New J-10 Thread III

Originally Posted by luhai

actually screws (actually they are rivets) are still pretty common in aviation today. However, usually the rivets would bow inward and a coating would covers it up. But they slowing on their out as composites % of plane becomes more and more. Here a "naked" JSF museum pieces, you can still see the rivets. But they aren't as pronounced as the one on that J-10.

Thanks for clearing that up. but the obvious difference may hinge on the manufacturing technology. While western rivets are done by precision tools and machines , China's are done roughly by human hands and eyes. That may not be true, but I am using that as an example.

Workmanship does reflect the stage of your industrial advancement level.

Maybe this has direct correlation to the WS-10A engine problem, the overall manufacturing process and technology is not good enough. Maybe time to introduce some new tools, process and manufacturing technology.

Many more J-10 close-up pics here:
¡¾ÏÈ·æÔ*´´¡¿¼ßʮ֮Ԕ Ï˺Á±ÏÏÖ - ³¤¿ÕÐÛÓ¥ - ÊÀ¼ÍÏÈ·æ - Powered by Discuz!

There was a discussion on another forum about this a while back, with links to other comparable aircraft close-up photos:
Military Photos - View Single Post - Close up pictures / details on J10. Is it a joke?

The J-10 workmanship isn't as smooth, but you'd find the same screws & rivets on all other 4th gen aircraft.

Originally Posted by lilzz

Thanks for clearing that up. but the obvious difference may hinge on the manufacturing technology.
...

Maybe this has direct correlation to the WS-10A engine problem, the overall manufacturing process and technology is not good enough. Maybe time to introduce some new tools, process and manufacturing technology.

It hard to do that when there is all these export restriction on you, since no precision manufacturing equipment can be exported to China under current circumstance, either civilian or military. So China has to do everything in house, which could take a while to catch up to world standards. (As Russians, in my opinion are worse than China regard to manufacturing technology.

It's actually a major problem in trade with the USA, since pretty much all the manufacturing product USA have and China wants are restricted or partially restricted items. Everything else, China can pretty much make themselves.

AFAIK, dear luhai especially France, Italy and in a slightly more restricted way also Germany are actually exporting all classes of high precision manufacturing machines, tools and equipment to China. There are indeed some western media reports that Chengdu currently has French and German machinery in use for J-10 production but this remains of course speculation.

Nevertheless you are correct about the extensive US technology embargo against China and corresponding negative effects on both countries. Unfortunately the Japanese government has been following it's ´masters´ lead and has tightened up export regulations considerably but Japanese companies are often unhelpful for purposes of technology transfer anyway.

Apparently you don't need to tighten up the screws that much for the J-10, or it's just an example that needs some serious overhauling.

Originally Posted by Skywatcher

I thought the radars of the KJ-2000, the KJ-200 and 052C DDG were all AESA?

Back in 1994,Chinese government science journal cite several technical achievement (both civilian and military) among them was the development L-band (or was it s-band) 4- bit T/R microwave circuit.
according to back issue of IDR,T/R MC for lower RF band are much easier to fabricate and produce than high RF band particular X-band and MMW band.
AESA for KJ-2000/Kj-200 and 052C all operating in low RF band.

Originally Posted by Violet Oboe

AFAIK, dear luhai especially France, Italy and in a slightly more restricted way also Germany are actually exporting all classes of high precision manufacturing machines, tools and equipment to China. There are indeed some western media reports that Chengdu currently has French and German machinery in use for J-10 production but this remains of course speculation.

Nevertheless you are correct about the extensive US technology embargo against China and corresponding negative effects on both countries. Unfortunately the Japanese government has been following it's ´masters´ lead and has tightened up export regulations considerably but Japanese companies are often unhelpful for purposes of technology transfer anyway.

Much of these tooling you mention are only used to make the internals. When it comes to the skin, the riveting, that's going to be mostly hand labor.

Not only you use large panels of molded composite, which precision machine tools have nothing to do about also.

Originally Posted by challenge

Back in 1994,Chinese government science journal cite several technical achievement (both civilian and military) among them was the development L-band (or was it s-band) 4- bit T/R microwave circuit.
according to back issue of IDR,T/R MC for lower RF band are much easier to fabricate and produce than high RF band particular X-band and MMW band.
AESA for KJ-2000/Kj-200 and 052C all operating in low RF band.

I don't know if its really easier to do a lower band. A lower band requires a much larger element since the size of an element cannot be 1/2" smaller than the maximum band frequency. So an L band AESA would require elements that are in the order, several times larger than an X band element.

Originally Posted by crobato

Not only you use large panels of molded composite, which precision machine tools have nothing to do about also.

