Sorry, I mean is J10 stealth at all.
BTW, tphuang. Can you tell me how to join the PDF, I have tried many times, but it always say that my email is not accepted by the board. So could you please tell me how to join. Thank you.
*New J-10 Thread*
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
- Status
Sorry, I mean is J10 stealth at all.
BTW, tphuang. Can you tell me how to join the PDF, I have tried many times, but it always say that my email is not accepted by the board. So could you please tell me how to join. Thank you.
Crobato:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
re wingtips: I think most fighters/attackers have some kind of them (either for carrying AAMs or ECM pods, or someting else) to add weight to the edge of the wing in order to supress possible vibration of the wing ... ?
And that leads me to J-10s ECM suite, does it carry it all in the top of the tail fin? I mean fighters like the F-15, MiG-29 wich don't have wingtips at all or other wich carry AAMs there have two tailfins to fit that gear.
And I would think it's better fitted to the aircraft as far away from the centerline as possible and not in the fuselage.
Well, actually you're right. I didn't really take the time to think about that when writing the post. I was somewhat guided by the impression that J-7, H-class, and Q-5 were derived from foreign (russian) airframes and therefore didn't count them as domestic. Especially the JH-7 and J-8II are in fact really chinese made aircraft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
re wingtips: I think most fighters/attackers have some kind of them (either for carrying AAMs or ECM pods, or someting else) to add weight to the edge of the wing in order to supress possible vibration of the wing ... ?
And that leads me to J-10s ECM suite, does it carry it all in the top of the tail fin? I mean fighters like the F-15, MiG-29 wich don't have wingtips at all or other wich carry AAMs there have two tailfins to fit that gear.
And I would think it's better fitted to the aircraft as far away from the centerline as possible and not in the fuselage.
Hmmm .... but then is the WS-10 - or at least the nozzle arrangement from its outward look - a "copy" of the AL-31FN and not a new design as shown on the J-11/WS-10-testbed !?!?
I'm still too confused about how to differentiate a AL-31 from a WS-10/A .... can anyone help ????
Deino
It is very difficult to distinguish any engine at all once it is installed in an airplane. Can you really distinguish if a jetliner is using Rolls Royce or GE engines if the company logos are removed?
The J-11 with the WS-10A probably didn't have the final nozzles on, and the engine seems to have a wider diameter (more bypass?). But that is between the vanilla AL-31F vs. the WS-10A; the AL-31FN actually has a wider diameter than the AL-31F due to a redesigned compressor stage (and thus may actually generate more power than the vanilla AL-31F despite the official specs). In all probability, the AL-31FN was tailor designed to match the WS-10/10A's dimensions to fit the J-10 specifically, hence the change in gearbox position. This can mean other changes vs the standard AL-31F, like the nozzle, and certainly the vanilla AL-31F lacks the bright metal collar. Its not the other way around, the WS-10/10A being made to fit the AL-31F as on the J-11, but on the J-10, its the AL-31FN being made to fit where the WS-10/10A is supposed to be.
But at least in this case, the AL-31FN appears to have a shorter metal ring, implying as the report suggests, that the engine is also shorter than the WS-10. From tip of the nozzle to tip of the radome, the J-10 with the WS-10/10A engine may be longer than the ones with the AL-31FN.
There is a difference between Chinese made and Chinese designed.
J-11 is Chinese made, but not Chinese designed.
J-7 and Q-5 are derived from Russian airframes but are Chinese made. In all these years, there are lot of modifications to the existing designs.
In the J-7E for example, the radar is very different, based on the ELTA 2001 or British Skyranger, and not just a simple gun ranging radar used on the MiG-21FL. The wing is entirely different, a double delta design with no fences and has computer controlled variable camber slats. The cockpit is entirely different, and comes with a modern HUD and an MFD (among later models of the E), whereas the MiG-21FL didn't even come with a HUD. The ejection seat is a copy of the Martin Baker. And the engine isn't original of the MiG-21FL at all, but an improved copy of an engine that appeared on the much later MiG-21MF that have been spruced up. So the plane is literally a hot rod, and is fast as the fourth generation MiG-21bis, but is far more maneuverable, thanks to the plane's much ligher weight, bigger wing area, variable camber. and double delta which enables higher alpha to be reached.
This makes the plane the most maneuverable of all Fishbed designs and variations.
