J-10 Thread IV

[latenlazy]

You "imagine"? All that digging and the last several posts were what you came up with? You have put forward a contrarian view to what I said and then in the next breath demand that _I_ do the digging (to prove you right, of all things LOL). I find this rather humorous. And you're right, I am not convinced based on anything you have said so far, including the 6 year old content like an interview which is no longer available to you. Huitong certainly disagrees with you regarding whether it's a PESA or AESA based on his web page. While the certainty of the J-10B having a PESA is not 100%, neither is it some kind of unknowable mystery what that radar most likely is. Bottom line, really it's a PESA until proven otherwise.

I was sharing this community's history over the topic, but if you want to turn this into a dick measuring contest, where's your certifiable proof that it's a PESA? What is the basis of your confidence? Are you a radar expert? Do you have some secret information that we aren't aware of?

One of the first old posts I shared was huitong himself talking about why he at the time switched his identification of the radar from a PESA back to an AESA. Huitong isn't perfect, but he had reasons for his determination at the time, and the story behind those reasons had a general consensus as valid amongst us watchers. He of course switched it back years later based on rumours tied to the J-10C, *but* as I pointed out in my reply we never did get a confirmation that even if the J-10B was mounting a PESA the radar we saw leaked was the radar in the rumour. In case clicking links is too much work for you, here's the copied text.

"Lololol, huitong changed J-10B's radar back to AESA again... heh.

Here's what he said when I asked him to clarify on the matter, and which could explain what the two displays in the link in post 98 was:

"The J-10B radar bid had two contenders. 607 Institute presented PESA while 14th Institute presented AESA. It was rumored that 14th Institute won the bid with their AESA design. That picture simply shows the losing PESA design by 607 Institute at some internal exhibition. Similarly, that AESA design shown in the other photo by 607 Institute for J-11B was also on display at the same place. However there has been no confirmation that J-11B has an AESA radar. It is likely that J-11B still features a tranditional PD radar since it entered production a few years earlier than J-10B. It is also possible that J-15 will have an AESA radar, or J-11B will be upgraded later with an AESA radar.""

The 607 radar refers to the picture of a radar whose picture we don't have anymore because of a dead link. (though I suspect the 607 radar, based on what I can recall and other pictures that still work in the archived discussions, refers not to a picture of a radar but a plaque talking about a PESA that we do have that we at first suspected was referring to the radar with the dipoles, before the matter was clarified on the Chinese BBSes).

Next time actually *read* the links people send you. Huitong of course can be wrong, but that's the point. We have some reasons to believe either that the radar was an AESA or PESA, and it was never clear cut and clarified. *That* has always been my point. We simply don't know whether the radar with the dipoles was from the 607 institute or the 14th institute. I spent a lot of words clarifying that I'm not saying the radar in question was an AESA, just that we don't have a good reason for being sure it wasn't. Don't misrepresent what I was saying.

 

[Iron Man]

I was sharing this community's history over the topic, but if you want to turn this into a dick measuring contest, where's your certifiable proof that it's a PESA? What is the basis of your confidence? Are you a radar expert?

I didn't feel this was a "dick measuring" contest, but clearly you do. I gave no "certifiable proof" that it's a PESA. Did I claim somewhere that I did? Please link and quote. No? Didn't think so. What I said is that the vast majority of AESAs today share T/R modules with their IFF system (PESAs don't). Based on this piece of information as well as the timing of the appearance of that particular radar in the Chinese aerospace and military radar development timeline, it was most likely a PESA.

One of the first old posts I shared was huitong himself talking about why he at the time switched his identification of the radar from a PESA back to an AESA. Huitong himself isn't perfect, but he had reasons for it at the time, and the story behind those reasons had a general consensus as valid amongst us watchers. Next time actually *read* the links people send you.

