New J-10 thread II

[aquilis182]

according to USAF, future air combat is going to be quick,you are not going to see WW-2 or vietnam war close in "knife to knife hand combat"

The USAF though the same thing back in Vietnam War... The make the first production F-4s without a machine gun, only relyng on missiles, less capable north vietnamese fighters like the Mig-19s (see colonel Toon of North Vietnamese Air Force at wikipedia) and Mig-21s defeat many F-4s cause the lacks of the machine gun, when the missiles ran out... the F-4s where vulnerable, the USAF realize their misstake and tell MC Donnel Doglas to instal a 20mm machine gun in the F-4s, resulting the F-4s improving dramatically their battle performance, now we have jetfighters stealth like the F-22 they still have a machine gun combined with superb maneuverability (both characteristic very important to dogfight or... knive to knive as you refered my friend) besides somethimes relys high technology make you vulnerable if you face a situation that for some reason your technological advantage is neutralize for many factors. Lastly i can't take all the credit that you argument cause a lot of High Tech stuff where developed for years like long range air to air missiles and things like that than make dog fights less nesesary but rely is never good to underestimate the need of dogfight, USAF do that mistake and they learn from it. The PLAAF learned too without the need of loss anyaircrafts, thats the J-10s carry a 23mm machnegun and refined aerodinamics, so to narrow advantages to more advanced jetfighters, besides missiles can be decoyed by countermeasures and maneuvers at dogfights the countermeasures and and think even the stealth wont save you from machine guns.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Looks like Andrei is back-tracking. He's trying cover-up holes pointed out in his last article about why the Russians would help the competition.

HONG KONG, China, Dec. 14
ANDREI CHANG

Column: Military Might
Is China preparing to export its J-10A fighter aircraft to Iran? Most likely, say military observers in Moscow and Tehran. The Russian "Kommersant Daily" reported that an Iranian aviation company agent had confirmed that China would export to Iran 24 J-10A fighters between 2008 and 2010, at a price of US$1 billion.

Allowing this information to surface at this time appears intended to embarrass, and warn, the United States. China is sending the message that it too can play the arms export game -- reminding the United States to think twice about its arms sales to Taiwan, especially Block 52 F-16 fighters.

It is widely known that Iran has been seeking to acquire third generation fighter aircraft. Not long ago, Iran approached Russian aircraft manufacturer Sukhoi, saying the country intended to import as many as 250 Sukhoi fighters. Iran is also sending messages, in the midst of the tussle over its nuclear intentions, that it has strong non-Western allies and shouldn't be trifled with. Iran is taking advantage of U.S.-China friction to cozy up to Beijing, and warn the United States and Israel not to take any reckless action.

Politically, if the sale of the J-10A fighters goes through, it will certainly cause turbulence in U.S.-China relations. Despite this strategic aggressiveness, China will hold to its longstanding policy of biding its time and concealing its military capabilities, while trying to minimize Sino-U.S. friction. Therefore, unless a major conflict breaks out in the Taiwan Strait, the United States intervenes militarily and U.S.-China relations deteriorate dramatically, China will somewhat restrain its exports of high-tech weapons, strategic weapons and long-range missiles to Iran at the current stage.

Technologically, the J-10As are fitted with Russian AL31FN engines. China has signed a contract to procure a new batch of 50 such engines from Russia in 2008, which means China's indigenous WS10A turbofan engine cannot yet meet the requirements of the PLA Air Force.

Under this circumstance, Russia will not allow China to use AL31FN engines on the J-10As to be exported to Iran, in order to protect Sukhoi's market. As a consequence, China may have to delay the export of its fighters to Iran until after it perfects the WS10A technology. This is unlikely to happen now or anytime soon.

Furthermore, the J-10A production lines are now focused on meeting the needs of the PLA Air Force, and Pakistan will come next. China's production capacity is not yet sufficient to meet the demands of the two air forces for J-10A fighters.

Pakistan assisted China in developing the J-10A by providing a thorough understanding of the structure of the F-16 fighter aircraft, which Pakistan has from the United States. Therefore the Pakistani Air Force has first access to the J-10A. China and Pakistan also have future plans to jointly develop FC-20 fighters on the basis of the J-10A.

The final factor in the speculation about Iran's planned fighter purchase involves Tehran's financial capability. It seems highly suspect that Iran intends to purchase as many as 250 Sukhoi fighters. In building up its air force, Iran has basically followed in the footsteps of China, relying mainly on indigenous production.

Russia recently provided to Iran 50 RD-33 engines for the development of Iran's indigenous "Lightning" fighter. The speculation that Iran intends to purchase Sukhoi fighters from Russia has been around for quite a long time, but in fact the only Russian combat aircraft that Iran has purchased from Russia are three Su-25UBTs. The contract was reportedly signed in 2005 but this has not been officially confirmed.

On top of speculations about China's planned export of J-10As to Iran are hints that China has been actively promoting its FBC2 (JH-7A) fighter-bomber to Iran as well, obviously under the same political and military rationale. Nonetheless, this is unlikely to result in any definite deal anytime soon.

 

[Jeremy Sun]

J-10A is roughly as good as F-16 block 52+, though less advanced in terms of radar, EW etc.

