J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

Status
Not open for further replies.

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
J-10A
number built ~190

maiden flight - spring 1998
IOC - end of 2003
crash due to AL-31FN malfunction - summer 2009

now go on and compare to F-16 A-class incidents due to F100/F110 problems
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

man, engineer, is not right, but he will claim always he is, you are wasting your time, it is obvious the Al-31 is more reliable, simply because they are buying 120 for J-10s and 150+ for J-11s and a further buy of 140 for J-10s

October 3, 2011, 4:45 AM
China has placed additional orders for Russian AL-31-series fighter engines. State arms trade agency Rosoboronexport clinched two big contracts earlier this year. One is for more than 150 AL-31Fs as replacements for earlier engines of same type that power the Su-27/Su-30MKK/MK2 fighters, that are designated J-11 in China. Engines under this contract will be assembled by the Ufa-based UMPO factory
The second contract is for more than 120 AL-31FN engines to power newly built Chengdu J-10 fighters. Engines under this contract are already being delivered, from the Moscow-based Salut plant.

Speaking to AIN at the Aviation Expo 2011 in Beijing, Salut general director Vladislav Masalov said that negotiations continue on a second batch of nearly 140 AL-31FNs and that a follow-on contract is expected to be signed in October.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


this means it is obvious
at least in 4-5 years all J-10 and J-11 will be fitted with Al-31, plus more Russian sources claim WS-10 has less thrust and reliability.

В настоящее время Китай выпускает для истребителей J-10 и J-11 двигатели WS-10 и их производные. Эти двигатели являются копиями российских АЛ-31, но отличаются от последних меньшей тягой, надежностью и более коротким межремонтным ресурсом. В частности, двигатели WS-10A установлены на прототип китайского палубного истребителя J-15 (копия Су-33), а WS-10G — на прототип истребителя-бомбардировщика пятого поколения J-20.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

flateric

Junior Member

Engineer

Major
man, engineer, is not right, but he will claim always he is...
Projecting much? Unlike you, I don't use invalid arguments and claim being right despite being proven wrong again and again. :rolleyes:

you are wasting your time, it is obvious the Al-31 is more reliable, simply because they are buying 120 for J-10s and 150+ for J-11s and a further buy of 140 for J-10s
Obviously, it isn't obvious, since there is absolutely no statistics to back this up. How many Al-31FN China brought doesn't mean anything in term of reliability. It only says that China needs the engines to:
  1. replace older engines,
  2. build more J-10s to replace older planes.
Consider MTBO, which isn't great for the Al-31. Yet, you cannot use the fact that China buys more Al-31 to argue that Al-31's MTBO is great.
 

Engineer

Major
so 3 crashes and 3 close calls caused by engine for whole 13 years of J-10 history? that's 'disastrous'

When have I said 'disastrous'? Quote me on it, I dare you. :rolleyes:

This is what I said:
Some claim that Al-31FN is more reliable, yet I have shown experience with J-10 shows this claim to be shaky.

Just because I am challenging the assumption that Al-31 is more reliable, that doesn't mean I made an assertion saying Al-31 is disastrously unreliable. I advise you not to try strawman arguments on me.
 

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
so 3 crashes and 3 close calls caused by engine for whole 13 years of J-10 history? that's 'disastrous'

Three chashes it is nothing, but if you are realistic both MiG-29 and Su-27 are twin engined for a reason, single engine fighters are prone to have more engine failure related crashes, the F-15 for example using the same engine has not as many crashes as the F-16, Su-33/J-15 was chosen just by the safety of twin engines.
 

flateric

Junior Member
When have I said 'disastrous'? Quote me on it, I dare you. :rolleyes:
Can you separate ironical 'disastrous' from citing you? I was hoping so.
Just because I am challenging the assumption that Al-31 is more reliable
reliable compared to what? to Taihang? Last one just has no enough statistics accumulated to compare it to Salyut engines, apart of development problems admitted before by authorities. When WS-10 equipped aircrafts will accumulate the same flight hours as AL-31 equipped ones, then you will be able to 'challenge' anything.
 

flateric

Junior Member
Three chashes it is nothing, but if you are realistic both MiG-29 and Su-27 are twin engined for a reason/
There are *plenty* of reasons they are twin-engined apart of reliability. And two engines are not always a remedy for reliability - look at dark saga of Tomcat engine-caused problems.
 

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Projecting much? Unlike you, I don't use invalid arguments and claim being right despite being proven wrong again and again. :rolleyes:


Obviously, it isn't obvious, since there is absolutely no statistics to back this up. How many Al-31FN China brought doesn't mean anything in term of reliability. It only says that China needs the engines to:
  1. replace older engines,
  2. build more J-10s to replace older planes.
Consider MTBO, which isn't great for the Al-31. Yet, you cannot use the fact that China buys more Al-31 to argue that Al-31's MTBO is great.

Wing loading: 335 kg/m² (69 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.98 (with AL-31); 1.03 (with WS-10A)

Armament

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Why China will officially claim the WS-10 has slightly more thrust than Al-31 and still continue buying Al-31? J-10 gets lower TWR by being fitted with Al-31. compared to a Eurofighter or Rafale well will get lower sustained turn rate, even F-16 weighs less than J-10 will benefit with its higher TWR
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the only answer it is less reliable
 

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
There are *plenty* of reasons they are twin-engined apart of reliability. And two engines are not always a remedy for reliability - look at dark saga of Tomcat engine-caused problems.

correct but Russia retired all single engine fighters in 1990s and today it has only twin engines plus MiG-29 and Su-27 are twin engined, the tomcat problem is related to the fact the engine is a bomber engine for F-111s, F-111s did not have the same surge and flame outs of F-14s
 

Engineer

Major
Can you separate ironical 'disastrous' from citing you? I was hoping so.

reliable compared to what? to Taihang? Last one just has no enough statistics accumulated to compare it to Salyut engines, apart of development problems admitted before by authorities. When WS-10 equipped aircrafts will accumulate the same flight hours as AL-31 equipped ones, then you will be able to 'challenge' anything.

With no statistics for Al-31 to compare against, then there is no backing up for the assumption that Al-31 is more reliable. So far, Al-31 being more reliable is just an assumption being stated as fact, and this assumption is what I am challenging. In particular, I am challenging this assumption based on the figures of engine failures on the J-10, with known problem of lubricant issues on the Al-31FN. So far, you haven't provided jack to refute any of my points.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top