New J-10 thread II

[crobato]

Thanks Feng. My mandarin isn't very good though, I was looking for a version that can be google translated.

[wlchang]

Parallax effects are more than noticeable, with or without the wide angle lens/telephoto lens, since we are talking about relatively near objects, and not about relatively far objects like mountain ranges. One example would be the first picture in my previous post.

Furthermore, it should be remembered that the shot was taken from another plane's cockpit. Practical circumtances would prevent the use of telephoto lens at farther distances. For example, a tripod stand can't be used in the cockpit.

The fact remains that the difference of focal length could perfectly explain all the perspective differences between the two pictures.

This, certainly, would not be to the extend that there will not be any noticeable (or measured) differences in the two planes' sizes in the second picture!

Recall that the shot was taken below both the planes. And, judging by the angle of the shot, the distance between the planes is even greater than what seems to be the case in the picture.

In any which way, lens effect would affect perspective in a certain degree but it won't remove it completely!








I intented to comment on the cover picture but ended up doing this instead.

The angle of the slat is the same! You can magnify it as much as you want but you'll only magnified the bluriness. (Take note that the missiles were photoshopped into slightly different positions. I cut away the missiles in the second image as it has a visual effect to judging the angle.) Anyway, I won't base my judgement only on this aspect of the picture as there are other more obvious clues.

[crobato]

Originally Posted by wlchang

Parallax effects are more than noticeable, with or without the wide angle lens/telephoto lens, since we are talking about relatively near objects, and not about relatively far objects like mountain ranges. One example would be the first picture in my previous post.

Nonsense. Parallax effects are barely noticeable. You need a detailed background to get a measurement of parallax, and you don't.

Comments like this suggest you truly don't know, never handled, never truly experienced the use of telephoto and wide angle lenses.

In any which way, lens effect would affect perspective in a certain degree but it won't remove it completely!

Furthermore, it should be remembered that the shot was taken from another plane's cockpit. Practical circumtances would prevent the use of telephoto lens at farther distances. For example, a tripod stand can't be used in the cockpit.

Wrong. You obviously don't know photography---NOT BY A LONG SHOT. Continue to comment and make a fool out of yourself.

One issue of using wide angles in shooting aviation photography is that the result often end up with two tiny planes amidst a very blue sky occupying much of the picture. In order to get some pictures, you have to be flying close, and maybe a bit too close. In other words, you have too much excessive FOV in your image.

Telephotos allow you to crop an image, by selectively limiting your FOV to make the subjects fill the picture properly. You can do that when a camera has a zoom lens. And why do you need a tripod? You have bright daylight, and you can use fast ISO film. The shutter speeds are high enough even if you stop down the aperture, which increases your depth of field.

You can even get exactly the same effect with a normal lens (50mm), and then selectively crop only part of the image you need.

The grain in the image do strongly suggest that this is either a fast ISO film, or a slow to medium ISO film that had been cropped and magnified. Let me add to you that Photoshop does not do a good job recreating the look of chemical film grain.

The angle of the slat is the same! You can magnify it as much as you want but you'll only magnified the bluriness. (Take note that the missiles were photoshopped into slightly different positions. I cut away the missiles in the second image as it has a visual effect to judging the angle.) Anyway, I won't base my judgement only on this aspect of the picture as there are other more obvious clues.

Bull. The angle of the slot is obviously not the same. One is slightly lower than the other.

Another thing is that there are tons and tons of pictures like this, even with birds. Pictures of the Blue Angels, pictures of the Thunderbirds, pictures of the Red Knights and about every aerobatic team in the world, and these pictures look very much like this, planes two to four, flying in precise formation looking very much like a copy of each other. Suffice to say this is a very common aviation picture theme.

[wlchang]

************************************************** *

Take your off topic arguing elsewhere! This is thread about J-10 which has nothing to do with someone's knowlidge or ignorance over the theory of photographing. If I spot either of you continuing this rumble after this message, a official warnings will follow and as one of you have blue colours, I expect the "seniority" of him to stand out and focus on the actual issues.


Is this enough of harsh words?

