Rafale, an ideal aircraft for PLA carrier aircraft

I agree with many what adeptitus sais, but I have my problems with the tech transfer that would come from sales.
The chinese build a few systems in lisence, and then, with all the newly aquired technology "develop" a domestic plane wich they build in a factory just at the other end of the street. And now they can export that again because it is their own aircraft.

SteelBird said:

OK! first, you said that it's 25m per unit, fully loaded or fly away? If it's a fly away price than you can't compare with a fully loaded Rafale. Secondly, J-10 can't be used on a carrier (which you claim to be 1/5 price of the Rafale), the coming carrier version of the J-10 is supposed to be, what is it unit price and how long does it take PLA to have it?

Click to expand...

I wrote "My personal estimation is about 25 million USD after factoring in sensors and weapons". I think I was pretty clear.
As for when will J-10's carrier version will be ready. I think 2010-2015 is a pretty decent estimation. Considering that embargo got put off again, waiting for the modified naval J-10 to come out or a naval J-11 to come out sound more appealing to me.

Maybe when the embargo is lift, you'll get a new version of the Rafale, anyway, if you don't start now, you'll never have it.

Click to expand...

PLAAF is not RAF or French air force or IAF or RuAF, it's main opponent is USAF. It needs something that can go against JSF and can shoot down the occasional F-22. On top of that, you are always going to get an export version of Rafale. So no, if you don't get Rafale, no big deal. Even if Rafale got offered in 2005 when we though embargo might be lifted, it would not have been bought. Not saying that J-10 is better, but that it can handle what Taiwanese and Japanese throw at China. At that point, you have to support the domestic industry.

planeman said:

Developing a brand new aircraft (J-10B) is cheaper than buying "off the shelf"? I think it would be a mistake to assume that devloping a twin engined navalised J-10 would be anything other than prohibitively expensive, especially considering the relatively small production run.

Another observation which sort of takes away from your point is that the PLAN chose the Su-33 over the presumably cheaper Mig-29K.

Click to expand...

J-10B is already developed and out in operational status. The J-10B is the 2 seater fighter-trainer vairant of the J-10A, the J-10B could also be used after small modifications as a ground attack role aircraft. The J-10B is a single engine not a double engine as you said. The aircraft that you are thinking about is the Super 10 project, the englarged double engine version of the J-10. So you have the J-10B as the naval variant double engine aircraft carrier plane wrong. The naval varaint J-10 will obviously be cheaper than buying the Rafale initially it might be expensive but after mass production it will become cheaper in the long run. Besides it is inable to carry chinese munitions. Big problem. It seems that you think that buying the Rafale is better option than China developing their own aircraft carrier plane. You are completly wrong if you think so. If you think that the project of the twin engine J-10 is more expensive than Rafale, and being worried and going to the cheaper option of purchasing the Rafale instead of creating a project. Your aviation industry is screwed. Thinking that buying the plane is cheaper than making it yourself, your aviation industry will never grow, mature, advance, modernise, gain knowledge or anything. You will be like a baby being bottle fed instead of becoming an adult. China despite the cost is activaley pursuing in their own technology advancements rather than relying on the embargo to be lifted or others to offer. Even if the cost of the project is more expensive than buying it off the shelf, China would've gain valuable knowledge of research, development, construction and its self reliant. Domestic is always better full stop. J-10 production line isn't small anymore.

tphuang said:

PLAAF is not RAF or French air force or IAF or RuAF, it's main opponent is USAF. It needs something that can go against JSF and can shoot down the occasional F-22. On top of that, you are always going to get an export version of Rafale. So no, if you don't get Rafale, no big deal. Even if Rafale got offered in 2005 when we though embargo might be lifted, it would not have been bought. Not saying that J-10 is better, but that it can handle what Taiwanese and Japanese throw at China. At that point, you have to support the domestic industry.

Click to expand...

