Diving Falcon
Junior Member
tphuang
Is it true that the WS-13 engine is primarily for China's 5th generation fighter projects?
Is it true that the WS-13 engine is primarily for China's 5th generation fighter projects?
New J-10 thread II
- Thread starter wlchang
- Start date
- Status
That's what some of us previously thought -> that China would go for a hi-lo mix with 5th generation fighter, so one would be using 2 AL-31 size engine and another would be using 2 RD-93 size engine. But right now, that's hard to see. We know about the twin-engined "J-10" using 2 WS-10/AL-31 engines, but not sure about whether there are 1 or 2 5th generation fighters after that. But even if it's not used for a main stream fighter, it could still have other applications like a future trainer. And if JF-17 sells well, they could continuously evolve the plane to satisfy the higher requirements.
Chengdu J-10
Junior Member
China 3rd generation fighter, "J-10" is a great platform for improvement expansion. Radar is an easy fix solution, engine still waiting information about the WS-10/A true capability, armnament not much of a problem, intergrate it with China's new HMS and you have a fierce fighter in defending China's air space against most foes.
Twin engined J-10 I would suspect to be a strike aircraft simular to F-15, although China has something simular to the F-15 like the Su-30 in their inventory.
Twin engined J-10 I would suspect to be a strike aircraft simular to F-15, although China has something simular to the F-15 like the Su-30 in their inventory.
aquilis182
New Member
I've been agreed with most of your arguments my friend but when you state:
"I don't think we'd be comparing that to typhoon. There is only one ultimate mission for it: that's to be able to defend against F-22/F-35 on Chinese soil"
I think the J-10 are better than the F-16s and maybe at the same leage than the Typhoon and the rafale (Not the same performance as you say) But with all respect I dont see how you think China really believe than the J-10s are able to stand a chance against the F-22s If the F-22 are far superior than even the Typhoons, the typhoons may have more room to carry more weapons than the F-22 but in allmost everything the F-22 its better. That plane have thrust vectoring than the typhoons lack obviously thats make the F-22s far more maneuverable, Lets talk now about stealthyness, the Typhoon may have some radar absorbant composes but still not considere as a "stealth" fighter everybody should know the F-22s are really "stealth" now lets talk about avionics (right here I just gessing I dont remember exactly were I get the info) The F-22s radar and avionics tis so advance than take a joint efforts of various of the best contractors including loocked martin and McDonnel Doglass to build the avionics. And the radar prove to be more than 10 times more powerfull than the US NAVY's FA-18s. Maybe thas why that plane it's so damn expensive jeje... And final lents talk about the speed... my warplane's source (aerospaceweb.org) tells my than both planes hit mach 2, thats not big deal to me... the scince the F-15s are much older and the hit mach 2.5. but the impresive thing about the F-22 it's than the F-22s can achieve mach 1 without the use of his afterburners (to be honest with you I dont know any other jetfighter that can do something like that)... The F-35??
If you ask me that will not be my choise for a air battle... perhaps that plane can be used for ground support... something like the Harrier. The only thing I think that fighter can have to do a good role in air battle its the stealth but I think The J-10s can easily defeat the F-35 if they find a way to detect them and shoot them down (being honest again I dont see how u can detect a stealth aircraft other than wit untill they open their weapons bay to attack... maybe also depends of they can detect them by his own radar signals... Im far to be an expert on this field if someone else know more please explain further) Please chek my source so you can see where I back up my argument
One long run on sentence aside. It is the ultimate mission for the hypothetical twin engine version of the J-10, so comparing the J-10 to the F-22 is a red herring. Also, the key is defend - over Chinese soil, that is to say, over land-based radar networks and SAM networks. Nothing is as simple as comparing two planes' performance assuming they are fighting over two on two over a featureless barren landscape. You conclusion that the J-10 is no match for the F-22 is otherwise correct.
As for why F-35? Answer is simple, F-35 are to be main carrier-borne fighter, not F-22. Just for same reason that in a theoretical conflict with China in the next ten years the likely fighter is the F/A-18, F-35 is a good target candidate.
It a bit premature to compare the J-10 to a 5th generation fighters like the F-22 and F-35. As it currently stands, the J-10 is out match by both the F-35 and the F-22. The F-35 may not be as capable as the F-22 but it is a lot more capable than the J-10.
Why:
1.) Stealth
2.) Greater thrust to weight ratio
3.) low wingloading, especially the C version
4.) Superior Avionics
5.) Helmet Mounted Head Up Display (Not just cueing system)
A more "fair" comparison would be against 4.5 gen fighters in China's neighborhood.
