duncanidaho
Junior Member
I would say optical illusion.
J-10 Thread IV
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
I would say optical illusion.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
That's just because of the angle that picture was taken from.
China experimented with TVC back in the 90s when Jiang Zemin was still in charge, there was a picture and brief video of him playing around with it. China also uses TVC on almost all SAMs and AAMs they make, so they are familiar with the technology and benefits it offers.
In the years since, Russia has repeatedly made TVC available on AL31 variants they offered, but China never took them up on the offer.
The simple explanation is that China has deemed TVC surplus to requirements on its manned fighter aircraft. This is most likely caused by the great maneuvability already achieved with their designs are already pushing the human body to the limit.
If your basic airframe can already turn the plane at 9G+, you are still going to be limited by the human pilot with regards to how fast you can turn even if TVC does offer a higher, theoretical maximum for the airframe itself.
The benefit of higher sustained turn rates achievable with TVC is offset by the massive energy loss rates such extreme turns cost.
Factoring in advancements in high off-broadside firing AAMs and HMS/Ds, I think the PLAAF has concluded absolute nose turning ability isn't the be all and end all of air combat it once was.
If it was a guns only contest, TVC may offer marginal advantages. But in reality, the PLAAF pilots doesn't need to match and outdo you in nose pointing contests, they just need to keep you within 60-90 or more degrees of their nose for the few seconds it takes to launch a missile and guide it until it's own seeker achieves lock-on, and then you can go have a turning contest with a missile now that you have bled away much of your precious airspeed and energy.
The PLAAF wants its pilots to do that will minimising their own loss of airspeed and energy.
It's clear from the way PLAAF pilots fly during displays, the design decisions made with their fighters that the PLAAF recognises and values transonic agility and energy retention in air combat. TVC just doesn't offer what they are looking for, certainly not for the cost in added weight, reduced thrust and added logistical challenges.
The PLAAF may re-evaluation for the J20, especially for the stealth benefits TVC may offer. But I think that will only be explored well after the WS15 enters service.
Blackstone
Brigadier
I might be wrong, Brain, but the turkey feathers look shorter. AN31 engines have longer feathers than WS-10.
We know that WS-10 equipped J-10's are coming. It is just a question of when. Now we have 53 block 1 J-10B and we have seen 22 block 2 J-10B/C. That's 75 AL-31Fc series 3 engines in total not to mention the once being used in the J-20 prototypes. That's more than 80 engines used up in total. Does anyone know how many AL-31FN series engines have been ordered ? And wasn't there an article that said that once the current stock of AL-31FN series 3 is used up the J-10's will be produced with WS-10 engines ? And since there is no news of new orders for AL-31 means that we are getting closer to the day that J-10 will be produced with the WS-10 engines.
Engineer
Major
Color of the nozzle is usually a good way of distinguishing between the two. Of course, there are physical differences as well, but these aren't as handy when image resolution is low.
Nozzle on the left indicates WS-10 engine, and on the right is nozzle for Al-31 series.
Al-31F is used on the left, and WS-10 on the right.
Last edited:
