SinoDefence Forum

Semi-Lobster

Well if you want to know the differences between the JL-9 and the L-15:

JL-9:
Crew 2 men
Length 14.55 m
Wing span 8.32 m
Height 4.1 m
Weight (empty) 4.96 t
Weight (maximum take off) 9.8 t
Engines 1 x WP-13F(C) turbojet
Traction (dry / with afterburning) 4,400kg/6,450kg
Maximum speed 1 700 km/h
Service ceiling 16 km
Ferry range 2 500 km
climb rate 260m/s
max load 8g
Combat radius ?
Cannon 1 x Type 23-1 23-mm cannon
2 000 kg of weapons on four hardpoints, including short-range, air-to-surface and air-to-sea missiles, unguided bombs and rocket pods.

Various PD fire-control radar such as the Grifo S-7 or an indigenous radar rumoured to be capable of BVR missions. HUD + MFDs, RWR, ECM, 1553B databus, INS/GPS, air data computer, mechanical control system.

L-15:

Crew 2 men
Length 12.27 m
Wing span 9.48 m
Height 4.81 m
Weight (empty) 6,5 t
Weight (maximum take off) 9.5 t
Engines 2 x AL-222K-25F
Traction (dry / with afterburning) ?
Maximum speed 1.4 Mach
Service ceiling 16 km
Ferry range 3 100 km
climb rate 150m/s
max load +8.0/-3.0g
Combat radius over 550 km

No built in weapons but has six hardpoints for weapons. glass cockpit, HOTAS control and 3-axis quadruplex digital FBW, FADEC. High LEX, good angle of attack. Still in the testing stages, small design features may fluctuate (they've changes some things here and there several times since the first flying prototype) as it develops and probably won't see service for several years.

escobar

great semi-lobster.thanks

zuhe

Aside from the differences indicated by Semi-Lobster, this the cost of the airplanes a JL-9 slope one 8 to 10 million $, on the other hand a L-15 this in the 15 million $.

Semi-Lobster

I'm just curious if in the future the JL-9 could simply be upgraded to feature some of the L-15's more advanced features, such as a glass cockpit, digital FBW and FADEC technology along with general performance upgrades such as the WP-14 engine and KLJ-7 radar which should be compatible with its J-7 based design. It certainly is large enough, its the same size as a regular fighter and has a larger nose for a more powerful radar like the KLJ-7 compared to the small size of the L-15. With nearly being half the cost of the L-15, the JL-9 could probably be upgraded to a more robust trainer for J-10 and J-11 pilots and still be cheaper than the L-15.

tphuang

not sure about that, should be cheaper than that for PLAAF, I can see it being 5 million.

As for whether or not it can be upgraded with more advanced features. This is what huitong has on his website.
http://cnair.top81.cn/FT-7_K-8_L-15.htm

Semi-Lobster

huitong's site is where I got most of the info in the first place! It seems that its quite simple to upgrade JL-9 which is certainly an asset compared to the L-15. I still think a digital FBW system and FADEC is essential for the JL-9 to be a trainer suitable for the J-10, J-11 and most importantly the J-XX whatevers in the future since these features are how the pilot is going to be flying the plane inthe first place. If theres one common feature in the PLAAF, trainers stay around for a LONG time. Most sources say the Grifo-7 radar is currently being used on the JL-9s but I think an indigenous radar will likely be used in production since I'm not sure how compatible the Grifo-7 can be with Chinese missiles and LGBs. Frankly I think if marketed properly can even give the JF-17 a bit of a challenge for 3rd world export markets beyond the traditional trainer/light attack role. Unlike other jet trainers which are around 11-12m long, the JL-9 is the size of an actual fighter to begin with and if at the very least it does infact the Grifo-7 or better, these countries would have access to a modern BVR capable aircraft with a decent range when they previously did not have any at all unlike say the BAe Hawk 200, Aero L-159A or Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet. They have MLS to deal with substandard runways, with a small (2000kg) but somewhat useful multi-role payload, and an easy transition from MiG-21/J-7 to th J-7E based JL-9 all at a paltry 5 million dollars. Of course 5 million IMO, can't possibly be right though? Thats even less expensive than the F-7PG export J-7s! The JL-9 can't possibly be that low can it?

tphuang

I don't think they are at the stage of putting radar on JL-9. FADEC is probably not worth it for a trainer that's designed to be cheap. If they upgrade it from WP-13II to Kunlun-2, that would be a good move imo. 5 million might be a little cheap, but let's say that J-7G is around $4 million each for PLAAF. Then, JL-9 has all these new cockpit and slightly expensive flight control system, but since it's not equipping combat stuff yet like a mult-mode radar, it probably will work out not much more than $5 million. With all that + upgraded engine, it might get to $8 million. Of course, exports will go at a premium.

