J-10 Thread IV

plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Iron Man said:
I wonder if the J-10 can carry two twin launchers on each wing.
Click to expand...

The hard points don’t look to be spaced far enough apart for there to be enough clearance for that.

The PLAAF has never been a big fan of western style heavy warloads with dozen+ missiles per plane. Since they have always been expected to face technologically superior opponents. So being able to shoot off 4-6 missiles per plane would be considered pretty excellent performance.

Another side of this is that Chinese fighter radars don’t tend to have as high multiple target engagement capabilities as comparable western and Russian fighter radars. That would potentially allow them to save on weight and costs on radars, and/or boost other performance parameters they feel are more important.

Only the Flankers and derivatives have that kind of carrying capacity, but that is just inherented from the original Flanker design.

If the PLAAF really wanted to hang more missiles on the J10, a redesigned cross shaped triple rail would probably be the best they can do in terms of missile numbers.
 
F

Franklin

Captain
plawolf said:
The hard points don’t look to be spaced far enough apart for there to be enough clearance for that.

The PLAAF has never been a big fan of western style heavy warloads with dozen+ missiles per plane. Since they have always been expected to face technologically superior opponents. So being able to shoot off 4-6 missiles per plane would be considered pretty excellent performance.

Another side of this is that Chinese fighter radars don’t tend to have as high multiple target engagement capabilities as comparable western and Russian fighter radars. That would potentially allow them to save on weight and costs on radars, and/or boost other performance parameters they feel are more important.

Only the Flankers and derivatives have that kind of carrying capacity, but that is just inherented from the original Flanker design.

If the PLAAF really wanted to hang more missiles on the J10, a redesigned cross shaped triple rail would probably be the best they can do in terms of missile numbers.
Click to expand...
I think the reason why Chinese planes have radars that are less capable of tracking multiple targets has more to do with China's inability to build radars of the same standards as the US and Russia rather than any tactical considerations. But now with 3 different planes in production with a AESA radar things are changing.
 
D

davidau

Senior Member
Registered Member
comparision of different variants...

cbyr-hftenhy6836444.jpg


5-Pp-hftenhy6836453.jpg


FqNb-hftenhy6836470.jpg


DCYW-hftenhy6837542.jpg


J-el-hftenhy6837505.jpg
 
D

DaTang cavalry

Junior Member
Registered Member
The second pic is clear to see both nose of the plane are different, J10B/C nose is much flat, that the radar is PESA or AESA.
 
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
plawolf said:
The PLAAF has never been a big fan of western style heavy warloads with dozen+ missiles per plane.
.
Click to expand...

West never really had 12+ missiles per plane. At least not as designed for the plane initially, and as used regularly. Highest number was 8 missiles per plane. In cold war, Four planes had that capability, and two of them were interceptors, mainly designed to deal with Soviet bomber planes.

Tornado ADV, the only European plane, carried 4 BVR and 4 wvr missiles.

F14 carried 6 BVR and 2 wvr missiles.

The third plane was f15, whose acceleration and speed requirements also basically stemmed from Interceptor roles. It carried 4 BVR and 4 wvr missiles, as designed. (Before amraam came)

Fourth one was f4, with 4 BVR and 4 wvr.

All other us and European planes in service with nato countries by the end of cold war carried 2-6 missiles.

F5 carried only 2 wvr.
F8 carried 2-4 wvr.
F16 carried 4 wvr. Only a handful of airframes in 1989 carried 2 more BVR missiles in addition to those 4.

F18 carried regularly 4 BVR and 2 wvr. Though in theory it could have carried 2 more BVR instaed of drop tanks, but AFAIK that was not practiced.

Mirage F1 carried 2+2
Mirage 2000 carried 2+2
Mirage III carried 1 BVR and 2 wvr.

Today, situation is a bit different but 12+ planes are still not really used.

F15 mostly uses 6 BVR and 2 wvr.
F16 used 4 BVR and 2 wvr
F18 uses 4-6 BVR and 2 wvr, mostly.
F18e uses two more on top of the above.
Hornet CAN carry more with it's dual amraam racks, but it's seldomly practiced. F18 can thus, in theory, carry 10 BVR and 2 wvr. And f18e is the only Western plane that can in theory use 12+ missiles, or up to 14. But there are no such images anywhere.

M2000-5 can carry 6 missiles
Eurofighter 6+2
Rafale 8 missiles ( though mostly it carries 6) (despite the fact that rafale demonstrator plane could in theory carry 10)

Gripen carries 4 missiles.