In the Q-5, you have a complete nose and canopy job. The wings are actually longer in wingspan, and the engines have been improved to a point the plane is another hotrod. Planes of the sixties and seventies are lucky if you get a TWR ratio of 0.75 to 0.80. The Q-5s, with two engines of 3900kg thrust each, and a combat weight of 8000 to 9000kg, from an empty weight of around 6000kg easily surpasses that margin and can reach a good 0.9. Even though the JH-7A is a much more modern plane, the Q-5 is still a lot more nimble and maneuverable. At low altitudes, it can still threaten and shoot down similar attackers if confonted.
Quite true.
In the case of the J-10, the wings may be sturdy enough not to need it. Delta wings by its basic design has a tendency to be very sturdy and a number of delta or semi delta designs don't use wingtip rails (Mirage 2000, F-15) in order to extend the wing further and add more wing area. Clipping wings and the reduction of wing area, actually makes planes go a bit faster on low altitudes, but at the expense of turn rates higher altiudes.
We don't much about the J-10's ECM suite, and I don't know what is exactly on top of the J-10's tail fin, which is also there on top of the FC-1's tail fin.
Hmmm ... ??? Yes, but even if I can't distinguish them without a closer look "inside" it's quite possible to distinguish aspecific engine on military planes by a look at their nozzle: like a F100 powered F-16 from a F110 powered one; the same especially for the first RB.199 powered Typhoones from the serial EJ.200 powered.
And that's what surprises me as I don't know any two fighter engines which use the same (or at least quite very similar) afterburner arrangement.
Therefore I still ask myself 2 questions:
1) If the WS-10A is actually based on the core of the CFM.56 and we assume that the engine shown on the J-11/WS-10-testbed is then a "prototype" with not the final arrangement ... would it be possible to adopt the AL-31's nozzle ???
2) Otherwise if both engines do use the same nozzle and are only distinguishyble by the lenght of the metal ring ... could it be that the WS-10 then is more related to the AL-31F as I thought before (like the WS-13 to the RD-93) ???
HELP !!!!???? ... and Thanks in advance, Deino
But you would need to be close enough. Maybe too close. If its a photograph, you probably won't be seeing the rest of the plane.
Nozzles work the same way almost everywhere. They all look alike to me.
Yes. By design you mean. The diameters will be different so you cannot directly transplant an existing nozzle to another engine.
Not necessarily. Better to see the number of stages inside the engine. In order to confirm the similarities, you would need a cutaway of the engines so we can do things like count the number of fans per stages. One must also note that the AL-31FN has a different 3 fan IP compressor stage than the vanilla AL-31F (I think it uses four fans). The WS-10 or WS-10A appears to have a 3 fan IP stage based on a leaked CG image. However, the AL-31FN came later than the WS-10.
Trying to identify engines by the nozzle is like trying to identify the engines o a car by its exhaust. Actually, the latter is easier.
maozedong
Banned Idiot
crobato already explained very clearlly and professional.
as so far as I know WS10a is core engine of WS10.
WS10 is design for J10 fighters, the project started from 1984.
AL31f is russia engine design for SU27,not for J10.
WS10 was ready just in end of 2005,but before 2005 J10 already serviced PLAAF.
because WS10 was not ready for J10, China ordered Al31fn for J10.
Al31fn is little bit improved from Al31f, then let the engine incorporate J10 fighter.crobato has explained very well.
WS13 is China design for FC-1 and JH7.WS13 is not = RD93, they are just incorporate FC-1 fighters.
some Russia sorces reported that China already ordered one batch of AL31fn engine from russia,that is another improved engine for J10,these engine are vectoring thrust engine--this source only for reference.
the conclusion is there are many deffint kind of engine can incorporate the plane but they are not the same.
I am not a engineer, my engine knowledge is limited,if any one can make post more detail,that is grateful.
as so far as I know WS10a is core engine of WS10.
WS10 is design for J10 fighters, the project started from 1984.
AL31f is russia engine design for SU27,not for J10.
WS10 was ready just in end of 2005,but before 2005 J10 already serviced PLAAF.
because WS10 was not ready for J10, China ordered Al31fn for J10.
Al31fn is little bit improved from Al31f, then let the engine incorporate J10 fighter.crobato has explained very well.
WS13 is China design for FC-1 and JH7.WS13 is not = RD93, they are just incorporate FC-1 fighters.
some Russia sorces reported that China already ordered one batch of AL31fn engine from russia,that is another improved engine for J10,these engine are vectoring thrust engine--this source only for reference.
the conclusion is there are many deffint kind of engine can incorporate the plane but they are not the same.
I am not a engineer, my engine knowledge is limited,if any one can make post more detail,that is grateful.
