*New J-10 Thread*

[crobato]

And does that prove the serial numbers are PSed? The serial numbers are easily cross referenced with other pictures, and there is a lot of other 44th Divsion J-10 pictures out there. Including the many that were taken by Aviation Now, which as I said, happens to be an international aviation magazine.

It could be that there is an original 44th Divsiion J-10 pic, then perhaps someone made a duplicate of it. However, I am doubtful of your claims unless I happen to see the picture. As I have mentioned, the new crop of pictures are taken by professional magazine photographers, that includes the number of Chinese military enthusiast magazines and journals, international magazines like Aviation Now, and Xinhua. Aviation Now did a lot of the recent 44th Divison J-10 pics, while Xinhua did a lot of the 3rd Division J-10 coverage. If that picture happens to be Aviation Now's, then I kind of doubt that there is any manipulation involved other than cleanup in the original picture. If someone played around with one of Aviation Now's pictures, then I like to see the photo to verify this. Even then, the prankster may have done an easy cut and paste job and that does not invalidate the original image.

AVIC's own pictures show serial number deletion as well as a poor PS job of deleting the PL-8 missiles.

I should note that if you check around AN's website, you will see many J-10 pictures that have two or three J-10s flying in formation.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[FugitiveVisions]

However, there is one example that debunks this and it happens to be a good one. The PLANAF 6th Division has both the original set of JH-7s (81x6x) in one regiment and the second set (82x6x) in another. The circumstances of both the PLANAF 6th Division and the PLAAF 44th are very similar. Both have the IOC of a new domestic fighter, and in the 6th Division's case, this was the first regiment to have the JH-7.

The PLAN must feel that ~20 JH-7s aren't enough to do the job, which is to interdict an American carrier heading south-bound towards Taiwan. Two regiments in the PLANAF 6th division, in this case, may ease problems with coordination and increase the scale of attack.

J10s on the other hand, are more of a defensive weapon at this point. Defensive weapons have more of a tendency to be spread out as opposed to offensive weapons, which are more concentrated to increase the intensity of the attack.

 

[crobato]

Perhaps, but I don't think that's the reason for it, since you can assign the JH-7s to any of the other PLANAF regiments facing the east coast. Heck, all PLANAF regiments face the east coast or they won't be PLANAF.

Considering the range of the JH-7, which by the way is quite good, there is no reason for it to be concentrated on one division when you can easily converge several differently based forces.

The reason why the second regiment is still on the same division has to do with logistics. Because the 6th Division PLANAF already has the infrastructure to maintain the JH-7s, it was an easy choice to put the second batch on the same division as the first. This is the kind of situation where the plane may be radical and different enough that it cannot be easily adopted to an existing force and logistical infrastructure without much retraining.

One reason why a second regiment could have stayed on the 44th is because the J-10 hasn't been perfected yet, and thus require a closer proximity to the factory, for much of the same reasons as the first. And that's its easier to consolidate the logistical infrastructure.

It should be noted that the headquarters of the 44th is actually on Menzies, which also based the 130th, so the 130th should have been the lead regiment of the division. So why the J-10s went to a subordinate regiment instead?

So many questions, unanswered. Of course those reasons above are mere theories, for all you know, there may only be one J-10 regiment on the 44th, and the different numbers are as a result of PLAAF reorganizing their numbering system. But I like more definite answers to the questions, and only more pictures, the right pictures could solve this.

 

[wlchang]

And does that prove the serial numbers are PSed? The serial numbers are easily cross referenced with other pictures, and there is a lot of other 44th Divsion J-10 pictures out there. Including the many that were taken by Aviation Now, which as I said, happens to be an international aviation magazine.

It could be that there is an original 44th Divsiion J-10 pic, then perhaps someone made a duplicate of it. However, I am doubtful of your claims unless I happen to see the picture. As I have mentioned, the new crop of pictures are taken by professional magazine photographers, that includes the number of Chinese military enthusiast magazines and journals, international magazines like Aviation Now, and Xinhua. Aviation Now did a lot of the recent 44th Divison J-10 pics, while Xinhua did a lot of the 3rd Division J-10 coverage. If that picture happens to be Aviation Now's, then I kind of doubt that there is any manipulation involved other than cleanup in the original picture. If someone played around with one of Aviation Now's pictures, then I like to see the photo to verify this. Even then, the prankster may have done an easy cut and paste job and that does not invalidate the original image.

AVIC's own pictures show serial number deletion as well as a poor PS job of deleting the PL-8 missiles.

I should note that if you check around AN's website, you will see many J-10 pictures that have two or three J-10s flying in formation.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Well, the digits of the serial numbers can be manipulated individually leaving the the rest of the J-10 picture unchanged. Furthermore, the original picture could be showing two (or maybe more) J-10s flying side by side with the serial numbers clearly visible - so you have quite a number of digits to play with (these digits won't look out of place since the original J-10 image in the picture is going to be reused.). This way, a number of J-10 images with different serial numbers could be duplicated. This may also contribute to the present confusion with the PLAAF new numbering systems.

