right now. Since the plane is still in the prototype stage what they have in the nose is probably just steel weight.

 

[Blitzo]

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.

Umm I think it's a bit far to talk about RCS here. That J-11B 3m^2 RCS rumour has gotten way out of hand

 

[A.Man]

This is this Two Seater?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Quickie]

The protective covers we've seen on AESAs are featureless and flat. This one has horizontal lines and circular holes.

The disturbing thing is that I thought the J-20 was using AESA; if the J-10B is still on PESA it may turn out that the J-20 is also on PESA until Chinese first generation AESAs become ready.

It's just a protective covering. The unevenness on it has nothing to do with and will not affect radar transmission. The covering has nothing to do with whether it's AESA or PESA!

 

[Blitzo]

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.

Which PESA was that again? And I wouldn't judge whether something is AESA or PESA based on the translucent piece of plastic on that radar picture (not the one with the J-10B's nose open, but the one supposedly on display -- that looked like it was just for protection/displaypurposes?)

---------------

Oh hai, Israeli EL/2052 AESA
It's shiny and translucent too

Hmm but the previous supposed talk over at CD is making me consider the possibility the radar could be PESA.

Going for AESA visually, is the appearance of individual TR modules.
Going for PESA visually, is the red IFF poles.
As of now I'm going to stick with the status quo though, unless something major pops up, like huitong changing his entry or a change of stance from tphuang, =GT, or i.e

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.

I disagree. J-10B should have a much smaller RCS than any sino flanker, as someone else before said. RCS will determine who wins in BVR, mostly, apart from how powerful the radar on respective aircraft are. If J-11s got AESAs that were fitted snugly into their nose then we'll see.
But as of now it sounds like J-10>J-11/flankers in everything apart from the "hard" physical attributes (radar size, endurance, range, payload) so yeah it certainly won't be the "low" in the PLAAF's force composition.

I think it'll be more of a "medium/high" while flankers take the "high". J-7s and J-8s take the "low" for the next few years, but I'm expecting a low cost mass produced fighter (based on JL-15 maybe?) to replace them simply because the PLAAF probably doesn't have the funds to replace all legacy planes with J-10s

 

[antiterror13]

Which PESA was that again? And I wouldn't judge whether something is AESA or PESA based on the translucent piece of plastic on that radar picture (not the one with the J-10B's nose open, but the one supposedly on display -- that looked like it was just for protection/displaypurposes?)

---------------

Oh hai, Israeli EL/2052 AESA
It's shiny and translucent too

Hmm but the previous supposed talk over at CD is making me consider the possibility the radar could be PESA.

Going for AESA visually, is the appearance of individual TR modules.
Going for PESA visually, is the red IFF poles.
As of now I'm going to stick with the status quo though, unless something major pops up, like huitong changing his entry or a change of stance from tphuang, =GT, or i.e



I disagree. J-10B should have a much smaller RCS than any sino flanker, as someone else before said. RCS will determine who wins in BVR, mostly, apart from how powerful the radar on respective aircraft are. If J-11s got AESAs that were fitted snugly into their nose then we'll see.
But as of now it sounds like J-10>J-11/flankers in everything apart from the "hard" physical attributes (radar size, endurance, range, payload) so yeah it certainly won't be the "low" in the PLAAF's force composition.

I think it'll be more of a "medium/high" while flankers take the "high". J-7s and J-8s take the "low" for the next few years, but I'm expecting a low cost mass produced fighter (based on JL-15 maybe?) to replace them simply because the PLAAF probably doesn't have the funds to replace all legacy planes with J-10s

PLAAF doesn't need to replace all legacy J-7x with J-10x, it is absolutely unnecessary and too expensive. Perhaps in the next 5 years when FC-1 more mature and more modern and able to be fitted with PESA/AESA (small version), PLAAF may be interested to buy 500 of them, perhaps it will be called FC-1C or JF-17C, if the cost go up to $25M with indigenous engine WS-13A/B, it is still cheap, 500 of them is only $12.5B, it is only 0.4% of her $3T FX reserve or only 2 months interest income, very cheap. And being 100 % indigenous, including engine and avionic, actually the purchase will create more jobs and stimulate Chinese economy (and somewhat Pakistan as well)

 

[Blitzo]

PLAAF doesn't need to replace all legacy J-7x with J-10x, it is absolutely unnecessary and too expensive. Perhaps in the next 5 years when FC-1 more mature and more modern and able to be fitted with PESA/AESA (small version), PLAAF may be interested to buy 500 of them, perhaps it will be called FC-1C or JF-17C, if the cost go up to $25M with indigenous engine WS-13A/B, it is still cheap, 500 of them is only $12.5B, it is only 0.4% of her $3T FX reserve or only 2 months interest income, very cheap. And being 100 % indigenous, including engine and avionic, actually the purchase will create more jobs and stimulate Chinese economy (and Pakistan as well)

$25 mil for an aircraft, I think is still too expensive for the PLAAF to procure in J-7 and J-8 numbers... On wikipedia the estimate unit cost for a J-10 is ~$28 mil. May as well buy more J-10s instead of JF-17s considering how similar their parameters are and the capabilities they offer...

I envision an L-15 derived light fighter/attacker, without AESA or IRST or any too fancy ECM. Equipped with "off the shelf" avionics like late J-7 variants like the G version (which in themselves are not too shabby) but with the addition to fire actively guided missiles and PGMs, it should have a pretty low unit cost and offer a small, light fighter that can go supersonic and is not too overpowered for consistent peacetime duty and not too underpowered when called on for more demanding wartime operations.

Something like this:

 

[antiterror13]

J-10 basic cost $28, J-10A cost #35 and J-10B cost $45M

$25M is too expensive for China ?, It is only 2 months interest income for 500 of them. $25M is my estimate, perhaps if China buy 500 of them, the price may be $20-$22M, extremely cheap for BVR and AESA