Hi TP,

I think you need to get my idea clear, PLA will not get the best of the Rafale (if France would ever supply), the same as the USA would offer down-grade versions of F-22 to Japan and its other allies. The improved J-10 and J-11, or also the coming J-xx might be good aircrafts, and we also need to support the domestic products so that they can survive and get improved. But don't you think that most (if not all) of PLA's equipment are based on Russian technologies? To me, PLA needs a new idea or new concept in their inventory. For example, the SD-10 can be considered as a revolution in PLA's air-to-air missile and the missile has some western influence. If PLA just keep looking at Russian's missile, they would not have had SD-10. The same in aviation industry, they need a new idea, not just keep improving things based on the Sukhoi or the MiG's designs. That the main reason I suggest PLA to buy Rafale if they ever can.

SteelBird said:

Hi TP,

I think you need to get my idea clear, PLA will not get the best of the Rafale (if France would ever supply), the same as the USA would offer down-grade versions of F-22 to Japan and its other allies. The improved J-10 and J-11, or also the coming J-xx might be good aircrafts, and we also need to support the domestic products so that they can survive and get improved. But don't you think that most (if not all) of PLA's equipment are based on Russian technologies? To me, PLA needs a new idea or new concept in their inventory. For example, the SD-10 can be considered as a revolution in PLA's air-to-air missile and the missile has some western influence. If PLA just keep looking at Russian's missile, they would not have had SD-10. The same in aviation industry, they need a new idea, not just keep improving things based on the Sukhoi or the MiG's designs. That the main reason I suggest PLA to buy Rafale if they ever can.

Click to expand...

Does J-10 look like something based on Russian technologies? In terms of airframe alone, J-10 could use more composites and such, but it's a pretty good platform already. And you can see as I well as I can how J-10 has certain common attributes of Euro-Canards. At this point, the only fighters that China should get influence from are F-22 and JSF.

The Rafale is a very expensive aircraft. The total unit cost, including R&D expense, is over $90 million euros each, of which ~50 million euros is production cost. Weapons, sensors, parts, munitions, training, etc. will easily add another 20-30+ million euros each.

It's roughly comparable in cost to the Mitsubishi F-2 and F-16 E/F (UAE export pricing). If the PLAAF were to ever obtain this aircraft, I'd suggest reasonable numbers (60-80) for air superiority and carrier operation role. Most likely they'd be made in France only.

I'd be more interested in obtaining rights to produce the Mirage 2000-9 locally with tech transfers. Last year there were rumors that the PRC was interested in obtaining 210 Mirage 2000-9CS for $12 billion euros. This "news" was later proved to be false, but I do think the Mirage 2000-9 is a good cost-effective platform. Equipped with RDY-2 radar, laser targetting pod, AM39 Exocet, and Mantra apache cruise missiles, it'd make a good mid-level multi-role strike aircraft.

During the 1999 Kargil conflict, the Indian AF reported to have deployed the Mirage 2000 in 515 sorties, of which 240 were strike missions, dropping some 55,000 kg of ordnance. The Indian AF was very impressed with the high sortie rate, high-altitude performance, reliability, and ease of maintenance of the Mirage 2000. In comparison, the Indian AF's experience with MiG aircraft (from MiG-21 to MiG-29) was much worse.

SteelBird said:

Hi TP,

I think you need to get my idea clear, PLA will not get the best of the Rafale (if France would ever supply), the same as the USA would offer down-grade versions of F-22 to Japan and its other allies. The improved J-10 and J-11, or also the coming J-xx might be good aircrafts, and we also need to support the domestic products so that they can survive and get improved. But don't you think that most (if not all) of PLA's equipment are based on Russian technologies? To me, PLA needs a new idea or new concept in their inventory. For example, the SD-10 can be considered as a revolution in PLA's air-to-air missile and the missile has some western influence. If PLA just keep looking at Russian's missile, they would not have had SD-10. The same in aviation industry, they need a new idea, not just keep improving things based on the Sukhoi or the MiG's designs. That the main reason I suggest PLA to buy Rafale if they ever can.

Click to expand...

The J-10 is a capable aircraft who's capability is either on par or surpasses the F-18. The design was not based on an Russia aircraft but more so resembles the cancelled Lavi project from Israel-US, this design has Western aspects and is a major step away from the Russia-Soviet Union designs that China's inventory is largely populated with. This is a major step foward in achieving Western standards of technology, and towards modernisation and advancement. The only thing major in the J-10 that is Russian is the AL-31 engine but this is slated to be replaced in future production by the domestic WS-10 which has and increased thrust from 122kN to 129kN. The J-XX might be a good aircraft? It will be a good aircraft.

