New J-10 thread II

[FugitiveVisions]

Plus, how would the construction of another Rafale class fighter be an appropriate answer to the F-22?

The PLA already has fighters that can match up with F-15s, F/A-18s and F-16s. To match against advanced versions of those planes, it would be a lot more economical to just make modifications on the J10s and J11s than to finance a new fighter project.

A proper response to the F-22 threat would be an indigenous stealth fighter or another offensive weapon system that is just as useful in penetrating enemy defenses.

[AmiGanguli]

They're not going to develop something that's basically the same as what they've got. But there are good arguments for producing some intermediate planes rather than waiting until you can produce something comparable to the F-22.

You can imagine (for example) something that's mostly comparable to the J11 or J-10 in performance, but featuring as much RCS reduction as the designers are able to pull-off given their current level of technology.

Doing intermediate designs might be a little more expensive, but it's less risky, and would allow them to gain experience (and thus progress) more quickly.

Also keep in mind the steadily increasing budget. The R&D teams that worked on the J11, J-10, and JF-17 are probably bigger than they were a few years ago, and working hard on something.

... Ami.

[zyun8288]

Yes, I agree with most of the above comments. In fact, my opinion is, in theory, China should conentrate on improving J11+J10 for the 3rd gen fighers and one true 4th gen heavy weight class fighter that can hold its ground against F22 (I don't expect it to match F22 in all areas).

And, my observation is, PLAAF had been doing that exactly. JH7? No, FC1? No. They only wanted Flankers and lately J10s. And SAC's 4th gen fighter has been their favorite for a long time.

But the ground reality is not perfect. CAC (and other institutes) needs projects to survive. With J10's sucess, they have established their position firmly ( especially in normal mil fan circles). They will do whatever they can to get into the 4th gen fighter market. That's why we are hearing all sorts of news or rumors from ChengDu.

These are all real efforts, but they are just their own efforts. In the next 1-3 years when the dust settle down, we will know the outcome. 611/CAC may end up empty handed or they may get a contract from PLAN, or even a contract from PLAAF. It's a very interesting time.

BTW, this medium class fighter thing is a long story. It's exactly because chinese realised that a fighter like Eurocanards is not an answer to F22 so they gave it up in the 90s. But now with PLAN's carrier projects on the way, there's a unique chance for CAC to explore. Plus the government and the parent holding company are encouraging 611/CAC to compete. How far can they go? I don't know.

[Schumacher]

Originally Posted by mehdi

These days you have to be a strong person not to start going loko look at what we have now a so called twin engined J-10 with medium trust engines which will resemble the French Rafale ??? and also a heavily redesigned J-10 with a TVC engine which might be completely different than the original one , who know what it will look like. I feel personally that this is just too much speculation it would be better if we refrained from adding more comments until we can have some substantial proof what are the new developments for the J-10.

I get what you say. But when it comes to observations of the secretive PLA, a lot will inevitably be speculative. If we only comment on stuffs with substantial proof, forums like this one will be very very quiet.

[Schumacher]

Any idea if this latest report below is talking about the same J-10 redesign project or a different one ?
I'm quite clueless in deciphering all these reports from Chinese sources. It basically just said it's an important aircraft project.
I wonder why they even bother to report anything if only so little detail is given.


http://mil.qianlong.com/4919/2007/04/27/135@3811634.htm

国产重点型号飞机结构设计图即将完成(图)

“3月底完成长线数控件设计发图！”,“4月底完成所有结构设计发图！”

　　这是1月下旬确立的重点型号发图目标，是重点型号任务今年的一个重大节点。时间紧迫、形势逼人！当被问 及能否按时完成发图任务时，设计员们异口同声地回答：“我们有信心！”

信心，在困难面前坚定

　　重点型号发图的困难主要在四个方面：技术难度大、协调量大、时间紧工作量大及多型号多任务 并行。

　　重点型号外形布局变化大，但又要保证主要结构交点和设备接口不变，保证其他专业的延续性，尽量将全机的 改动保持到最小。这无疑增加了难度。.................