Gollevainen, Spanish Inqvisition

[crobato]

Test pilot interview

http://www.wforum.com/specials/articles/04/33806.html

googled edited a few parts for brevity. one part reveals some frustrations with early missile testing on the J-10.


Xu Yongling, the second test flight of the Air Force-level experts, the first two bachelor's degrees, the air force pilot, test pilot, Only one member of China's three international flights. They advanced proficiency in China's third generation fighter plane and the various equipment fighters, transports carrying out their duties. Up to now, more than 1,800 hours of flight safety, proper disposal of more than 20 aerial danger.


Can you talk about your objective evaluation of the F-10 in a controlled and practical experience.

Xuyongling : as a test pilot, lifetime flights in the high-performance fighters such as the F-10 is one of my "good fortune" I am flying! many at home and abroad the same type of aircraft, but few such as the F-10 is a good man-machine interface and exchange flying qualities. F-10 aircraft a digital fly-by-wire system is used in the drive can be completed "human loop." In simple terms is the manipulation of the pilot signal strength will be the case onboard flight control computer. computer signal processing, and through the transmission signal parameter steering, and the completion of the aircraft's rudder control drive, so a complete cycle of the feedback loop. Compared to the computer data processing, HUD and through information transmitted to the multi-functional displays will test flight, the aircraft's test flight, in quality control, efficiency, comfort and intuitive than traditional aircraft and other aspects of qualitative leap. First, I want to say-one F-10 aircraft under the "efficient." One of the F-10 makes use of advanced fly-by-wire control, joystick in hand to feel the pressure sensor. Onboard computer control signals sent to and from a computer calculation based on the best real-time control of volume aircraft, and the control signal sent rudder control system aircraft to adjust posture. This will not only reduce the burden on the pilot, but also give full play to duck the aircraft's maneuverability. Figuratively, the pilot driving takeoff weight of the aircraft in the past, will feel the steering stick very Shen, Sometimes, the body should stick to leave the seat back to the ground after the pilot flying clothes are often soaked by sweat. But the F-10 is a fax aircraft, the pilot manipulated by the steering stick to force information into signals further into steering parameters, driven aircraft and the control of the rudder completed, we will feel very handy; appears to be a vehicle to install power steering system. need not be effectively completed very strong driving movements. F-10 fighters with very different second-generation drivers, system administrators into a test flight by operators. HMI aircraft instruments from the traditional style into a "menu". This means the test flight pilots must possess considerable engineering background. Access procedures can be adopted by the steering stick into the menu. Through the different buttons on the steering stick Integrated Avionics conversion can be achieved, bombs, missiles, rockets, electronic warfare, Radar function of the various functions that can be said is very convenient, very efficient.

Brother : I-, if the F-10 completed a long-range attack, the pilots in order to "facilitate" how do?

Xu Yong; MR : This is not to worry, we will be issued per person on the plane "urine is not wet," not in general. But the key moment can really understand the "immediate need." (We both "Baoxiao"). Return-1 under the F-10's "security", the safety is a broad one, including the overall test flight safety including the safety of the aircraft itself. According to statistics, in the West have Shuaiguo fax aircraft's maiden flight. Throughout the development of the F-10 and no one Shuaiguo an airplane, I was told that this was "lucky" and the fact that they simply do not know. China is a developing F-10 aircraft in the lessons learned abroad, strengthening the flight simulator training variable-stability aircraft to simulate the various risks, which makes test flight in a test flight when do know, This is called "risk overdrawn." Fax plane crashes because of the reasons is the largest foreign "human coupling." F-10 aircraft in a test flight when there was a severe human coupling. Aircraft landing at 180 meters above the ground when suddenly a horizontal swing manipulation becomes very difficult. Due to the use of variable-stability test pilot induced oscillation similar simulation, test pilot knows no time bar for stability operations, Instead of "ignore" the manipulation methods. He then fuel to go around to avoid a serious accident. Otherwise, it sure that the F-10 onto a one. F-10 aircraft itself on the safety, health small fault when the aircraft, the aircraft's flight control system can be compensated automatically This is China's traditional aircraft have taken a quantum leap forward, while the F-10 aircraft rescue a perfect system. After the air test, dive, roll, dive pulled up worldwide, six under the actual speed detection. This would provide the most reliable guarantee for the flight. I want to emphasize that the aircraft can be automated fax solution small failures, but if a major fault and special situations. The flight control system is not compensation, leave room for disposal of a relatively smaller test flight, which is also the risk lies FBW aircraft. Finally, I turn to the F-10 aircraft of the "comfort." Objectively speaking, the F-10 aircraft environmental control system is the best aircraft. Sometimes opened airborne air-conditioning, automatic start driving luxury cars still uncomfortable feeling than sitting. This is really grateful to the Chinese aviation plant involved in the tests, sometimes in "fault-finding." frequently asked our pilot's feelings, we reflect the problem, city immediately be resolved. Remember the late test flight, test pilot felt the plane Display brightness high, it will affect the observed outside the cabin. manufacturers will send specialists to resolve. Through the next few tests, the final "stickers mold" a way to completely solve the problems. F-10 : the ultimate manifestation of the author or fire fighting capacity.