 

[kickars]

J-10A is roughly as good as F-16 block 52+, though less advanced in terms of radar, EW etc.

Again, you are making such a strong statement here. I'd like to ask you the same question again, where do you get the idea from? China has never officially released any detailed information about J-10, ie radar EW...So how come you know how good J-10 is? I mean you sound like you've tested both J-10 and F-16. So you can be so confident to make this kind of one line statement.

 

[maozedong]

However China officially denied the report about J-10 Fighter sale to Iran:

ZXS Beijing December 18 (Xinhua Wang Yan) China's Foreign Ministry on the 18th clarify once again the Chinese J-10 fighter sales to Iran and rumours.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang held on the 17th at the regular press conference that China and Iran not on the media reports referred to in the negotiations over the issue fighters, but also does not have such considerations. "The report is unfounded and irresponsible." He said.

He said that the Chinese government has always adopted the export of military products cautious and responsible attitude, and strictly in accordance with China's relevant government military and trade policies and regulations, in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by China and other international obligations to the act.

 

[PrOeLiTeZ]

The J-10 is comparable to F-16 in terms of capability and performance. But its initial avionics isn't as capable as its later F-16 counterparts. Though this isnt to say it cannot be achieved with its J-10 modernisation refit happening currently. With the upgrade it would be near or on par with the latest F-16 avionics.

About this J-10 and J-11 discussion these to aircrafts were bred for different purposes so its airframes and design are different. So one cannot say that the J-10 is better than J-11 due to a few exercises. The J-10 would be a homeland fighter to protect the skies of China, while the longer range J-11 would be the frontline fighter for offensive and defensive roles beyond China's soil.

 

[tphuang]

The J-10 is comparable to F-16 in terms of capability and performance. But its initial avionics isn't as capable as its later F-16 counterparts. Though this isnt to say it cannot be achieved with its J-10 modernisation refit happening currently. With the upgrade it would be near or on par with the latest F-16 avionics.

About this J-10 and J-11 discussion these to aircrafts were bred for different purposes so its airframes and design are different. So one cannot say that the J-10 is better than J-11 due to a few exercises. The J-10 would be a homeland fighter to protect the skies of China, while the longer range J-11 would be the frontline fighter for offensive and defensive roles beyond China's soil.

J-10 is supposed to clearly exceed the capability of F-16. And checking the radar, I wouldn't say it's behind in avionics either.

As for J-10 vs J-11, they've had many different combats in many different scenarios and J-10 dominates every single time. Of course, J-11B will be a whole different story, but we are still waiting for those encounters to be reported. As for J-11 being longer ranged, not that much really if J-10 is carrying 3 external fuel tanks. It's main advantage is in the increased payload -> more multi-roled.

 

[PrOeLiTeZ]

J-10 is supposed to clearly exceed the capability of F-16. And checking the radar, I wouldn't say it's behind in avionics either.

As for J-10 vs J-11, they've had many different combats in many different scenarios and J-10 dominates every single time. Of course, J-11B will be a whole different story, but we are still waiting for those encounters to be reported. As for J-11 being longer ranged, not that much really if J-10 is carrying 3 external fuel tanks. It's main advantage is in the increased payload -> more multi-roled.

The avionics and weapons suite for the first production J-10 line weren't fitted originally with the ones currently installed. Thats what I mean't in my previous post.

If the J-10 and J-11 were just to run on internal fuel supply and nill external the J-11 still has a longer range. Though its payload is a given considering one is light fighter and the other a heavy one.

One would consider that the J-11B was to address these short comings from the exercise between the J-10 and J-11.

 

[tphuang]

The avionics and weapons suite for the first production J-10 line weren't fitted originally with the ones currently installed. Thats what I mean't in my previous post.

If the J-10 and J-11 were just to run on internal fuel supply and nill external the J-11 still has a longer range. Though its payload is a given considering one is light fighter and the other a heavy one.

One would consider that the J-11B was to address these short comings from the exercise between the J-10 and J-11.

ok, well, we don't really see J-10 without those 3 exernal fuel tanks. I think the idea is that J-11B is probably going to be comparable to current J-10 in A2A, but has much better strike capabilities. And when upgraded J-10s come out, J-10 will have definite advantage again.

 

[PrOeLiTeZ]

ok, well, we don't really see J-10 without those 3 exernal fuel tanks. I think the idea is that J-11B is probably going to be comparable to current J-10 in A2A, but has much better strike capabilities. And when upgraded J-10s come out, J-10 will have definite advantage again.

True, the PLAAF ideal would be J-10 for a2a engagment, while J-11B would be for a2g strike engagment simular to F-15E. J-10 lighter and sharper turn will be advantage for close a2a engagment. Though the J-11B having a bigger nose for radar with its avionics and heavier payload would be better for delivering precision guided missles and LGB.

It seems the PLAAF have gone from:
J-11 Air superiority
J-11B Multirole fighter
J-11BS Twin seater multirole fighter
to maybe the carrier version twin seater
J-11HS (H=Hou=Sea) just my personal designation

Seems the trend is moving towards a carrier bourne version. Just dont know the PLA are so secretive in their actions. And im still waiting for 3 years to see the Varyg fully fitted.