Translation...
Domestic focus on models of aircraft structural design is nearing completion (Picture)

"By the end of March to complete a few long-term control plan designed hair! "" At the end of April to complete all the structural design of the map! "

This was established in the latter part of the plan's key objectives is the key tasks of this type of a major node. Time is running short, the situation is pressing. When asked whether the timely completion of the map task, designers were unanimous answer : "We are confident that! "

Confidence in the firm in the face of difficulties

Chart key models made major difficulties in four areas : technical difficulties, coordination capacity, Time was tight workload and multiple concurrent multi-task model.........

[fishhead]

From the recent news, we can see clearly that J-10, or WS-10a are just transitional goals for PLAAF. The new airplanes are coming from the drawing board(there are other speculations as well), same improvement probably from the engine as well.

I have some doubt that the current configuration of J-10 or WS-10a will go to mass production. The engine, WS-10a needs at least 3-5 years to get mutured for that. The Chinese real goal at least should be the improved version of WS-10a that powers the J-10 Mod version airplane with some kind of stealth feature.

It's quite prudent for them just do small batch production, to solve all the problem encounted for the brand new versions of engine and airplane, not unexpectedly. In 1970s, when China rushed to mass produce the new turbo engines, the problem of broken blade merged from that and forced to ground the whole airplane fleet. They couldn't solve the problem in the short time and the case went up finally to Chinese prime minister, Zhou Enlai. They definitely learned something from that.

[mehdi]

For a start I will accept with fishhead's comments. I always wanted to know why China never co-produced the Al-31F engine, perhaps cause they were developing the WS-10A engine that they would incorporate into the indigenous version of the Su-27SK that is the J-11B. Anyway about the J-10 first they will have to test the aircraft fully before running to make new modifications. Jumping to conclusions is pretty easy but one lesson I learned from the Chinese is that they never ever show what they really GOT and that's their true force. We can debate as much as we want but what we see is only the tip of the Iceberg.

[fishhead]

We can do a parallel comparing:

The WS-9 turbofan engine, aka Spey Mk 202, passed the design certification(domestic improved version) in 2003, but got its production certification only this month(2007).

For WS-10a, the design certification was done in Dec, 2005, it's reasonable to assume the production certification takes 3-5 years. After that, the improved version will get mutured much quicker.

[Kilo636]

Originally Posted by mehdi

For a start I will accept with fishhead's comments. I always wanted to know why China never co-produced the Al-31F engine, perhaps cause they were developing the WS-10A engine that they would incorporate into the indigenous version of the Su-27SK that is the J-11B. .

THe Russian did not allow co-produced of AL-31F engines... Chinese has to do it ,it own way.

By the way, have a question. For every J-11B produced. Does China need to pay a loyalty fee to Russian since they are using their own design. If Russian refused to allow China to produced more J-11B or deliberate charge very high fee for a single copy. Will PRC obliged(Stop the production)?

[fishhead]

Originally Posted by mehdi

I always wanted to know why China never co-produced the Al-31F engine, perhaps cause they were developing the WS-10A engine that they would incorporate into the indigenous version of the Su-27SK that is the J-11B.

They charged too much. They've transfered the Su-27 technology and if they lose the grab on engine, they won't have any money to make in the future(they hope).

Actually Chinese is making the core parts of Al-31F today(blade, etc), the overhaul of the engine is no longer needed to be sent to Russia.

[fishhead]

This 2004 PLA Daily article is interesting.

It talks about when Russia sold Chinese airplanes, they also required that Chinese used their fuels and lubricants. And one by one, Chinese replaced them with domestic made products.

