*New J-10 Thread*

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by Deino, Mar 20, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. crobato
    Offline

    crobato Colonel
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    4
    That is not what I know about Western parlance. The planes you described as "second generation" are nearly as equally technology and performance level as the "third generation" you mention. The technology change is only evolutionary not generational.

    There is no change in doctrine, for one. Supersonic interception is top priority. The engines are still turbojet. There is no leap in aerodynamics, other than the variable wing concept, but the Phantom, the J37 (which uses fixed canards like Mirage III based Kfir), the Mirage F1 and the J-8II don't share that.

    Relative stability is another feature in generational change, and a major one when it comes to maneuverbility. Mirage F1 and III don't have that, but 2000 has.

    And the context of which you have failed to explain how. Unfortunately, there is no major doctrinal change between the Mirage III and the Mirage F1, the latter can only be described as the latter half of the 3rd generation while the Mirage III as the first half of the 3rd generation. The Starfighter itself was deployed concurrently with the Phantom, in fact, in the sixties, right when the Phantom was already in service, the Starfighter was considered quite an advanced fighter.

    On the other hand, there is a major doctrinal change on the Mirage 2000 that was a result of the conflicts fought by 3rd generation planes---Vietnam War, Six Day War, Yom Kippur, and Indo-Pakistan conflicts. There is a renewed emphasis on maneuverbility for example, as well as low altitude performance and subsonic acceleration.

    Generational differences is _about_ major design issues plus doctrinal context. Just like fifth generation is defined by supercruise and stealth.

    There is never, never one mention in any PLA or Chinese literature that described the J-8II as a new generation fighter.

    Argument aside, no one thinks that the J-8 belongs to a new generation above the J-7. The engine is literally the same, both use the WP-7 and later the WP-13 engines, and even the Kunlun. There is no fundamental difference in the aerodynamics, seem to work on the same principle, delta wing complete with area rule Coke bottle principle, same you see with the fifties Delta Dagger.
     
  2. AssassinsMace
    Offline

    AssassinsMace Brigadier

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    7,949
    Likes Received:
    9,630
  3. crobato
    Offline

    crobato Colonel
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    4
    This is an even cooler vid. More pics of J-10 no. 26 from the 44th, and confirms J-10B prototype no. 1023. So there must be at least 3 J-10B protos.

    One of the early scene, the plane was quick to lift off from a short run, then pointed its nose up early, then zoomed up for the climb. The last scene on the vid had me going "wot?" The plane came in from a steep angle as he approached, then angled his nose up, then landed, parachute deployed. All this is indicative of a plane with low wing loading and high surplus power.
     
  4. tphuang
    Offline

    tphuang Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    7,551
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    this is a interview with J-10's principle developer.
    An interesting point is where they reported J-10 actually ended up 26 kg less than the original design
     
  5. tphuang
    Offline

    tphuang Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    7,551
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    seems like Western media is finally taking notice of J-10's unveiling. Anyhow, many article similar to this are posted.
    more TV clips - interview with more J-10 people
    http://www.war-sky.com/forum/htm_data/46/0701/221140.html

    clip from aviationnow
    http://www.aviationnow.com.cn/022.wmv
     
  6. crobato
    Offline

    crobato Colonel
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    4
    I would think so too. But in these 16 years, I would think the PLAAF knows that and would have done some homework in countering this.
     
  7. simonov
    Offline

    simonov New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2006
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    1999年,何斌斌等第二批四名试飞员进入型号调整试飞,这是更大强度的试飞——只有飞出极限值,新型战机 的性能才能得到拓展,战斗力才能得到提升;因为是极限情况,在第三代飞机的研制过程中,国外无一例外都摔过 飞机。


    I try babelfish, to translate this, who is Heibin Bin?Tq
     
  8. DarkEminence
    Offline

    DarkEminence New Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070106/wl_nm/china_fighter_dc

    This, according to Yahoo. It's good that they quote the site!
     
    #588 DarkEminence, Jan 6, 2007
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2007
  9. David2007
    Offline

    David2007 Just Hatched
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    In April 2006 the cost for each F-22A is assessed by the Government Accountability Office to be $361 million per aircraft.

    Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22_Raptor

    That makes the Raptor about 10-12 times the cost of a J-10?
    I wonder if the Raptor is even 3 times better than a J-10.
    Regardless, with the sophisticated missiles they both have, they just become expensive launch platforms.
     
  10. mehdi
    Offline

    mehdi Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    0
    some new pics I hope someone can tell me why this model of the J-10 has 2 FLIR pods. Normally it is supposed to have only one and the other space is taken by a laser designator.
     
    #590 mehdi, Jan 6, 2007
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2007
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page