Having said that, I know most of the pictures are genuine especially those coming from reliable sources. But one can't be too sure with those coming from unknown sources.

I will post the picture in question here if I can find it.

 

[crobato]

There really is no confusion with the new PLAAF numbering system. It by itself is a code, and you need to break that code. Its a matter of understanding that code and what it means.

Previously people did play around with the J-10 serial numbers, but that is because showing the true numbers in public can land you in jail. So what people did is to jumble the digits to get past the censors (usually web administrators under strict rules).

Like for example.

42511. But the plane's tail says 21.

But knowledgeable people can assemble the correct order of the digits. Which is---

41251.

Do you honestly think these things get past experienced watchers?

Its not easy to transpose the digits from one plane to another. That is because changes in lighting, angle, not to mention the sheer sharpness and fuziness of the fonts. The fonts themselves are unique; you cannot duplicate them exactly, and people can catch that.

Watchers also know how to cross reference. If the serial numbers don't jive with other known data, it is suspect. J-10 photoes with serial numbers are often matched to eye witness accounts of J-10s flying in certain areas. Once you have a fix of the area, you can associate that area to a particular base, and when you get the base, you get the regiment and division. As a matter of fact, before we get pics of the 44th Division J-10s, we have many forum eyewitness sightings of J-10s over those particular areas (Kunming and Menzies in the Yunnan province.) As a matter of fact, we still don't have any pics of J-10s for the 2nd Division, but we have eyewitness reports of J-10s over Guilin, which is 2nd Division jurisdiction. The ROCAF has already admitted the presence of J-10s over that area.

If I were to get a J-10 pic and put a number like 81192 over its tail, you think thats going to get past people?

 

[wlchang]

There really is no confusion with the new PLAAF numbering system. It by itself is a code, and you need to break that code. Its a matter of understanding that code and what it means.

I didn't mean confusion as to the understanding of the numbering system code. I meant confusion as to the notion that there's ongoing change in the numbering system.

Its not easy to transpose the digits from one plane to another. That is because changes in lighting, angle, not to mention the sheer sharpness and fuziness of the fonts. The fonts themselves are unique; you cannot duplicate them exactly, and people can catch that.

I think you miss my point regarding lighting, angle etc in my earlier post - This wouldn't be a problem if all the digits of the serial numbers and the J-10 images itself are from the same picture. Not to mention those higher end 3-D graphic software that can do wonders - like lightings, angle of view, light reflections, shadows etc.

Watchers also know how to cross reference. If the serial numbers don't jive with other known data, it is suspect. J-10 photoes with serial numbers are often matched to eye witness accounts of J-10s flying in certain areas. Once you have a fix of the area, you can associate that area to a particular base, and when you get the base, you get the regiment and division. As a matter of fact, before we get pics of the 44th Division J-10s, we have many forum eyewitness sightings of J-10s over those particular areas (Kunming and Menzies in the Yunnan province.) As a matter of fact, we still don't have any pics of J-10s for the 2nd Division, but we have eyewitness reports of J-10s over Guilin, which is 2nd Division jurisdiction. The ROCAF has already admitted the presence of J-10s over that area.

If I were to get a J-10 pic and put a number like 81192 over its tail, you think thats going to get past people?

Except for the fact that there are also imposters out there who are smart enough to look into all those important nitty gritty details in the PSed photo and those so-called eyewitnesses could be the same imposters.

But of course the truth is going to come out sooner or later and I am not arguing against the fact that most of the information gathered in this forum are accurate.

Actually, it's not even my intention to discuss about these things. My actual intention is to share the fact that I once came across a PSed picture that nobody else seems to have noticed.

EDIT: Just finished searching this thread for the picture but can't find it. Could be in the old J-10 thread (or another forum?) or somebody already deleted it.

 

[maozedong]

two pics above show different style of symbol number on J-10 planes, if the first pic is not Psed, it is hard to explain.
one thing I am sure the second pic number symbol style is offical release picture.

 

[FugitiveVisions]

[qimg]http://pic.anhuinews.com/0/01/22/54/1225496_024254.jpg[/qimg]
[qimg]http://news.vnet.cn/2007/20070108/U1220P27T1D425360F3DT20070108094149_0cffxEwu41WW.jpg[/qimg]

two pics above show different style of symbol number on J-10 planes, if the first pic is not Psed, it is hard to explain.
one thing I am sure the second pic number symbol style is offical release picture.

The one above is a prototype. If you compare the numbering to other prototypes, it makes perfect sense.

 

[crobato]

Except for the fact that there are also imposters who are smart enough to look into all those important nitty gritty details in the PSed photo and those so-called eyewitnesses could be the same imposters.

Except that such scams are not going to get past the over 500,000 people that browse the military forums in the mainland. If a scammer claims he sees J-10s over his city, what are the chances that there are other posters that happen to be in the city to refuse such claims? Quite high actually.

The truth gets out sooner or later, and it gets out pretty quick as a matter of fact.

 

[maozedong]

The one above is a prototype. If you compare the numbering to other prototypes, it makes perfect sense.

do mean the first pic is prototype? but I have another pic below, it is J-10b, so I still don't understand.