I think Russia charged about 1 billion USD for AL-31F tech transfer, a price thought too high by Chinese(about J-10 R&D total cost). No surprise everybody wants to squeeze more money from some one in this world.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2004-0...nt_1431195.htm

[Kilo636]

Originally Posted by fishhead

From the recent news, we can see clearly that J-10, or WS-10a are just transitional goals for PLAAF. The new airplanes are coming from the drawing board(there are other speculations as well), same improvement probably from the engine as well.

I have some doubt that the current configuration of J-10 or WS-10a will go to mass production. The engine, WS-10a needs at least 3-5 years to get mutured for that. The Chinese real goal at least should be the improved version of WS-10a that powers the J-10 Mod version airplane with some kind of stealth feature.

It's quite prudent for them just do small batch production, to solve all the problem encounted for the brand new versions of engine and airplane, not unexpectedly. In 1970s, when China rushed to mass produce the new turbo engines, the problem of broken blade merged from that and forced to ground the whole airplane fleet. They couldn't solve the problem in the short time and the case went up finally to Chinese prime minister, Zhou Enlai. They definitely learned something from that.

Fishhead really offer some insight into China aviation history. But I second that it will take that long for WS-10A to mass production. You have pass record to back your words but what you mention about the problem in 70s is totally different from the China 30years later.China changes so fast that sometimes you cannot use something 20 to 30 years ago to compare present times of China. The lesson will indeed be painful and I believe China learn it the hard way. The painfully long time to deliver WS-10A may offer us insight of Chinese careful and thorough test to ensure WS-10A is up to standard and lowest error free possible.

From the early 80s,China open itself to the western and give insight to China of really good standard and management of goods production that the west can produced other than the soviet union where China can access. This management will indeed help China in future (which is now) to produced world standard product. (WS-10A indeed may benefit from such new management and strict QC test ensure it is tip top)

From Pakistan side,PAF will also induct a dozen of J-10 and this is definitely accomplished with the using of indigenous engines. This clearly show the confident of China of using WS-10A as this J-10 will be export. THe news of Ws-10A being mass produced soon will no doubt be true and will soon happen to accompany many J-10 going to enter service. Don't forget,J-11B will also be using the Ws-10A. Meaning really lots and lots of WS-10A are going to be available to ensure large squadron of J-10 and J-11B are going to enter service..


Moderator edit:Let it be last time I need to intervere to your use of childish Slang!!! Next time means offical warning, and with your warning rate...

[crobato]

Originally Posted by fishhead

We can do a parallel comparing:

The WS-9 turbofan engine, aka Spey Mk 202, passed the design certification(domestic improved version) in 2003, but got its production certification only this month(2007).

For WS-10a, the design certification was done in Dec, 2005, it's reasonable to assume the production certification takes 3-5 years. After that, the improved version will get mutured much quicker.

Are you sure? I'm pretty sure all the JH-7A are using WS-9 Qinling, as the engine was featured back then when the JH-7As were being released (CCTV clip). The numbers of Spey imports don't support the JH-7s + JH-7A fleets plus spares.

the production certification of the engine you may be referring to is the WS-10A, since J-11B has already started.

WS-10/10A has been in test for a long time, and has been flying in J-11 since June of 2002. I think its about time J-10 will use it too.

From the recent news, we can see clearly that J-10, or WS-10a are just transitional goals for PLAAF. The new airplanes are coming from the drawing board(there are other speculations as well), same improvement probably from the engine as well.

I have some doubt that the current configuration of J-10 or WS-10a will go to mass production. The engine, WS-10a needs at least 3-5 years to get mutured for that. The Chinese real goal at least should be the improved version of WS-10a that powers the J-10 Mod version airplane with some kind of stealth feature.

I do think that a slightly improved version of the J-10 with upgraded systems and wS-10A will come into production soon. You cannot take a step further without taking baby steps. There are things even that IOC/OPVAL of the platform will miss,and the only way to know is to actually field numbers of the plane in service. It does not have to be a large number, but something like 100 to 200. To bring the plane to the field is important because that will provide you with the feedback to improve the plane further. One does not roadmap the path of progress in a vacuum.