I'm not a member of CDF, so I obviously didn't *read* the links you posted. His current page which I believed has not changed for years, states the following:
"Its nose appears flatter too, similar to that of American F-16, housing a new fire-control radar which is thought to be an X-band

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

developed by the 607 Institute (track 10, engage 4 simultaneously), the first of such type ever being developed for a Chinese fighter aircraft, giving J-10B a stronger multi-target engagement and ECCM capability. It was rumored that initially the aircraft was planned to be fitted with an AESA developed by the 14th Institute but the radar was not ready by the time the aircraft was ready for production."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Then we have you, demanding that _I_ do the legwork for YOUR claims. Well I'm not here to convince you personally of anything, all I have been doing is responding to your contrarian view on a public forum that you made in response to my original statement. So either do your own legwork or quit complaining.

 

[latenlazy]

I didn't feel this was a "dick measuring" contest, but clearly you do. I gave no "certifiable proof" that it's a PESA. Did I claim somewhere that I did? Please link and quote. No? Didn't think so. What I said is that the vast majority of AESAs today share T/R modules with their IFF system. Based on this piece of information as well as the timing of the appearance of that particular radar in the Chinese aerospace and military radar development timeline, it was most likely a PESA.

You seem to have a problem with contempt. Calm down.

I'm not a member of CDF, so I obviously didn't *read* the links you posted. His current page which I believed has not changed for years, states the following:

"Its nose appears flatter too, similar to that of American F-16, housing a new fire-control radar which is thought to be an X-band

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

developed by the 607 Institute (track 10, engage 4 simultaneously), the first of such type ever being developed for a Chinese fighter aircraft, giving J-10B a stronger multi-target engagement and ECCM capability. It was rumored that initially the aircraft was planned to be fitted with an AESA developed by the 14th Institute but the radar was not ready by the time the aircraft was ready for production."

Then you probably should have mentioned that you didn't have membership and asked for the actual text. Anyways, I'm well aware of what huitong's current page says. You, on the other hand, are not aware of what huitong's page *used* to say, and the basis by which he makes his changes. Leaning on huitong for certainty without understanding the history of discussions, deliberations, sources, and rumours that go into his conclusions is inadvisable in this hobby.

Note that on his page today Huitong says the J-10B is mounted with a PESA because the intended AESA from the 14th institute wasn't ready on time. However, he also previously, in the post I shared, determined that the radar with IFF dipoles was probably the radar from the 14th institute. Did he change his mind about the identity of the radar? Or was he saying that same radar with the IFF dipoles was the radar that couldn't make it to production? That's why understanding the history of information around this radar is important.

Then we have you, demanding that _I_ do the legwork for YOUR claims. Well I'm not here to convince you personally of anything, all I have been doing is responding to your contrarian view on a public forum that you made in response to my original statement. So either do your own legwork or quit complaining.

No one is going to go out of their way to spoon feed you knowledge here. I dug around for some old posts as a matter of good faith to cover some of the information we discussed years ago, since it sounds like you haven't been doing this for long and weren't aware of some of the information and discussions around this radar that came out with the first pictures. You can continue to hold whatever opinions you want, but if there are sources of information that others are referring to which you neglect and refuse to look at, you are attaching your conclusions on a willfully ignorant basis.

I wasn't demanding that you do anything, nor do I owe you any of my time just to convince you of things I already know. Pointing to archived information was a friendly suggestion on my part in case you wanted to see where I was deriving my points from, grade my hw, or just review infirmation you might've forgotten, missed, or didn't know about. I presume we are operating under the basis of more information is better than less. Perhaps you want to spend some time collecting more information regardless of your opinions and beliefs, that others just so happens to have kindly pointed you to (I even gave you a date range so you have a starting place to look...). I'm not the one complaining here.

 

[Iron Man]

You seem to have a problem with contempt. Calm down.

This statement is massively hypocritical (and extremely humorous) coming from someone who started making accusations of dick measuring. Get over yourself already. Like yesterday already.