Chengdu J-10 said:

The J-10 is a capable aircraft who's capability is either on par or surpasses the F-18. The design was not based on an Russia aircraft but more so resembles the cancelled Lavi project from Israel-US, this design has Western aspects and is a major step away from the Russia-Soviet Union designs that China's inventory is largely populated with. This is a major step foward in achieving Western standards of technology, and towards modernisation and advancement. The only thing major in the J-10 that is Russian is the AL-31 engine but this is slated to be replaced in future production by the domestic WS-10 which has and increased thrust from 122kN to 129kN. The J-XX might be a good aircraft? It will be a good aircraft.

Click to expand...

Hi Chengdu

I noticed you always have an empty post with (.....) before your post, why? The mods don't mind that? ff

OK, back to our topic, I think China is trying to get away from Russian design, SD-10 and J-10 are the examples. what a coincident, they all have a number 10! But the heart of J-10, the AL-31F, is still Russian made (I think at this stage China has no choice, though the American refused to provide their engines). WS-10 or WS-10A? I don't have much info about them, to me they are the copy or the improved version of the AL-31 series. So, still Russian influence, how to get away from them? I don't hate Russian stuff, but I hope China will have more than one source. Just try to get Rafale (the reason is simply you need a carrier aircraft), maybe you'll get something in the future which you never think of before.

SteelBird said:

Hi Chengdu

I noticed you always have an empty post with (.....) before your post, why? The mods don't mind that? ff

Click to expand...

I've been trying to delete those.

OK, back to our topic, I think China is trying to get away from Russian design, SD-10 and J-10 are the examples. what a coincident, they all have a number 10! But the heart of J-10, the AL-31F, is still Russian made (I think at this stage China has no choice, though the American refused to provide their engines). WS-10 or WS-10A? I don't have much info about them, to me they are the copy or the improved version of the AL-31 series. So, still Russian influence, how to get away from them? I don't hate Russian stuff, but I hope China will have more than one source. Just try to get Rafale (the reason is simply you need a carrier aircraft), maybe you'll get something in the future which you never think of before.

Click to expand...

Actually, I'm one of those who really dislikes Russian stuff. But anyhow, it is kind of interesting that J-10, WS-10, WZ-10 all have 10 as their designation. I guess it's a lucky designation. Mind you, SD-10 is an export missile, plaaf will never use it. As for WS-10, you can read up on some articles on it. But some of its root seems to come from past experiences with turbofan engines like WS-6. From most of the Chinese sources, WS-10's core seemed to have been developed by studying the core of CFM-56. In fact, a lot of WS-10's specs are aimed at replicating that of F110-GE-129. And the initial long duration tests for WS-10A's certification were definitely more stringent than that of AL-31.

To adeptitus,
I remember reading an article posted on afm that an empty Rafale is around 66 million and a fully loaded one is 140 million! The cost of this thing is really going up. As for M2K, considering that China thinks J-10 is a M2K with better maneuverability and thrust, I don't think they would be interested in it.

tphuang said:

Actually, I'm one of those who really dislikes Russian stuff. But anyhow, it is kind of interesting that J-10, WS-10, WZ-10 all have 10 as their designation. I guess it's a lucky designation. Mind you, SD-10 is an export missile, plaaf will never use it. As for WS-10, you can read up on some articles on it. But some of its root seems to come from past experiences with turbofan engines like WS-6. From most of the Chinese sources, WS-10's core seemed to have been developed by studying the core of CFM-56. In fact, a lot of WS-10's specs are aimed at replicating that of F110-GE-129. And the initial long duration tests for WS-10A's certification were definitely more stringent than that of AL-31.

Click to expand...

TP: Would you please give me some links to the WS-10 or the WS family, I'd like to know more about its situation.

If PLAAF is not going to use SD-10, I can't see PLAAF having any MRAAM which is more capable than it. Or do want to say that SD-10 is a down-grade version of PL-12?