It's quite prudent for them just do small batch production, to solve all the problem encounted for the brand new versions of engine and airplane, not unexpectedly. In 1970s, when China rushed to mass produce the new turbo engines, the problem of broken blade merged from that and forced to ground the whole airplane fleet. They couldn't solve the problem in the short time and the case went up finally to Chinese prime minister, Zhou Enlai. They definitely learned something from that.

People do that all the time actually around the world, many of whom are more serious than our Chinese examples. The early F-16s and PW F100s for example. The MiG-29 and the RD-33 for example. The MiG-21 for example. The Su-27 and the AL-31 for example. The fiasco on Starfighters. It is totally amazing what the rest of the world actually put up with. You want to see smokey trails? I'm sure people hit on the RD-33 on the MiG-29 all the time for that, but look, every J-79 fitted on the Phantom, Starfighter and a few others like the Kfir, belches smoke like no tomorrow. And yet, there were thousands of these fighters ever made and even more of those engines.

Nonetheless, this is no excuse to field a knowingly defective product.

There are other concerns as well. The PLAAF fleet is aging fast, and you can't keep giving them J-7G as an interim substitute. There is a yearly quota of many units in the PLAAF gets a true modern upgrade. At the same time, in CAC, for a continous production line with full time workers, you need a set quota of production to keep that line running and to maintain that skillset. Its very hard to restore production once a line is stopped and the labor behind the skillset disbanded and moved to other sections, even other employment. So you need a modest production rate.

My personal estimate, is that we see around one to two regiments each year being converted with an average of 26 to 28 aircraft per regiment, which means a production rate of 26 to 50 aircraft per year. I think its possible for the production line and the modernization program to run concurrently while more advanced versions of the J-10 is being developed. I don't believe the PLAAF will put all its eggs in one single basket of J-10 version-model. Subsequently we will see various improvement on the J-10 and J-11B till their full replacement is at hand, and even then, some production will continue. Furthermore, as China is obsessively capitalistic, there will be every effort to sell the aircraft overseas, and that's going to drive development.

One feature the FC-1 has over the J-10 is that the FC-1 is being driven by outside customer demands other than the PLAAF. Because you cater to outside customers, your are not designing specs myopically towards one specific customer. You get different insights from facing different customer demands. One market is trying to beat F-16 but the other market is trying to beat MKI. By being export driven, you have to try harder. Marketing J-10 overseas will do it a good.

[fishhead]

Originally Posted by crobato

Are you sure? I'm pretty sure all the JH-7A are using WS-9 Qinling, as the engine was featured back then when the JH-7As were being released (CCTV clip). The numbers of Spey imports don't support the JH-7s + JH-7A fleets plus spares.

the production certification of the engine you may be referring to is the WS-10A, since J-11B has already started.

WS-10/10A has been in test for a long time, and has been flying in J-11 since June of 2002. I think its about time J-10 will use it too.

I am refering to this news(Chinese)
http://www.mct.com.cn/jungongcekong/...an.asp?num=278

The last WS-9 flight trial for production certification was complete on Dec 15, 2006. The paperwork was approved probably in last month, Mar 2007.

The design certification is different from production certification in China, two concepts. And production can start even without "production certification", actually you have to start to produce to get that. But it's only small volume and trial in nature.

Originally Posted by crobato

My personal estimate, is that we see around one to two regiments each year being converted with an average of 26 to 28 aircraft per regiment, which means a production rate of 26 to 50 aircraft per year.

I agree with that. And that number shows the production is in small batch and not enough for PLA requirement, let alone export.

[tphuang]

Originally Posted by fishhead

I agree with that. And that number shows the production is in small batch and not enough for PLA requirement, let alone export.

you obviously have missed all of the AVIC1 articles that stated WS-10A is in mass production right now. You can't compare WS-10A to WS-9, they have completely different priorities.