Can you talk about the link test flight of the F-10 combat

Zou Jianguo : One of the F-10 combat aircraft are mainly embodied in aerial bombs, air-to-air, air-to-ground and air-to-ship missile rockets and electronic warfare areas. I have previously completed a variety of tasks range test fighters live, Not such an aircraft like the F-10 in a state of complete bombings achieve the arbitrary action. As long as the air will be locked on the target, we can carry out an attack, simple operation and high precision. F-10 aircraft in the air can simultaneously track a few months, be able to crack down on a number of objectives. Onboard, a J-10 air-to-air missile live-fire test is a series of frustrations. The missile has been widely used in a series of domestically produced J-8 fighters. developed by China itself is a kind of air-to-air missiles were launched from the interception. In the F-10 aircraft for a successful use of this type of missile, the test flight lasted for a long time simulation training and drills. But live-fire testing is a relatively large risk, missile launch by the end of the aircraft engine smoke may cause "to swallow the smoke," and "surge" caused mid-air parking, as a single plane, stopping once in the low-altitude engine, test pilot ejected only. I really target in the head, officials, the cabin, I firmly fixed on screen is the target of a shooting box. When the drone in the screen is demonstrated in the "bullet" into the fire boxes regional, I resolutely pressed the button to launch the missile. "Whoosh" bang, a dashing wing aircraft fire from the jet out of the water like a missile guidance straight goals, A distant sky turf "fireworks" and hit the target accurately. But we have also seen a missile test-launch of the enormous difficulties, the test firing the missile missed its target during a test of the air. Through joint efforts, we think the main reason is the failure of the range test aircraft radar "main beams" caused by interference. Find, test pilot made a missile test-launch of the "anterior range test, a head-mobile" and "after the end of the range test. Tactical aircraft contained "and the missile test was a success. One of the F-10 aircraft's electronic warfare jamming and mainly rely on IFF, anti-jamming capability. In short, the F-10 is an outstanding performance of an air mobility, combat effectiveness of the outstanding fighters, and in the future it will certainly become an important force in safeguarding the motherland's security and integrity

[Scratch]

Speaking of man-machine-interface, does the J-10 utilize HOTAS and/or voice controll?
And btw, can someone briefly explain the term man-in-the-loop to me?

[Red_CCF]

Anyone know if there's any evidence of a plane called Super-10 being built or developed because I saw it on Wikipedia and got curious

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_Super-10

[crobato]

J-10 uses hotas but I don't think it has voice control. Man in the loop is simply suggesting a man reacting within an electronic closed loop system.

I don't know Super-10 being a two engined J-10. IMO, Super 10 is the planned evolution for the J-10 having TVC, uprated engines, and ESA radars. A twin engined plane would be a totally seperate project that will earn a new J-X number.

[Ryz05]

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/jxx.asp - Twin-engine J-10?

