J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

[Engineer]

You are the one making the all encompassing claim, not me.
How is your example of su-35, su-30mki, su-34 proof of your universal claim? All it shows is that the Russians had different requirements than the Indians, you've not shown one piece of proof that Russian flankers do not have canards+tvc because they two together are redundant.

Flanker is made by Russia, and so Russian have total understanding about the aircraft where as India does not. Therefore, what Russia does with their own Flanker should be the yard stick, not the MKI. The fact that Sukhoi didn't go for canards in the latest Flanker variant says a lot more than the canards on the MKI.

 

[Engineer]

That... Is a dangerous Underestimation.

Oh yeah? How many wind tunnels do they have compared to US, Russia, China, France or UK? India's track record with its existing aircraft isn't pretty, either.

 

[Blitzo]

Flanker is made by Russia, and so Russian has total understanding about the aircraft where as India does not. Therefore, what Russia does with their own Flanker should be the yard stick, not the MKI. The fact that Sukhoi didn't go for canards in the latest Flanker variant says a lot more than the canards on the MKI.

For the sake of continuing the discussion I will concede this idea. But that does not validate the claim he made in the first place, which I put into a simpler to comprehend form in post 2322.

 

[Blitzo]

Oh yeah? How many wind tunnels do they have compared to US, Russia, China, France or UK? India's track record with its existing aircraft isn't pretty, either.

Fewer I'd imagine. That doesn't mean they are so daft they will stupidly follow sukhoi "advice".

 

[Lion]

Fewer I'd imagine. That doesn't mean they are so daft they will stupidly follow sukhoi "advice".

After their Arjun tank problem.. I believe this is possible. Their Arjun is seriously overweight which most of their infrastructure can't support. This problem has pointed out long time ago before finalise of the design but was seriously ignored.

Indian defence can be very irrational sometimes.

 

[Blitzo]

After their Arjun tank problem.. I believe this is possible. Their Arjun is seriously overweight which most of their infrastructure can't support. This problem has pointed out long time ago before finalise of the design but was seriously ignored.

Indian defence can be very irrational sometimes.

Finally, something we can agree on.
But there will need to be a bit more than incompetent Indian technical expertise in some areas to believe they got taken advantage of on an aircraft which they're now going to acquire in additional numbers (240 aircraft in total now I believe)

 

[Hyperwarp]

Re: J-10B Vigorous Dragon PT05 with WS-10A engine

(August 7, 2011 pictures)
...
[IMG*]http://i.imgur.com/wSaOS.jpg[/IMG]
Pair of J-10Bs with WS-10A engines.
...

Sorry but those 2 are not J-10Bs. They are J-10A powered by AL-31FN. Look at the intake, tail, ventral-fins, nozzles etc.

 

[no_name]

The third pic seems to be WS-10.

 

[latenlazy]

Why would it be flawed? Like I have pointed out in an earlier example, if you can achieve 9G's maneuverbility with one, there would be little point in retaining the other, since the pilot wouldn't survive it. Of course, you would need to retain both if you couldn't reach 9G's with either one, or if the pilot is out of the equation.

Still a question of whether you can pull 9G for all maneuvers just through aerodynamics. Also, TVC would be very useful for climbing.

 

[Hyperwarp]

The third pic seems to be WS-10.

Pic 1 & 3 are WS-10 powered J-10B
Pic 2 show J-10A with AL-31FN
Pic 4 is unclear