J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter crobato
- Start date
- Status
danielchin
Junior Member
ladioussupp
Junior Member
Accroding to a post at dsjunshi, the difference between J-10B and C is the thrust power of engine. (I guess that J-10C is equipped with AL-31FN-Sep3) Consequently, J-10C would be put into mass production. Existing J-10B would be modified to J-10C configurations.
J-10B prototype tried PESA radar and adopted AESA radar later. It is found that PESA radar needs to be enlarged by 30% to meet the requirements. An enlarged cross section will harm performance if no more powerful engine. Thus PESA was replaced by AESA which features with an even smaller cross section than original slotted array antenna.
The following picture shows a PESA, rather than an AESA. Comments in red say so.
J-10B prototype tried PESA radar and adopted AESA radar later. It is found that PESA radar needs to be enlarged by 30% to meet the requirements. An enlarged cross section will harm performance if no more powerful engine. Thus PESA was replaced by AESA which features with an even smaller cross section than original slotted array antenna.
The following picture shows a PESA, rather than an AESA. Comments in red say so.
thunderchief
Senior Member
In that case B and C probably aren't official designations for J-10 variants ? Same question could be asked for J-11 A and B .
ladioussupp
Junior Member
I learned that PLAAF already uses A, B, C, ..., etc as official variant designations. For example, in the news written by PLA reporter below, "J-11B" was mentioned in the official PLA newspaper.
However, it does not represent the J-10B/C are officially designated.
I have a difficult time believing this post. But then again, huitong claims the factory number 201 is J-10C. It seems to me just based on timing of news that the first batch of J-10Bs should be using sep 3 engines
ladioussupp
Junior Member
Anyway, I believe that the DSI variant of J-10 is equipped with AESA and more powerful engine. The article just explain why it takes so much time to make DSI variant of J-10.
Moreover, based on the following link, it is said that domestic made type 1475 AESA of J-20 as well as other avionics are put in a test bed of a modified J-10B.
He is talking about radar models -- original (synthetic aperture) is JL-10A, PESA is JL-10B, AESA is JL-10C.
Thanks a lot guys for these latest updates and most of all it is not the first time we've heard that the definitive serial J-10B needed additional power - not thrust but most of all electricity - to run all its sophisticated avionics ... and that this delayed the service introduction my not a small margin.
However I'm sceptical that these is an official PLAAF designation for a J-10B, that will not enter service, while already a slightly futher updated J-10C already exists.
I can't proof it but I given the fact that the J-10A too was introduced into service in blocks or steps each with more capabilities (at first only PL-8 + PL-11, later PL-8 + PL-12, then bombs, now LGB, ... maybe later targeting capability and even the ASMs) gives me the feeling that this will also happen with the J-10B. As such I think the J-10B will be an ideal replacement for additional J-7 units (maybe even J-8) but more related to the air-to-air-role and the possible J-10C might be a true multirole platform, maybe for SEAD roles or a successor to the last Q-5 units.
Just my two cents.
Deino
However I'm sceptical that these is an official PLAAF designation for a J-10B, that will not enter service, while already a slightly futher updated J-10C already exists.
I can't proof it but I given the fact that the J-10A too was introduced into service in blocks or steps each with more capabilities (at first only PL-8 + PL-11, later PL-8 + PL-12, then bombs, now LGB, ... maybe later targeting capability and even the ASMs) gives me the feeling that this will also happen with the J-10B. As such I think the J-10B will be an ideal replacement for additional J-7 units (maybe even J-8) but more related to the air-to-air-role and the possible J-10C might be a true multirole platform, maybe for SEAD roles or a successor to the last Q-5 units.
Just my two cents.
Deino
- Status