1.) SU 30 MKI
2.) F-15K
3.) F-15J
4.) F-15S
5.) SU 30 MKM
Why:
1.) Stealth
2.) Greater thrust to weight ratio
3.) low wingloading, especially the C version
4.) Superior Avionics
5.) Helmet Mounted Head Up Display (Not just cueing system)
A more "fair" comparison would be against 4.5 gen fighters in China's neighborhood.
1.) SU 30 MKI
2.) F-15K
3.) F-15J
4.) F-15S
5.) SU 30 MKM
aquilis182
New Member
How a SAM network can hit something that they can't see? Well let supose somehow they can... those missiles have to deal with a very maneuverable plain, a lot of chaff (us aircarfts used to have 30) to deal radar guided missiles and flairs to deal with heat seekers (us aircrafts used to have 30 as well) and the most very basic U.S. fighter pilots train over 300 hours per year in comparation with chinese pilot only train 140 to 150 hrs per year... you can chek that out at globalsecurity.org... I almost forget U.S. AWACS are unmatchable, as far as I know china is working on their own indigenous AWACS If Im right is the J2000 or something like that but today as the sources say they dont have AWACS whatsoever. If an air forces have no waks is like a blind wrestler trying to fight a normal visioned wrestler... jeje flukes happen sometimes but believe me I dont think the guy of the movie "blind fury" aint gonna show up and fly those J-10s for you chinese buddies. besides US Warplanes carry a lot of HARM 88s anti-SAMs missiles and ussually they have more range than most (not all) of the SAMs... China have better chance to survive if they turn of thouse SAMs off in order to prevent U.S.A. to find them and take them out but still just a remothe chanse cause in the moment they turns on the radar to fire a missiles (that for the things I say before have a little chance to shoot down an F-22) I gonna see another U.S. Aircraft firing an HARM 88 and erase him from the existence. If you keep that in mind you gonna se how mush the chances of defeating the F-22s. I dont say its impossible but we have to be realist... The odds stack against China real bad in air superiority against the U.S.A.
Besides cruise missiles (like the thomahawk) can be fired from U.S.A. naval units to take out thouse SAMs to lower the already low risk of the F-22 get shootdown by a SAM fire
alright, let's get a few things straight here:
There is a huge difference between J-10 and the so called "twin-engined" J-10.
There is no question that the most we can hope for J-10 is to achieve A2A capability of Rafale/Typhoon. Maybe at home with supporting ground based radar and AWACS, it will also take down a few F-35s.
However, this "twin-engined" J-10 supposedly will already have many of the 5th generation attributes like sustained supercruise without using afterburners, using internal weapon bay, advanced RAM, stealthy engine intake, generally achieve some level of stealthiness (although probably still an order of magnitude greater than F-35/F-22), multi-role AESA radar, advanced EW suite and such. In terms of maneuverability, I would think the requirement would be higher than F-35/eurocanards and probably matching that of F-22. In fact, they will sacrifice multi-role capability to achieve more power tracking range in A2A, greater maneuverability and stealthiness.
Now, whether or not this will happen is a different story, but that's the goal. Remember, in 10 years times, the computer processing speed, RAM technology, missile technology and such will all have advanced.
As for stealthy targets for SAMs, you can check out Ba-7. That's what China uses as it's stealthy target to test against. It supposedly simulates the maneuverability of a 4th generation fighter. And it has very low infrared signature and radar signature (< 0.1 m^2 frontal and even smaller with RAM).
There is a huge difference between J-10 and the so called "twin-engined" J-10.
There is no question that the most we can hope for J-10 is to achieve A2A capability of Rafale/Typhoon. Maybe at home with supporting ground based radar and AWACS, it will also take down a few F-35s.
However, this "twin-engined" J-10 supposedly will already have many of the 5th generation attributes like sustained supercruise without using afterburners, using internal weapon bay, advanced RAM, stealthy engine intake, generally achieve some level of stealthiness (although probably still an order of magnitude greater than F-35/F-22), multi-role AESA radar, advanced EW suite and such. In terms of maneuverability, I would think the requirement would be higher than F-35/eurocanards and probably matching that of F-22. In fact, they will sacrifice multi-role capability to achieve more power tracking range in A2A, greater maneuverability and stealthiness.
Now, whether or not this will happen is a different story, but that's the goal. Remember, in 10 years times, the computer processing speed, RAM technology, missile technology and such will all have advanced.
As for stealthy targets for SAMs, you can check out Ba-7. That's what China uses as it's stealthy target to test against. It supposedly simulates the maneuverability of a 4th generation fighter. And it has very low infrared signature and radar signature (< 0.1 m^2 frontal and even smaller with RAM).
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
No AWACS whatsoever? What sources say? "Whatsoever" is a big word to lay on the table. You should check at least Sinodefense.com if you want to see at least 3 to 4 "no AWACS whatsoever."
- Status