F22 was designed for 4+2 but in the end carries 6+2.

F35a carries 4 BVR, with other variants usually up to 2 more wvr externally.

And actually even Soviets didnt carry 12+ missiles. Before su27 came, their planes carried less missiles on average. 4-6. (With smaller wvr missiles, too and fewer BVR missiles)

Su27 carried 4 BVR, 2 specialized BVR/wvr and 2-4 wvr, depending on jammer carriage.

Su30 increased that to up to 8+2/4, if r77 is carried.

Su35 can do, in theory, 10+2, if no wingtip jammers carried.

Mig29m/k can do 4-6 BVR and 2 wvr, depending on number of drop tanks carried.

So... Considering the number of flanker platforms within Chinese air forces, and the fact most planes carrying just 4 missiles are increasingly getting retired (j10b carrying up to 6), plaaf and planaf are not doing bad in number of missiles at all.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Totoro said:
West never really had 12+ missiles per plane. At least not as designed for the plane initially, and as used regularly. Highest number was 8 missiles per plane. In cold war, Four planes had that capability, and two of them were interceptors, mainly designed to deal with Soviet bomber planes.

Tornado ADV, the only European plane, carried 4 BVR and 4 wvr missiles.

F14 carried 6 BVR and 2 wvr missiles.

The third plane was f15, whose acceleration and speed requirements also basically stemmed from Interceptor roles. It carried 4 BVR and 4 wvr missiles, as designed. (Before amraam came)

Fourth one was f4, with 4 BVR and 4 wvr.

All other us and European planes in service with nato countries by the end of cold war carried 2-6 missiles.

F5 carried only 2 wvr.
F8 carried 2-4 wvr.
F16 carried 4 wvr. Only a handful of airframes in 1989 carried 2 more BVR missiles in addition to those 4.

F18 carried regularly 4 BVR and 2 wvr. Though in theory it could have carried 2 more BVR instaed of drop tanks, but AFAIK that was not practiced.

Mirage F1 carried 2+2
Mirage 2000 carried 2+2
Mirage III carried 1 BVR and 2 wvr.

Today, situation is a bit different but 12+ planes are still not really used.

F15 mostly uses 6 BVR and 2 wvr.
F16 used 4 BVR and 2 wvr
F18 uses 4-6 BVR and 2 wvr, mostly.
F18e uses two more on top of the above.
Hornet CAN carry more with it's dual amraam racks, but it's seldomly practiced. F18 can thus, in theory, carry 10 BVR and 2 wvr. And f18e is the only Western plane that can in theory use 12+ missiles, or up to 14. But there are no such images anywhere.

M2000-5 can carry 6 missiles
Eurofighter 6+2
Rafale 8 missiles ( though mostly it carries 6) (despite the fact that rafale demonstrator plane could in theory carry 10)

Gripen carries 4 missiles.

F22 was designed for 4+2 but in the end carries 6+2.

F35a carries 4 BVR, with other variants usually up to 2 more wvr externally.

And actually even Soviets didnt carry 12+ missiles. Before su27 came, their planes carried less missiles on average. 4-6. (With smaller wvr missiles, too and fewer BVR missiles)

Su27 carried 4 BVR, 2 specialized BVR/wvr and 2-4 wvr, depending on jammer carriage.

Su30 increased that to up to 8+2/4, if r77 is carried.

Su35 can do, in theory, 10+2, if no wingtip jammers carried.

Mig29m/k can do 4-6 BVR and 2 wvr, depending on number of drop tanks carried.

So... Considering the number of flanker platforms within Chinese air forces, and the fact most planes carrying just 4 missiles are increasingly getting retired (j10b carrying up to 6), plaaf and planaf are not doing bad in number of missiles at all.
Click to expand...

I think both the Typhoon and Rafale have enough hard points for dozen plus AAMs, without dual racks, although I must admit I cannot recall seeing such loads being flown.

I was thinking mostly of the Eurocanards, F18E and F15S etc, more recent planes when I said dozen plus missiles.

Your point about Cold War designs is right on the money, and is precisely in line with point I was making in that during the Cold War, when western air forces were expecting to face a peer opponent, they didn’t see the value in stuffing planes with as many missiles as physically possible either. Because in such a situation, few of the planes involved are expected to survive long enough in combat to be able to use so many missiles, so hanging so many would prove to just be a waste in the majority of cases.

It is only after the Cold War, when air dominance is effectively a forgone conclusions, that huge warloads became popular as western air forces shifted their focus to sortie efficiency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top