J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

[foxmulder]

well, not sure about just B itself, but J-10 from this point on should have at least 5 years of production 2014-2018) before J-20 starts mass production. If they build an average of 35 a year, that would point to a production run of 165. After which point, it may decline to a regiment a year. At some point, they will move to J-10C. I'm guessing 5 to 6 regiments is probably reasonable number.

Is there a J-10C project actively worked on? Around 2020s I think it will be J-20 and J-31. I don't see the reason to keep producing J-10, bar export customers, when you have these two 5th generation production lines are running.

 

[Franklin]

well, not sure about just B itself, but J-10 from this point on should have at least 5 years of production 2014-2018) before J-20 starts mass production. If they build an average of 35 a year, that would point to a production run of 165. After which point, it may decline to a regiment a year. At some point, they will move to J-10C. I'm guessing 5 to 6 regiments is probably reasonable number.

What is this C going to be an upgraded B or a whole new design ?

 

[asif iqbal]

Since 2003 they have built just shy of 300 units so in and around 10 years we have around 30 units per year or basically one Regiment standing up every year makes sense because we have one naval Regiment and 8 PLAAF regiments plus aerobatics team and FTTC

So of we count 2014 as the first stand up regiment of J10B then we can expect 5 Regiments until 2018 or maybe 6 by the time J20 starts up

So really we will see around 280 x J10A and between 140-168 x J10B total production around 450 say that's a good run over a 15 year period

If J10C comes along then they could start on with that

 

[tphuang]

Is there a J-10C project actively worked on? Around 2020s I think it will be J-20 and J-31. I don't see the reason to keep producing J-10, bar export customers, when you have these two 5th generation production lines are running.

PLAAF was receiving J-7s all the way into 2006. Project 310 is not going to be ready by 2020. We will see how long J-10 production lasts, but I can't imagine it will stop until the cheaper 5th gen project goes into full production and cost stabilizes. That won't happen at 2020.

Since 2003 they have built just shy of 300 units so in and around 10 years we have around 30 units per year or basically one Regiment standing up every year makes sense because we have one naval Regiment and 8 PLAAF regiments plus aerobatics team and FTTC

So of we count 2014 as the first stand up regiment of J10B then we can expect 5 Regiments until 2018 or maybe 6 by the time J20 starts up

So really we will see around 280 x J10A and between 140-168 x J10B total production around 450 say that's a good run over a 15 year period

If J10C comes along then they could start on with that

there are 9 plaaf regiments/brigade of J-10 and some regiment has more than 28 aircraft. so I think J-10A run has been more than 300. Also, you can't divide by the number of years to get their production rate, because they stopped production for a year or maybe longer due to suspension of military contracts with Russians. And they didn't have 2 full J-10 production lines until 2006.

 

[asif iqbal]

Yeah sure but I was talking about average numbers and not the specifics

 

[plawolf]

The J10B will be a solid performer well into the 2020s and probably 2030 and beyond.

I just can't see the PLAAF going for the J31 in any meaningful way.

It's unnecessary when the PLAAF has already chosen the J20. I have never thought going full stealth was a particularly good idea. It just isn't necessary, especially when you consider the cost of doing so. And given how spectacularly badly the USAF experiment with the F35 has gone, I really cannot see the PLAAF wanting to tempt that fate given the obvious similarities and parallels.

The PLAAF would be far better off buying J10s instead and using the saved money to buy more J20s and developing a stealth bomber.

In the future, I can see the J10 evolving along similar lines to the F16, with subsequent variants favouring strike over air superiority.

 

[Solaris]

I just can't see the PLAAF going for the J31 in any meaningful way.

It's unnecessary when the PLAAF has already chosen the J20. I have never thought going full stealth was a particularly good idea. It just isn't necessary, especially when you consider the cost of doing so. And given how spectacularly badly the USAF experiment with the F35 has gone, I really cannot see the PLAAF wanting to tempt that fate given the obvious similarities and parallels.

The F-35 went bad because of the B variant IMO. The PLAAF doesn't have this problem so there's no reason to believe the J-31 won't be successful. The PLAAF could easily adopt a hi/med/lo structure of J-20/J-31/J-10, allowing the J-20 to concentrate on air superiority, the J-31 for stealthy strike, and the J-10B for when all the high value enemy stealth fighters and SAMs are gone and you just want to blow up everything else.

 

[latenlazy]

The F-35 went bad because of the B variant IMO. The PLAAF doesn't have this problem so there's no reason to believe the J-31 won't be successful. The PLAAF could easily adopt a hi/med/lo structure of J-20/J-31/J-10, allowing the J-20 to concentrate on air superiority, the J-31 for stealthy strike, and the J-10B for when all the high value enemy stealth fighters and SAMs are gone and you just want to blow up everything else.

That stealthy strike role might be better for future UCAVs and other more optimized stealth platforms. I personally don't expect China to churn out a prodigious number of J-20s, so the J-31 could be used to fill in numbers and act as a mainstay of stealth fighters if that becomes necessary (if say the Pacific theater is loaded with F-35s). Furthermore, the PLAAF will need something to replace retiring J-10s at some point, though they may simply opt for an entirely new project.

 

[Engineer]

The J-31 isn't even an official project, so it is premature to speculate on the aircraft's success in PLAAF. What's more, most of the expense of an aircraft lies in the avionics, not the airframe. A high/lo mix of stealth fighters can be achieved with J-20 alone, with one version of the J-20 featuring the most state-of-the-art avionics, while another being the stripped version with only essential avionics. The J-31 is redundant. There is no need to open another manufacturing line or create a whole new logistical support structure for the sole purpose of having J-31 as low-end stealth fighters.

 

[Solaris]

The J-31 isn't even an official project, so it is premature to speculate on the aircraft's success in PLAAF. What's more, most of the expense of an aircraft lies in the avionics, not the airframe. A high/lo mix of stealth fighters can be achieved with J-20 alone, with one version of the J-20 featuring the most state-of-the-art avionics, while another being the stripped version with only essential avionics. The J-31 is redundant. There is no need to open another manufacturing line or create a whole new logistical support structure for the sole purpose of having J-31 as low-end stealth fighters.

I've never heard of a hi/lo mix of aircraft based on stripped down fighters. I don't think you can strip down enough avionics to make this worthwhile. The J-20's EODAS/IRST maybe, then you're pretty much done. How much money can even be saved right there? Smaller AESA? The cost of T/R modules aren't that much compared to the rest of the radar system. The fact is that the J-31 exists and is in testing. Nobody knows if it is going to be domestic or offered for export. We will see I guess. Nobody also knows if the J-10B or J-11B will have a run big enough to replace legacy aircraft in substantial numbers; if the rest of Asia-Pacific is going to be armed with F-22, F-35, and PAK-FA in the coming years, it would be rather foolish to build any 4th generation aircraft in substantial numbers IMO.