JH-7/JH-7A/JH-7B Thread
- Thread starter MIGleader
- Start date
Re: Jh-7 thread
I remember seeing one pic where jh7's inner pylon carried 6 bombs and it was said they're 250 kg each. These look pretty similar, so that could be 1500 kg on inner and 1000 kg on outer pylon. Not bad. I wonder if outer pylon is wet one with some 1 ton fuel tank designed for it. Inner pylon could then carry even some heavy hitters in the class of storm shadow or taurus to a fine distance (with 3 tanks), when their equivalents get developed.
I really wonder though if that jh7a only outermost pylon can carry pl12 class weapons. If one thinks about it, jh7 is really not a bad platform to base an interceptor on. It can carry a powerful and large radar, it has the legs matched only by flankers, it's perfect. Even on strike missions, pl12 as self defence weapons would be much more useful than pl8. Too bad about the design and positioning of the landing gear space, if somehow they could've pulled off the landing gear to swivel backwards (i know, i know - the engines) one would have plenty of space to carry a pl12 class weapon under the each intake.
I remember seeing one pic where jh7's inner pylon carried 6 bombs and it was said they're 250 kg each. These look pretty similar, so that could be 1500 kg on inner and 1000 kg on outer pylon. Not bad. I wonder if outer pylon is wet one with some 1 ton fuel tank designed for it. Inner pylon could then carry even some heavy hitters in the class of storm shadow or taurus to a fine distance (with 3 tanks), when their equivalents get developed.
I really wonder though if that jh7a only outermost pylon can carry pl12 class weapons. If one thinks about it, jh7 is really not a bad platform to base an interceptor on. It can carry a powerful and large radar, it has the legs matched only by flankers, it's perfect. Even on strike missions, pl12 as self defence weapons would be much more useful than pl8. Too bad about the design and positioning of the landing gear space, if somehow they could've pulled off the landing gear to swivel backwards (i know, i know - the engines) one would have plenty of space to carry a pl12 class weapon under the each intake.
maglomanic
Junior Member
Re: Jh-7 thread
I have repeatedly come across comments regarding WS-9s that they are much better in terms of powe compared to speys. Can you or anyone else kindly tell how much WS-9s have alleviated the "under powered " problem of JH-7s??
crobato said:
I have repeatedly come across comments regarding WS-9s that they are much better in terms of powe compared to speys. Can you or anyone else kindly tell how much WS-9s have alleviated the "under powered " problem of JH-7s??
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
Re: Jh-7 thread
I never got the impression the ws-9 was more powerful than the Spey. It might offer a teeny bit more than a second-hand spey, but not much. Tphuang mentioned sometime ago it was the use of more composites in the jh-7a that made it less underpowered(but still inferior to western models)
I never got the impression the ws-9 was more powerful than the Spey. It might offer a teeny bit more than a second-hand spey, but not much. Tphuang mentioned sometime ago it was the use of more composites in the jh-7a that made it less underpowered(but still inferior to western models)
maglomanic
Junior Member
Re: Jh-7 thread
"The first batch of the JH-7 was powered by the Spey Mk202 engines purchased from Britain in 1975. All effort to reverse-engineer the engine have failed since then. By the 1990s it was deemed too costly to redesign the aircraft for the Russian AL-31 turbofan. It appears that by 1998 the PLA was ready to go back to Rolls-Royce and pay for technology to permit co-production. The PLA reportedly purchased from RAF another 80~90 second-hand Spey 202s, acquired by 2001, and entered into a new co-development program which would enable China to finally produce its own version of the engine known as WoShan-9 (WS-9), or “Qin Ling” in its commercial name. A 2001 report noted that if successful, the new engine co-production program could lead to the construction of another 150 JH-7s for the PLAAF and PLANAF. If the WS-9 is an up-rated version of the Spey, as some sources suggest, that would meet a longstanding JH-7 requirement for greater power.
"
Another source repeats the exactly same above and cites "barrie and sherman" as source.
" If it is an uprated version of the Spey, as some sources suggest, that would meet a longstanding JH-7 requirement for greater power. A 2001 report noted that if successful, the new engine co-production program could lead to the construction of another 150 JH-7s.[76] And in early December 2003 the PRC’s CCTV carried footage of new JH-7s in production, which appeared to be a new version of the fighter-bomber.
"
"The first batch of the JH-7 was powered by the Spey Mk202 engines purchased from Britain in 1975. All effort to reverse-engineer the engine have failed since then. By the 1990s it was deemed too costly to redesign the aircraft for the Russian AL-31 turbofan. It appears that by 1998 the PLA was ready to go back to Rolls-Royce and pay for technology to permit co-production. The PLA reportedly purchased from RAF another 80~90 second-hand Spey 202s, acquired by 2001, and entered into a new co-development program which would enable China to finally produce its own version of the engine known as WoShan-9 (WS-9), or “Qin Ling” in its commercial name. A 2001 report noted that if successful, the new engine co-production program could lead to the construction of another 150 JH-7s for the PLAAF and PLANAF. If the WS-9 is an up-rated version of the Spey, as some sources suggest, that would meet a longstanding JH-7 requirement for greater power.
"
Another source repeats the exactly same above and cites "barrie and sherman" as source.
" If it is an uprated version of the Spey, as some sources suggest, that would meet a longstanding JH-7 requirement for greater power. A 2001 report noted that if successful, the new engine co-production program could lead to the construction of another 150 JH-7s.[76] And in early December 2003 the PRC’s CCTV carried footage of new JH-7s in production, which appeared to be a new version of the fighter-bomber.
"
