J-10 Thread IV

[Hyperwarp]

Is that confirmed that the new AVEN or TVC-nozzle on that J-10C is an AL-31FN??

I was referring to the other posts with the J-10S. Regarding the TVC nozzle, that is most likely a WS-10 version. Only question for me is which version? Is it the 137 kN version? Very, very unlikely to be an AL-31FN unless they have a new arrangement with Salut.

 

[FORBIN]

One other

 

[taxiya]

The TVC on J-10 is different from types used by Sukoi and Mig and F-16. Here is what I think. In the mean time I happily steel some of @Hendrik_2000's nice photo.

1. In TVC nozzle of Su-35 and Pakfa (before article 30), the vector control part is marked (1). It is partially ball shaped. (2) is the converging part of the nozzle. (3) is the diverging part. The converging and diverging parts work in the same way as a conventional nozzle. The tilting of the nozzle is done by (1). This approach separated the work of converging and diverging from tilting. It is also heavier and longer than conventional counterpart.​

2. In Mig OVT, F-16 AVEN, the Zhuhai model, European demonstrated TVC and article 30 of Su-50, the tilting are done by the paddles of converging and/or diverging. The outside paddles are one pieces.






3. J-10's TVC is in the same category as items 2 above, but with different implementation. See the red circles in the following diagram. This does not exists in the all engines in 2. This required the external paddles being constructed in two pieces joined by a hinge. See the red lines in the diagram below and pictures of J-10 further down. Why does the designer make this choice? What difference can be made compared with all other implementation? Maximizing the tilting angle? Further shortening the length of nozzle?


Summary:

1. Pre-article30 Sukoi TVC is in its own category. The rests are in another.
2. J-10 TVC has a distinct feature than the rests in their category.
3. There seems to be more than one type of TVC nozzle evaluated by PLAF.

 

[taxiya]

Correction diagram to post #2233

 

[siegecrossbow]

Correction diagram to post #2233View attachment 44431

Seems like they can save more weight with the variant used on the J-10.

 

[Inst]

HK isn't completely reliable on the defects of TVC. It's only American flat nozzle TVC that reduces thrust; circular TVC is unstealthy, but does not reduce thrust to a similar extent.

Another possibility regarding the design is stealth benefits; i.e, a two-petal design could allow the nozzle to vector thrust without breaking the lines of the fuselage. Note that in the Su-35S picture, the TVC nozzle, presumably in its maximum deflection angle, is jutting out from below the fuselage. Since stealth aircraft use TVC to avoid moving the elevators, the Chinese two-petal TVC can allow maximum deflection at 20 degrees without increasing frontal RCS.

 

[Deleted member 13312]

A gorgeous looking fighter, an a quite capable one as well. Though I am wondering what it's future will be. With the advent of 5th gen fighters it is clear that once the technology matures enough, major nations around the globe will look to fully equip their air forces with it. Then what is to become of the J-10s and the J-11s.
Its not like that future is far away, give or take another 10-20 years or so. So will China then retire the bulk of its 3-4 gen fighters ? Or will it upgrade them or sell them off secondhand to friendly nations if they still have some service life in them ?

 

[Inst]

Via Daniel707 on the other thread:

View attachment 44326


Patent application for a type of AVEN with inherent stealth characteristics

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Yusheng from pakdef just uploaded this hot shot. Is the convergent/divergent nozzle?

 

[kurutoga]

A gorgeous looking fighter, an a quite capable one as well. Though I am wondering what it's future will be. With the advent of 5th gen fighters it is clear that once the technology matures enough, major nations around the globe will look to fully equip their air forces with it. Then what is to become of the J-10s and the J-11s.
Its not like that future is far away, give or take another 10-20 years or so. So will China then retire the bulk of its 3-4 gen fighters ? Or will it upgrade them or sell them off secondhand to friendly nations if they still have some service life in them ?

I agree J-10 was not ideal for export due to many factors. The biggest one is lack of demand. China do not have enough "friends" who are also rich enough to be able to afford an air force. The other main problem is J-10 never saw real war situations. So if you are buying Chinese designed jets you are betting the testing/training is close enough to real fight, that its effectiveness is not just on paper.

On the other hand, the best days of J10 may be still to come. Generally speaking as the unit cost of fighter jets getting extremely high, and higher over time, the low cost jet market segment will always exist. A good air frame (let's assume J10 is) has inherent advantages, a late life upgrade with mature flight control software might be appealing to some. We can not assume all air forces decide to switch to 100% stealth fighters overnight.