J-10 Thread IV

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Lower threshold for J-10C radar detection range (presumably against standard fighter aircraft 3-5 meters squared) is at least 200KM. This number is from Vice Chief Designer Xie Jin so this is top tier in terms of credibility.

Attached is Siege’s scale of CCTV interview credibility —

There are tiers to CCTV7 programs. Highest tier are interviews with chief designers/engineers. Second tier is interview with actual operators of weapons like pilots and soldiers, commanders. Third tier is ex PLA experts who have served in technical roles. Bottom tier will be “experts” who analyze “conflict of the week” (usually international news), some of whom are renowned members of the strategic foo-you agency back when that was still a thing.

1748979798681.jpeg
 

sequ

Major
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Lower threshold for J-10C radar detection range (presumably against standard fighter aircraft 3-5 meters squared) is at least 200KM. This number is from Vice Chief Designer Xie Jin so this is top tier in terms of credibility.

Attached is Siege’s scale of CCTV interview credibility —



View attachment 153505
Poor small nosed Rafale stood no chance whatsoever...

Edit: if KLJ-7A and LFK601E (864TRM) have comparable detection ranges (170km) against "fighter"sized targets of 5m2, then a hypothetical 1200 TRM J-10C radar based on the same tech as the aforementioned radars reaches 225km.

I made use of @Stealthflanker radar range calculator.
 
Last edited:

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Good Catch ..... and yes, the blade antenna is a valid point and could suggest a JF-17B. That said, I still feel the overall shape and markings leave quite a bit open to interpretation, especially given the resolution.

We might just be seeing what fits our own expectations at this distance. So, while I respect the JF-17B possibility, I think we’re all working with too little visual clarity to land on anything conclusive.



This one

View attachment 153462

The insignia on the tail of the aircraft in the hangar clearly is not the same as the insignia on the JF-17B you posted.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Lower threshold for J-10C radar detection range (presumably against standard fighter aircraft 3-5 meters squared) is at least 200KM. This number is from Vice Chief Designer Xie Jin so this is top tier in terms of credibility.

Attached is Siege’s scale of CCTV interview credibility —



View attachment 153505

3-5m2 is really an obsolete RCS for fighter sized targets these days.

Really fighter sized targets should be 1m2
 

tphuang

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Lower threshold for J-10C radar detection range (presumably against standard fighter aircraft 3-5 meters squared) is at least 200KM. This number is from Vice Chief Designer Xie Jin so this is top tier in terms of credibility.

Attached is Siege’s scale of CCTV interview credibility —



View attachment 153505
saying these kind of things is really kind of meaningless imo. Under what circumstances and what operational mode are these figures achieved?
I remember when I first got started with J-10, everyone was concerned with just comparing range vs 3m^2 targets and how many tracking and engagement at the same time.
Now, it seems like emission control, EW, radar resolution and a whole bunch of things are just more important from electronics point of view.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Unless you don’t have any external carry I don’t see how you can reach that size.

Modern 4.5th gens with an external A2A loadout only can definitely reach it.

More importantly, I'm pretty sure western radars have, for the last two decades used a 1m2 standard as the fighter sized RCS standard.

1m2 is basically impossible for combat-configured non-stealth aircraft. 3m2 is a reasonable approximation.

3m2 as the top end is reasonable, but in context of modern 4.5th gens in an air to air loadout, 1m2 is far from non viable.

I have also observed 1m2 as the standard measure for a western radar "ranges" for at least the last decade, so for the perspective of comparing equivalent "ranges" that should be the standard that any numbers should be viewed in context of.
 

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member
Registered Member
Modern 4.5th gens with an external A2A loadout only can definitely reach it.

More importantly, I'm pretty sure western radars have, for the last two decades used a 1m2 standard as the fighter sized RCS standard.



3m2 as the top end is reasonable, but in context of modern 4.5th gens in an air to air loadout, 1m2 is far from non viable.

I have also observed 1m2 as the standard measure for a western radar "ranges" for at least the last decade, so for the perspective of comparing equivalent "ranges" that should be the standard that any numbers should be viewed in context of.
Which 4.5 gen is around or below the 1m2 frontal rcs in fighter configuration?

Think the J10 (dunno if all the versions) can do it, but which others as well?
 

Tomboy

Junior Member
Registered Member
Which 4.5 gen is around or below the 1m2 frontal rcs in fighter configuration?

Think the J10 (dunno if all the versions) can do it, but which others as well?
IMO, KF-21 would probably be the closest with semi recessed pylons. Since missiles are usually cylindrical which apparently have pretty big side RCS plus right angled fins etc, it'll be pretty hard for other 4.5th gen to get to around 1m2.
 
Top