Semi-Lobster

Ah so the 5 million was just for the basic airframe itself with no radar. So I guess zuhe's estimate of around 8 million for the complete product is more or less accurate and still almost half the price of the L-15. While the JL-9 certainly has its foot through the door with the PLAAF I believe being able to imporve on the JL-9 is the key if it wants to go up against the more advance L-15. The key difference between an intermediate trainer like the JL-8/L-11 and an advanced trainer is the cockpit layout and control scheme that can best teach a pilot how to fly the advance fighter aircraft he will be flying along with a performance that can mimic those of an advance fighter while at the same time being forgiving and stable enough to be piloted by a novice or trainee pilot. Right now, while the JL-9 is impressive and is a completely indigenous, self-sufficient aircraft unlike the L-15, it lacks several important features of a modern jet fighter that the pilots are supposed to eventually fly. The key Guizhou has to keep in mind is that while the lowest cost for a tender like this is important, if it does not meet the requirements to be a LIFT trainer which is what the PLAAF is looking for, it won't get a follow up contract. The PLAAF isn't an aircraft that is slightly better than the JL-8 or a LIFT trainer for the aging J-7E/Gs and J-8H/Fs, they're lookngi for trainers for China's 4th and 5th generation fighters (or in the Chinese designation 3rd and 4th generation)

Semi-Lobster

tphuang what is your opinion on what the PLAAF intends to replace its JJ-7 with? What sort of doctrine or plan do they have for their fighter trainer program? Are they looking for something extremely advanced like the L-15 you think? Or perhaps something 'simpler' like the JL-9? Or perhaps will they aquire both? Neither of the aircraft were developed in house by the PLAAF so both are equally distanced from the PLAAF insiders to be automatically assumed to be the prime contender? Is there even really a competition between the JL-9 and L-15 or has this been completely been blown out of preoportion by western commentors with either aircraft perhaps being used for different training roles entirely? Without the JL-9 succeeding or the possibility of not aquiring Grob, Guizhou really has nothing going for it all, is this a make or break deal for Guizhou to remain viable?

escobar

i think PLAAF need both jl-9 and l-15
the first will play the role of trainer for plane like j-10 ,j-11 and
the second for j-xx
what do you think semi?

Semi-Lobster

I don't really know what exactly the PLAAF is planning to replace the JJ-7. The JL-8/L-11 have already replaced the JJ-6 and production for domestic J-7s and JJ-7s has also ended IIRC. The current PLAAF is muddled as it is, the PLAAF wants to streamline the amount of aircraft it has and not have so many different types from so many different companies all at once since it makes maintenace a problem. I think it would be best served with one type of advance LIFT trainer that can be expected to continously serve the PLAAF's trainer requirements for many years, such as the USAF T-38 Talons, which have been flying for nearly 50 years now. From a political standpoint it should also be exportable, within the next decade or so a lot of the 70's era trainers such as the prolific Aero L-39 will be retired which will open up a huge export market, It would be wise to have an aircraft that can be exported widely to replace them.

escobar

i always request why they have so many different companies
for social reason or what??

Semi-Lobster

In 1999 the single state owned Chinese AVIC corporation and its subsidiary companies was split into AVIC I and AVIC II. I to handle large aircraft construction and II to handle small aircraft construction. This was done to encourage competition between the companies to increase innovation and to lower production costs but this infact just led to a split it resources and a bunch of redundant projects so AVIC I and II were re-merged in 2008. The JL-9 and the L-15 are an example of these 'redundant projects' I guess

Semi-Lobster

Hmmm... according to this image from AssassinsMace, the JL-9 looks like it will use the WP-14III/C! I guess we can throw out all of our previous JL-9 statistics out the window because the WP-14 should give the JL-9 a substantial boost in its speed, agility and overall performance. From this chart says that the WP-14III produces 82kN of thrust which is a HUGE improvement over the WP-13F, which was the previous JL-9 engine which produces 44.1kN dry and 66.7kN with afterburners. The list also talks about the JL-9 using the WS-12 Taishan engine, a turbofan engine that is slightly less powerful but, given the nature of turbofan engines compared to turbojets, would be more fuel efficient and certainly less of a gass guzzler

crobato

That engine will make a serious hot rod out of a J-7 or J-8II if they're intending to do this. They can have a thrust to weight unity (1:1) even near full combat loads.

__________________
"Lets do a thermal sweep."