Last edited:
Are You sure ??? I surely don't think that this is so difficult as they truely don't look the same ! The General Electric engines do have very different nozzles in comparison to the Pratt & Whitney engines for example ... so I think it's not too difficult to recognise an aircraft via its afterburner nozzle !
And even if it's difficult - perhaps as with the different F100-PW-versions like the 100/200/220/229 - every moderne engine has its typical external characteristics ... and no two engines especially from two very different manufactors look so similar like these Shenyang WS-10A and the Saturn AL-31FN exhausts !
Therefore IMO the differences are much smaller than between an F100-PW-200 in an F-15 and a late F100-PW-229 in an F-16. ... what led me to three conclusions:
1. this is not the WS-10A !!!! ... or ...
2. both engines are closely related ... or do at least use the same exhaust design ! (Why I don't know)
3. both engines are the same (= AL-31FN's) ... maybe from onother production block and therefore show minimal external changes ... changes on the rear part of the airframe and not on the engine !
If You look at the white 01-prototype ... which is said to be powered by an AL-31FN it also has the larger metal-ring !!
Hmmm .... Thats clear if the WS-10A has a larger diameter ... but I can't recognise a change in diameter between both engines - if they ever actually show a real WS-10-powered J-10.
Once again IMO ... these are the same engines = AL-31FN !! .... or I still don't get it as I cant read the original source, which described and finally convinced that these the early prototypes 1003 - 10?? are WS-10A powered.
The pbig picture do show late production AL-31FN-powered J-10 in comparison to the prototype 1003's engine ...
Jane's Puts Their Spin on Things
In case anyone didn't see it, last week's issue of Jane's Defence Weekly (17 January 2007) made brief mention of the recent public unveiling of the J-10. A couple of items bear repeating from this assessment.
First, was that according to Jane's sources, the J-10 was unveiled specifically to facilitate the marketing of the airplane to foreign customers:
In case anyone didn't see it, last week's issue of Jane's Defence Weekly (17 January 2007) made brief mention of the recent public unveiling of the J-10. A couple of items bear repeating from this assessment.
First, was that according to Jane's sources, the J-10 was unveiled specifically to facilitate the marketing of the airplane to foreign customers:
"The declassification of the widely known aircraft is likely to be part of an export drive by the Chengdhu Aircraft Industry Group (CAC) and the Chinese government: an effort already under way, with Pakistan a likely customer. The Pakistan Air Force was given clearance in April 2006 to begin negotiations on the possible procurement of the aircraft."
The second, was confirmation of at least some of those PLAAF units currently flying the J-10:"The footage also shows that at least two air divisions of the People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), namely the 44th Air Division and 3rd Air Division, are operating J-10s."
Not necessarily new information, but still, nice to see it being confirmed.
Not from a distance no. You have to be close enough to count the number of petals and design differences.
Look closely in the pictures.
* The WS-10 nozzle is longer. Nozzle + dark ring extends nearly way to the root of the parachute boom.
* The silver ring in the AL-31FN engine does not exceed where the parachute boom starts.
* But the silver ring in the WS-10 engine goes way back into the tail root. It consists of two parts, as you can see an outer ring that touches the root of the boom while the inner ring goes all the way further.
The nozzles are overrated. The Chinese may have conveniently copied the design of the AL-31F. But look at the rings around the engine past the nozzle. They are significantly different in size and location.
Here is a reason why the ring may be showing on the WS-10 engine. Because it has a slightly larger diameter in the butt so you can't extend the fuselage skin to cover it.
As for diameter, this is the wS-10 engine, not the WS-10A with the A engine that is improved. The AL-31FN does not have the same diameter as the AL-31F either, a reason for that it uses a new slightly wider 3 stage IP compressor while the vanilla AL-31F uses a 4 stage one.
The J-10 was made to fit the WS-10/10A ,not the other way around. In the case of the AL-31FN, it's trying to fit into the WS-10's bay, where as on the J-11, its the reverse, its the WS-10A trying to fit into where the AL-31F is supposed to be. There is something about designing an airframe around an engine, but there is something also about an engine being designed into an existing airframe.
The prototypes with WS-10 satisfy one glaring question I had before. How can the Russians be able to modify and manufacture the engine so quickly you can have it delivered in 1997 so a J-10 prototype can fly it in 1998.
The answer: they didn't. The first AL-31FNs were only delivered after 2001.
Oh and please note the lack of riveting on the tail itself on my second picture. Whereas the root has rivets. That shows you the J-10 tail above the root is made of composites, which does not require riveting.
Attachments
-
J-10_1006.jpg -
J-10A yellow primer part.jpg
Last edited:
- Status