J-10 Thread IV

[Andy1974]

Flight testing of this variant would also be much easier, using the modern simulation software and 3D printing gives a lot of confidence, China is on a roll with flight testing. As well as certification, they are getting good and efficient at it.

This variant, although 4th generation, would be able to defeat all other 4th generations (maybe). Giving it a good justification to exist.

This variant is not an alternative to MUMT, it is the core of it.

 

[Blitzo]

This variant, although 4th generation, would be able to defeat all other 4th generations, maybe. giving it a justification to exist.

Can you stop posting short single line or single paragraph replies so close to one another?
One page can only show ten posts.

You can put all of your thoughts together in one post before clicking "post reply".

I've had to merge like three of your preceding other posts together already.

 

[Schwerter_]

At some point during the upgrades of a jet, you come across a point where you'll either have to make peace with the upper limit of the airframe's potential, or make changes that are extensive enough that you're essencially building more of a new platform than upgrading an old one, with all the costs and headaches that it implies. A deeply upgraded J-10 with new materials, structural design, new engine and possibly new aerodynamics without a doubt falls into the latter catagory, so the next question is : why?

So... why? The question here is not necessarily what the J-10C can do better with extensive upgrades, but why one cannot use other platforms to do what it cannot already do, and that why not just design something from the ground up with no limitations.

edit: I am struggling to find anything meaningful that the J-10 can do better on with WS-15 except maybe some improvements in air combat kinematics, any ideas?

 

[weig2000]

@Blitzo are there rules about speculation in this forum? Do we all have to follow your PLA watching philosophy? isn’t there room for some level of fandom and wishful thinking?

I want to see more speculation in this forum. I want to see more ideas thrown around, I don’t think it devalues the forum, if we know what it is.


Well that would be a shame, I think you can contribute while also acknowledging that it’s a speculative discussion.

Very well.

Would anyone like to talk about a WS-15 powered J-10?

I think it's probably OK to speculate, but we do occasionally even in the flagship threads. But if you're too obsessed with and enthusiastic about speculation, after being repeatedly given patient explanations why your pet speculation simply does not stand the scrutiny of common sense, you may want to create a new thread dedicated to your speculation in order not to waste most people's time.

Make sure you prefix the thread name with "Caution: Speculation" though.

 

[Maikeru]

At some point during the upgrades of a jet, you come across a point where you'll either have to make peace with the upper limit of the airframe's potential, or make changes that are extensive enough that you're essencially building more of a new platform than upgrading an old one. A deeply upgraded J-10 with new materials, structural design, new engine and possibly new aerodynamics without a doubt falls into the latter catagory, so the next question is : why?

Hornet ---> SuperHornet. Vigorous Dragon ----> ExtraVigarousDragon??

 

[Schwerter_]

Hornet ---> SuperHornet. Vigorous Dragon ----> ExtraVigarousDragon??

I like the sound of ExtraVigarousDragon xd

Jokes aside tho, the SuperHornet was at least partly the result of NATF, A-X and A/F-X all getting axed by the DoD which leaves the US Navy with no prospect of an advanced platform in near future, making the idea of extensively upgrading an existing model (legacy hornet) inticing. PLAAF on the other hand does not suffer such problems and have high-end platforms in abundence.

 

[Blitzo]

Hornet ---> SuperHornet. Vigorous Dragon ----> ExtraVigarousDragon??

Indeed, but the Super Hornet was developed in the 1990s for early 2000s service, when there were no 5th generation fighters in service and due to various other USN fighter/strike projects being axed.

J-10 going to a "Super J-10" would be developed in the early/mid 2020s for late 2020s service, when 5th generation fighters are plentiful and actively produced around the world and in high proliferation, with 6th generation imminent.


If China didn't have J-20 and J-16 and J-10C already in active production (with J-20 now transitioning to high volume production), and if they didn't have J-XY/35 in testing (and possible land based J-XY/35 in development), and didn't have 6th gen and MUMT UCAVs in development, sure I would agree that a "Super J-10" might actually be somewhat useful.


But China is somewhat spoiled for choice -- they just don't need to develop a "Super J-10" when they have so many other projects that are much more capable in active production, in testing, or in development, some of which can also be offered competitively for export already.
A WS-15 powered "Super J-10" would just seem rather redundant to me, frankly.

The most I could see is perhaps if the PLA want a further iteration of J-10C with maybe CFTs or slightly increased range that would at most involve a minor structural modification, but even that I think would be pushing it.

 

[Andy1974]

At some point during the upgrades of a jet, you come across a point where you'll either have to make peace with the upper limit of the airframe's potential, or make changes that are extensive enough that you're essencially building more of a new platform than upgrading an old one. A deeply upgraded J-10 with new materials, structural design, new engine and possibly new aerodynamics without a doubt falls into the latter catagory, so the next question is : why?

So... why? The question here is not necessarily what the J-10C can do better with extensive upgrades, but why one cannot use other platforms to do what it cannot already do, and that why not just design something from the ground up with no limitations.

Some reasons why: because you have a whole J-10 industry in place that you don’t want to destroy, you already have designers for the J10, you have all the support infrastructure in place everywhere. It makes more sense for J10 designers to design better J10s that to design new platforms.

Buildimg more updated versions keeps costs of the components low, reducing the price for J20s etc.

Another reason is because fifth and six then fighters might not be available, or not in the numbers needed.

Maybe China is nervous, and wants more fighters, we often here about the worsening external situation, this is further reason why.

 

[Schwerter_]

because you have a whole J-10 industry in place that you don’t want to destroy, you already have designers for the J10, you have all the support infrastructure in place everywhere. It makes more sense for J10 designers to design better J10s that to design new platforms.

Not helpful if improving on the J-10 doesn't provide substantial performance gains, which I think is the case here.

Buildimg more updated versions keeps costs of the components low, reducing the price for J20s etc.

I assume you're talking about prices of engines here. This may be true, but cost isn't everything. The PLAAF's capacity, if you will, of fighter jets is not infinite and every J-10 takes up a slot that can otherwise be taken up by something more advanced and effective. And yes, by the time ws-15 makes it onto the J-10 probably any other fighter platform in production will be more advanced.

Another reason is because fifth and six then fighters might not be available, or not in the numbers needed.

In this case why not build ws-10 equipped J-10 instead? If one just needs something half-decent to fill the gaps then J-10C with upgraded avionics can do more or less as good (or as poor) a job as a new varient with less costs.

Maybe China is nervous, and wants more fighters, we often here about the worsening external situation, this is further reason why.

Well if the PLAAF needs jets and they need them fast, the better and probably only option is to ramp up production of whatever they currently produce, instead of spend additional time on upgrades.

 

[latenlazy]

Some reasons why: because you have a whole J-10 industry in place that you don’t want to destroy, you already have designers for the J10, you have all the support infrastructure in place everywhere. It makes more sense for J10 designers to design better J10s that to design new platforms.

Buildimg more updated versions keeps costs of the components low, reducing the price for J20s etc.

Another reason is because fifth and six then fighters might not be available, or not in the numbers needed.

Maybe China is nervous, and wants more fighters, we often here about the worsening external situation, this is further reason why.

This is by far one of the most bizarre reasons to keep around the J-10. All that J-10 “industry” is the same as the J-20 “industry”. Why would you want to keep your industry trapped on a legacy design with legacy capabilities instead of advancing them to get better at future designs and future capabilities? Your designers aren’t being utilized to upkeep old things but to make new things.