J-10 Thread IV

[by78]

Oh come on ... we have seen several more useless posts including long stupid discussions (just to remind to that stupid one on the Z-19's alleged ATGM just yesterday) and batches of worse, more blurry and dated images than this one. Yes, that particular aircraft is neither a new serial number nor that image the epitome of aviation photography, but it is a recent one, it shows several interesting details including the construction number and if one does not like it, he/she can simply ignore it.

Again, there are pages of useless, political and most controversial stuff here in this forum and you never care, but if he posts an image, you always react like being allergic, IMO it is not worth the mess.

I really don't understand why you are always so much upset?!

I just read the latest discussions at Z-19 thread. I'm frankly not surprised at the protracted back-and-forth. You were right to call that particular user out, and I myself have done the same quite a few times over the years. I have also frequently called out egregious off-topic political discussions.

Regarding that J-10S airframe, I don't think that construction number is anything new or interesting, the same goes for the image itself: grainy and meh. You and I apparently disagree on that point, but let's just agree to disagree. I object to cluttering the thread with low-quality and uninteresting images in the same way I object to off-topic political discussions.

 

[davidau]

Oh come on ... we have seen several more useless posts including long stupid discussions (just to remind to that stupid one on the Z-19's alleged ATGM just yesterday) and batches of worse, more blurry and dated images than this one. Yes, that particular aircraft is neither a new serial number nor that image the epitome of aviation photography, but it is a recent one, it shows several interesting details including the construction number and if one does not like it, he/she can simply ignore it.

Again, there are pages of useless, political and most controversial stuff here in this forum and you never care, but if he posts an image, you always react like being allergic, IMO it is not worth the mess.

I really don't understand why you are always so much upset?!

Deino, I totally agree with your assessment of 78! Anyone outshines him, he gets upset. He keeps on posting 'lost images', or scanned from mags and repeats at different websites of the same stuff. Why? To get more brownie points to hang on the wal!? Time he should learn to be tolerant of other learned contributors. They, too, can have a say and/or post some interesting images.

 

[by78]

Deino, I totally agree with your assessment of 78! Anyone outshines him, he gets upset. He keeps on posting 'lost images', or scanned from mags and repeats at different websites of the same stuff. Why? To get more brownie points to hang on the wal!? Time he should learn to be tolerant of other learned contributors. They, too, can have a say and/or post some interesting images.

Awww, I get it, I've hurt your feelings. Or maybe you're just jealous because I've 'outshined' you. Two can play this kindergarten logic.

Sorry, but I think of all people, you should be among the very last to make judgement on who is a 'learned' contributor or what images are 'interesting'. That's not just my personal opinion; that is the truth. Not everyone is equally discerning or knowledgable, and when it comes to observing the Chinese military, you are neither discerning nor knowledgable, and you certainly have appalling taste in what images are interesting, seeing that you prefer grainy photos with big ugly Sina watermarks.

These are well demonstrated facts, and they don't care about your feelings. Don't like it?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blitzo]

While not everyone's contributions to the forum are of equal quality, with some perhaps being more valuable and some being less valuable, openly saying so is not of optimal etiquette.
More importantly personal remarks should still be avoided and remain against the rules.

There is a line between the two, which I would ask all of our members to adhere to.


At the end of the day, being a contributor whose value is "lower" is not against the rules compared to a contributor whose value is "higher".

Putting it another way -- and this is not directed to any member, but rather a reflection of my time here on the forum for years and years -- it ultimately is not against the rules to be stupid. There are many members in the past who have been active here in the 2010s and the 2000s who were frankly idiots, but had long tenures here because they technically did not break any rules.

I have had conversations with multiple people both active on this forum and people who are long time lurkers and who are more knowledgeable about the PLA than many people here (and indeed myself), who've made observations about our tolerance of stupidity -- and while I think our tolerance of stupidity is a weakness of SDF, also I think it is a strength. Or at least it lends a certain flavour and diversity of opinion that is not fundamentally undesirable.


And at this stage there is no plans to change that.

Any further posts on this matter in this thread will be deleted, there are other threads where this can be discussed which I made dedicated for this reason in the past to hash out disagreements.

 

[xyqq]

The code on the PL-8 training missile reads J-P8A4841201110.



J stands for training, P8A indicates PL-8A, and 201110 probably means the year and month of production.

 

[antiterror13]

I am very surprised that PL-8 is still being used in PLAAF inventory, especially by J-10A.

I can understand if PL-8 is used by older fighters like J-7 and J-8 series, but with J-10 series ?

 

[siegecrossbow]

I am very surprised that PL-8 is still being used in PLAAF inventory, especially by J-10A.

I can understand if PL-8 is used by older fighters like J-7 and J-8 series, but with J-10 series ?

PL-8 is based on Python-3 and is still a relatively potent missile in the PLAAF arsenal, surpassed only by the PL-10. Not only do the J-10A series still use the PL-8, J-15 and J-11B use it as well.

 

[xyqq]

In the same set of pictures, a single-seat J-10AH showed its serial number,



but all the twin-seat J-10SHs did not.



Formation flight:



Close-up:

 

[Atomicfrog]

PL-8 is based on Python-3 and is still a relatively potent missile in the PLAAF arsenal, surpassed only by the PL-10. Not only do the J-10A series still use the PL-8, J-15 and J-11B use it as well.

In any case... better to use the available stockpiles until they are not good anymore. Number of missiles and bombs are not infinite and training with what could be used is always a good idea. Training with them is probably has valuable than training with newer types anyway,

 

[siegecrossbow]

In any case... better to use the available stockpiles until they are not good anymore. Number of missiles and bombs are not infinite and training with what could be used is always a good idea. Training with them is probably has valuable than training with newer types anyway,

Unless you are doing live fire exercises training rounds are always better. Every time you carry a missile into the air you are actually using up its lifespan even if you don’t fire it. I recall an episode of Chinese military report that showed JH-7 firing dozens of AA missiles. Pretty sure they wanted to use up the PL-5s before expiration hits.