Then you probably should have mentioned that you didn't have membership and asked for the actual text. Anyways, I'm well aware of what huitong's current page says. You, on the other hand, are not aware of what huitong's page *used* to say, and the basis by which he makes his changes. Leaning on huitong for certainty without understanding the history of discussions, deliberations, sources, and rumours that go into his conclusions is inadvisable in this hobby.

Note that on his page today Huitong says the J-10B is mounted with a PESA because the intended AESA from the 14th institute wasn't ready on time. However, he also previously, in the post I shared, determined that the radar with IFF dipoles was probably the radar from the 14th institute. Did he change his mind about the identity of the radar? Or was he saying that same radar with the IFF dipoles was the radar that couldn't make it to production? That's why understanding the history of information around this radar is important.

OR, the same institute produced both the PESA and the subsequent AESA. Is this some kind of logical mystery?

No one is going to go out of their way to spoon feed you knowledge here. I dug around for some old posts as a matter of good faith to cover some of the information we discussed years ago, since it sounds like you haven't been doing this for long and weren't aware of some of the information and discussions around this radar that came out with the first pictures. You can continue to hold whatever opinions you want, but if there are sources of information that others are referring to which you neglect and refuse to look at, you are attaching your conclusions on a willfully ignorant basis. I wasn't demanding that you do anything, nor do I owe you any of my time to convince you. Pointing to archived information was a friendly suggestion on my part. I'm not the one complaining here.

You are claiming that you actually have worthwhile knowledge to share here. This is a claim you have not backed up so far.

 

[latenlazy]

This statement is massively hypocritical (and extremely humorous) coming from someone who started making accusations of dick measuring. Get over yourself already. Like yesterday already.

See. Dick measuring. Anyways, if you find the word "dick measuring" so offensive...maybe you need to take your own advice and not be so sensitive.

OR, the same institute produced both the PESA and the subsequent AESA. Is this some kind of logical mystery?

If you dug through the archives you'd know there was explicitly a primary source saying the 14th institute skipped PESAs entirely.

You are claiming that you actually have worthwhile knowledge to share here. This is a claim you have not backed up so far.

Yes, the worthwhile knowledge is information found in archives, including primary sources and input from people you yourself have chosen to cite as reliable sources. You're fixated on whether I'm wrong or right, when I'm presenting information not from me, but from *others*. If you can't see that, then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Iron Man]

See. Dick measuring.

Yes, I agree you are.

If you dug through the archives you'd know there was explicitly a primary source saying the 14th institute skipped PESAs entirely.


Yes, the worthwhile knowledge is information found in archives, including input from people you yourself have chosen to cite as a reliable source. You're fixated on whether I'm wrong or right, when I'm presenting information not from me, but from *others*.

A "primary source"? LOL By which I'm guessing you are attempting to use to authoritatively claim that the 14th Institute could not possibly have created both types. If you can't dig up this primary source AND demonstrate both its credibility and knowledgeability as a primary source, your claim here is as valid as if you had not even uttered a word. And don't tell me to dig it up; you claim it, you back it. Put up or shut up; this has got to be one of the oldest rules of the internet.

 

[Deino]

Guys ! STOP ... and STOP right NOW !

No further posts into this off-topic direction and if You have personnel issue, clear them behind the public part.

To continue the discussion in a civilised manner is ok. ... even if I think at a ceratin point all arguments are said. So no need to derail this thread.

Deino

 

[latenlazy]

No genius, I stopped talking about the J-10B PESA/AESA as instructed, unlike you who wrote a giant wall of text. So much for listening to the mods.

I don't think he was telling us to stop about the actual topic, but the sniping. If I'm not mistaken, it's that, not substantive and topical comments, that called for an intervention from the mods.

 

[Deino]

@Iron Man n Man ... A civilised discussion is always possible and allowed as such no need to continue this OT-attacks .

Anyway at a certain point all arguments are on the table ... so no need to continue.

 

[SteelBird]

I like these photos

It seems that come back to an old question; AL-31 vs WS-10. but the nozzle hear doesn't look like AL-31 at all.