You need CNC machines to make the molds for the composite panels.

Dear Sirs:

The pictures of the J-10s or the F-22s merely confirm that when you need regular access to certain components, for maintenance, replacement, upgrade or testing, you are going to need the cover (in this case obviously the skin of the aircraft) to be removable.

And as you can see, the choice of designers from various countries is almost universal, that is, screwed-on panels that can be taken off and replaced or hinged to swing away.

Every aircraft has these screwed-on panels and there's no getting away from them.

The actual load-bearing structure of the aircraft (the airframe) mainly consists of longitudinal and transverse strength members to which those external panels attach to.

Even if the skin (or certain parts of the structural members) is/are made of radar-absorbing/composite materials the main members are most certainly made of metal - there is just no replacing it when rugged, brute strength is necessary.

Show me an aircraft that doesn't use metal in the landing gear and struts, and then look underneath at the structure which the landing gear attaches to - all metal.

The finish of the F-22 as well as the flush fitting of its rivets point to the care and attention which must be paid if one desires 'low-observable' characteristics.

The fit and finish of the J-10 remind me of a MiG-29 or early Su-27, several of which visited the Philippines a long time ago (early 1990's). There was also an Su-25, and An-32 and a An-124.

The Soviets (and in particular Frontal Aviation) made their aircraft as simple and rugged as possible, as well as maintainable by pretty much anybody.

Believe me - I should know, when they visited us here it was high summer with 90+ deg F heat. I got the Deputy Chief Designer of Sukhoi - Konstantin Marbashev to sign my Air Forces Magazine with his picture in it.

There were also several brutes who looked like they just escaped from the Gulag who were apparently the aircraft mechanics.

For the price of several cases of the local beer and some barbecue, they let my friends and I walk right up to all the aircraft and touch almost everything! Ha ha ha!

They ate and drank beer right underneath the some of the aircraft!

To refuel the Sukhoi (an Su-27UB), a mechanic walked onto its back and filled it up, but the pilot complained - he wanted it really full - so the guy walks (in dirty sneakers) across the wing and stands on the missile launch rail, and then - I shit you not! - he jumps up and down till the aircraft's fuel tank belches out air and then goes back and fills it to the brim!

Let me tell you - it was a joy to watch.

The difference between the J-10 and F-22 is generational, China has reached roughly the same stage of Western aircraft of the 1980's in its fit and finish, though not necessarily in other components.

Still the J-10 is no mean achievement, probably having similar performance to late-model F-16's. What will really be interesting is the NEXT generation of Chinese fighter aircraft.

But to judge the performance of an aircraft, its engines, radar and avionics solely on its external finish, is in my opinion (if you will forgive the pun) - SUPERFICIAL.

Best Regards,

Dusky Lim

Originally Posted by duskylim

Dear Sirs:

The pictures of the J-10s or the F-22s merely confirm that when you need regular access to certain components, for maintenance, replacement, upgrade or testing, you are going to need the cover (in this case obviously the skin of the aircraft) to be removable.

And as you can see, the choice of designers from various countries is almost universal, that is, screwed-on panels that can be taken off and replaced or hinged to swing away.

Every aircraft has these screwed-on panels and there's no getting away from them. ...

Interesting post! The J-10 'access panels' look exactly like those of F-16. It is something quite desirable. Also, placement of each internal component has to be such that it is maintenance friendly.

I do know some recently designed planes that are a maintenance nightmare due to lack of such considerations. Each unit of the design team simply added a component without any consideration of the overall design, proper documentation or maintenance!

This can make all the difference during emergencies. Poorly designed planes will take longer to maintain and will remain mostly grounded compared to properly designed planes like F-16, etc.

I suspect some of the pictures in the link provided by Adeptitus are actually taken from a display model of J-10, outside a museum or some other building. Someone was probably in the mode for bashing, and the pictures made good ammunition.

The way the J-10 looks has more to do with it construction methods of using many small panels with the accompanying not-so-nice-looking rivets as opposed to fewer but bigger panels. The J-10 designers obviously see the advantages of doing so, notwithstanding the fact that this would result in a not-so-sleek-looking construction. I don't see this as a problem if such construction methods constribute to the aircraft's performance and toughness.

24 hardened shelters can be seen from the airfield at Shantou, where pictures emerged last year of J10s supposedly parked at the location. The problem is, existing J10 units are known to have 28 hangers/28 planes. So could this be a J11/JH7 deployment?

Also, Sean O'Connor has also spotted a HQ9 unit next to several of the hangers at this location. Something up?

another new picture of J-10B, numbered 1031.