Doesn't the third picture down remind you of the underside of Dassault Rafale?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rafale2_ag1.jpg

[unknauthr]

Another article on upcoming Russian-Chinese joint military maneuvers, scheduled for this summer:
http://www.cacianalyst.org/view_arti...articleid=4748

RUSSIA AND CHINA UNITE FORCES IN PEACE MISSION 2007
Erica Marat

This summer the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) will conduct joint military exercises called "Peace Mission-2007". The Russian-led Collective Security Treaty (CSTO) will closely observe the drills. For the first time, the two organizations will act as partners rather than representing overlapping multilateral structures seeking to fight terrorism, extremism, and separatism in Eurasia. However, the drills also generate discussions whether both organizations are in fact pursuing transnational security or are more concerned with international dominance. The CSTO's suggestion to practice defense mechanisms against nuclear terrorism suggests the latter.

BACKGROUND: The SCO and CSTO embrace a significant part of Eurasia and their memberships overlap. The SCO members include China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan; while India, Iran, Mongolia, and Pakistan hold observer status. The CSTO members are Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan; while Azerbaijan and Georgia are observers. The SCO and CSTO were formed in 2001 and 2002, respectively. Since 2002, each organization has been conducting annual collective military exercises, with Russia and China being the main suppliers of military technologies, aircrafts, submarines, elite battalions, and armaments. The SCO and CSTO collective anti-terrorist drills usually involve heavy armament and thousands of soldiers. Today, the SCO's Regional Anti-Terrorism Structure (RATS) and CSTO's Collective Rapid Reaction Forces (CRRF) represent largely overlapping and at the same time competing military subunits.

This summer the SCO will practice defense mechanisms against nuclear terrorism in Russia's Povolzhsk-Uralsk military district. Such large-scale collective military maneuvers contradict the organization's initial goals of fighting drug trafficking, organized crime, and ethnic separatism that require smaller scale military and policing operations. The "Peace Mission 2007" exercises will feature exclusively Russian and Chinese military technologies, including China's Chengdu J-10 tactical fighter plane and BMP-96 infantry fighting vehicles and tanks. Russia will provide Il-76MF aircraft. New housing facilities will be built to accommodate the participants, and Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Hu Jintao will attend the drills. Given that no terrorist organization is presently known to possess nuclear weapons, the drills' objectives obviously aim beyond just anti-terrorism activities. They rather represent an attempt to boast Russian and Chinese military capabilities, as well as the growing ties between the two countries.

In 2006 Russia and China conducted joint military exercises on China's Shandong peninsula within the SCO framework. These were the first Russian-Chinese joint military maneuvers and signified a closer merger between both states. China provided 7,000 of its military personnel, while Russia provided 1,800. The drills involved trainings on assault ships, submarines, and strategic aviation. Since no other SCO members aside from Russia and China have access to the sea, the drills were largely labeled as window dressing in front of Taiwan. Importantly, the drills also promoted greater arms trade between Russia and China. Today, Russia's annual arms trade to China amounts to roughly $2 billion. Diplomatic visits between Russian and Chinese military and security officials also became more frequent since the 2006 drills.

At the CSTO's November 2006 meeting in Moscow, the CSTO expressed its interest to join the SCO's drills, but Beijing declined the proposal. The CSTO officials agreed upon the fact that since both organizations' goals and memberships converge, organizing military drills jointly would reduce costs and facilitate exchange of experience between them. However, the SCO claimed that neither organization provides a legal ground for uniting their militaries in joint maneuvers. Initially Moscow planned to field 450 military personnel to the drills, but Beijing insisted that the number should be 2,000. After negotiations, Moscow and China agreed to provide up to 3,000 military personnel each. These numbers are remarkably higher compared to smaller member-states. Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan will provide 100 personnel each and Kyrgyzstan only 30. The number of personnel sent by each country suggests that the drills will primarily feature Russian and Chinese military teams. Armenia and Belarus, both members of the CSTO, were invited to the SCO-CSTO exercises as observers.

It is unlikely that SCO's RATS and CSTO's CRRF will eventually merge, but potential synchronization of their functioning is indeed an important element in justifying their future coexistence. There is an informal threshold, primarily enforced by Russia, to withhold the expansion of Chinese military presence in the Central Asian states. Although RATS has an office in Tashkent, the SCO does not intend to station a military base anywhere in the region or jointly with the CSTO. The CRRF is stationed in Kant, Kyrgyzstan.

