J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

flateric said:

That's plain statistics. Now CAC officials looks like masochists from your description - buying new and new 'bad' AL-31FN instead of redesigning J-10s for such reliable Taihang.

Click to expand...

Thought some of those questions were pretty valid (at least the one about servicing). Nonetheless just because they bought new AL-31s does not mean they don't think the Taihang isn't better. It's a matter of production capacity and supply, and obviously the AL-31 is still sufficient to fill in while production lags behind.

Engineer said:

You are the one who suggested Al-31 is more reliable, yet facts fly in your face as I have shown. Al-31FN having lubricant issues is a well known problem, and is the cause for most of the crashes. This doesn't sound at all like Al-31 being more reliable than WS-10A.



They did redesigned the J-10 for Taihang -- it's called J-10B. Meanwhile, they will have to stick with the not-so-reliable Al-31FN when building more J-10As.

Click to expand...

actually it was i who suggested that AL-31 is perhaps more reliable, we do have J-10 crash due to engine problem, if we want to be balanced we have to recognize the huge amount of fly hours J-10 accumulated through the years with the AL-31
you will have to come with more facts to call it unreliable, and sorry it reminds me of other people who say WS-10 is 150 hours MTBO junk

and yet first J-10Bs fly with AL-31

can we continue the discussion somewhere else, i made a thread specially for this :
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/members-club-room/sdf-aerospace-aerodynamics-corner-5801.html

Engineer said:

You are the one who suggested Al-31 is more reliable, yet facts fly in your face as I have shown. Al-31FN having lubricant issues is a well known problem, and is the cause for most of the crashes. This doesn't sound at all like Al-31 being more reliable than WS-10A.



They did redesigned the J-10 for Taihang -- it's called J-10B. Meanwhile, they will have to stick with the not-so-reliable Al-31FN when building more J-10As.

Click to expand...

how many hours have the Al-31 performed on J-10s? and how many hours have been achieved by WS-10?

why buy more Al-31s?

Of course an engine with 30 years of production is more reliable than an engine that has not even replaced the Al-31s in J-10s and J-11s

flateric said:

That's plain statistics. Now CAC officials looks like masochists from your description - buying new and new 'bad' AL-31FN instead of redesigning J-10s for such reliable Taihang.

Click to expand...

They have a new Massive re haul plant in chengdu especially for AL-31 engines. T is also the plant responsible for extending the life of AL-31 engine by 60 percent. Tell me, if they stop completely buying new AL-31 engines. What happen to the equipment and facilities? Those exist AL-31 engines are Goin to expire soon.. Isn't it a waste to just change the tools for it?

Engineer said:

They did redesigned the J-10 for Taihang -- it's called J-10B. Meanwhile, they will have to stick with the not-so-reliable Al-31FN when building more J-10As.

Click to expand...

Yes. They designed J-10B fitted with more reliable Taihang. And instead of building new perfect J-10B with Taihang, they continue to build J-10As with these coward unreliable AL-31FN. Masochists, as I said.

flateric said:

Yes. They designed J-10B fitted with more reliable Taihang. And instead of building new perfect J-10B with Taihang, they continue to build J-10As with these coward unreliable AL-31FN. Masochists, as I said.

Click to expand...

China has planes to replace, and J-10B still has a while before being ready. Flight test takes years to complete. What else do you expect them to make in the mean time? Regardless of how you try to go off tangent, the fact remains that Al-31 caused numerous J-10s to crash, showing the suggestion that Al-31 to be more reliable as shaky.

Engineer said:

China has planes to replace, and J-10B still has a while before being ready. Flight test takes years to complete. What else do you expect them to make in the mean time? Regardless of how you try to go off tangent, the fact remains that Al-31 caused numerous J-10s to crash, showing the suggestion that Al-31 to be more reliable as shaky.

Click to expand...

How bad is it? How many have crashed? There must be close to 200 J-10 in-service now...
You could compare with the F-16 attrition and see whether J-10 has been unreliable... Arthur Hubers @ AFM calls the F-16 lawn-darts

Engineer said:

the fact remains that Al-31 caused numerous J-10s to crash, showing the suggestion that Al-31 to be more reliable as shaky.

Click to expand...

I'm asking for the third time - how many Js crashed due to AL-31FN? how that corresponds to all crash statistics? how that corresponds to total number of J-10A built and fleet flight hours on AL-31FN? what was exact cause of crash? did you see AIB reports? how old was that concrete AL-31FN? howm many hours it was in use before crash? wasn't that refurbished AL-31FN? give us facts, not just your emotions, otherwise it's all stay blah-blah

stop.

AL31F is way more reliable than TH at this point.

both in term of transient performance and surges.

TH actually has to back off on thrust to obtain reliability.

i.e. said:

stop.

AL31F is way more reliable than TH at this point.

both in term of transient performance and surges.

TH actually has to back off on thrust to obtain reliability.

Click to expand...

I think I'm quickly turning into your internet groupie.

Though, I do wonder...how do you know this?