IMPLICATION: The "Peace Mission 2007" drills indeed contain more political rather than practical value. Although both SCO and CSTO are concerned with transnational security in Eurasia, neither provides concrete mechanisms for fighting security problems such as non-state insurgency, drug trafficking and organized crime. The experience of previous collective drills shows that the SCO and CSTO primarily sought to master their military capacities as opposed to developing skills in police activities or intelligence exchange. Arguably, Russia and China share a common concern with secessionist movements on their territories. Both also loathe the Central Asian states' cooperation with the U.S and NATO's Partnership for Peace program. The SCO and CSTO represent a shield from international intervention into Russian, Chinese and Central Asian domestic affairs. With that, both organizations played a mere symbolic role in addressing terrorist incidents in the Central Asian states, often supporting incumbent regimes in times of instability instead of designing concrete anti-terrorism strategies.

The SCO and CSTO's programs emphasize that neither organization represents a military bloc, and that neither intends to align against any state or group of states. Despite that, the discourse around both organizations' functioning often involves discussions of their standoff with NATO and the U.S. military presence in the Central Asian region. Russian mass media regularly condemn Western negative perception of the SCO's cooperation with the CSTO, especially after Russia and China conducted bilateral military exercises in China in 2006. The SCO, on its part, underlines its peaceful intensions and rebukes the possibility of turning into military bloc. Along with that, the organization's documents stress the danger of unipolar tendencies in global security. The SCO regards its member and observer states as supporters of international multipolarism.

It is likely that China and Russia will try to involve India into the SCO's future military exercises. India's interest in the Central Asian region, as well as military cooperation with Russia and China, has been increasing in the past few years. The SCO also established ties with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations' Secretary, thus placing itself among China's most important multilateral alliances. At the June 2006 summit in Shanghai dedicated to the SCO's fifth anniversary, the organization announced a moratorium on further expansion. Instead, the SCO will stage partnership dialogues with individual states. Afghanistan has become the first state to participate in the SCO's bilateral partnership dialogues.

CONCLUSIONS: Growing ties between Russia and China indeed amplify both the CSTO's and the SCO's leadership positions in Eurasia. But there is a limit to the merger between the two organizations. Despite Russian interest in military cooperation with China, the Kremlin will not abandon the expansion of the CSTO. The CSTO is a counter-balance not only to Western influence in the former Soviet space, but also to Chinese presence in Central Asia and the South Caucasus. The SCO, for its part, emphasizes differences between itself and the CSTO. Unlike the CSTO's CRRF stationed at the Russian air base at Kant, the SCO lacks joint military troops. In practice, China will not be able to deploy troops to the Central Asian states, let alone to Russia. The SCO, however, offers a prolific venue for intensification of military cooperation between Moscow and Beijing. This does not necessarily contribute primarily to transnational security, fulfilling instead entirely different agendas.

[AssassinsMace]

Originally Posted by Ryz05

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/jxx.asp - Twin-engine J-10?

Doesn't the third picture down remind you of the underside of Dassault Rafale?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rafale2_ag1.jpg

I'm surprised that Sinodefense is running with this as the JXX and new version of the J10. There was a series of pics that showed many other types of familiar looking world aircraft models being tested in the same manner. It looks like they're just testing shapes of existing aircraft.

[Deino]

Originally Posted by AssassinsMace

I'm surprised that Sinodefense is running with this as the JXX and new version of the J10. There was a series of pics that showed many other types of familiar looking world aircraft models being tested in the same manner. It looks like they're just testing shapes of existing aircraft.

Ohhh ... that's actually a shame !! ... but it will surely be corrected !

Just found ... in 1/48 !!!

[challenge]

according to wforum.com/wmf
PLAAF planning different variant for J-10.aside from J-10a and two seater b.
c variant carry locally make engine,and improve avionic,d version fighter bomber (two seater?) while H variant naval version.

[crobato]

Those are nice model kits. The camoflage and nose color does not match what the PLAAF has, but it sure looks better. There is the nose of another plane in the side of the picture. FC-1 perhaps, implying that an FC-1 model kit exists also from the same brand.

[Deino]