New J-10 thread II

[crobato]

The current production rate of J10 is very low, around 500/10years, ws-10a is even lower than that. The report says WS-10a will go to J10 this year, so the engine hasn't been equiped on J-10 in a formal way yet, it's current production rate maybe around 30/year.

Whoever told you that 50/year is low by current modern standards? Its not, its actually quite high. As a matter of fact the PLAAF currently exceeds any airforce in terms of new plane acquisition rates, and remember it's not just J-10, but also J-11B, J-8F, JH-7A, and even upgraded J-7G.

What is limiting the PLAAF is not China's ability to produce jets like Big Macs---it would certainly do it if it wants to--- but its ability to digest new hardware.

The entire software part of the upgrade---training pilots and technicians, creating a new logistical infrastructure---is what is slow and painstaking. You can see the slow downs and problems of "digesting" of new ships in the PLAN.

Simply said, the PLAAF's ability to digest new hardware and units each year is limited, and that is what limits the actual number of planes being built. Organizational changes are quite disruptive and so on. It would think its' pretty generous if they're converting at a rate of four to five regiments each year, of all planes (J-10, J-11B, J-8F, JH-7A, H-6, J-7G). The "upgrade" old planes like J-8F and J-7G is much easier to convert because you don't have to make that many changes in the logistical infrastructure. But JH-7A, J-10 and J-11B will be quite a handful, and even so if JF-17 is added into the mix.

J-10 is a good airplane, but only compared with F16 class fighters. In next 10 years we are going to see next generation fighters being deployed in large volume. All Chinese news/source I read indicate that focus is shifted to the new generation fighters, or modified version of J-10. No sign to see Chinese to ramp up the current configuration J-10 production, that's about it.

Exactly. J-10s will still be produced in moderate numbers to keep production lines and jobs going as well. Its hard to imagine that J-8F and J-7G is still in production, which means obsolescence isn't the reason for shutting lines down.

So far the current formal statements I've read from Chinese leaders is that by 2010, China will have a core set of modern elite units, but still augmented by large numbers of upgraded older units. In other words combining new with upgraded/old.

My feeling is that before long, we may see the succeedor of J-10 coming out. The high profile public promotion of J-10 at the beginning of year, indicates the closure of this milestone, instead of its debut, in Chinese tradition.

Or its debut for the export market or send a message to Taiwan.

 

[AmiGanguli]

According to HJT, China's military might will reflect its economic size. Between today and 2020, it may exceed the US in terms of GDP/PPP and in 2050, by absolute PPP. That's way too far to make predictions.

Agreed that there can be no firm predictions, but matching the U.S. in terms of absolute GDP by 2050 is a reasonable guess given the population size. In any case, that's what the planners have to take into account. If things end up differently then of course plans will change.

The PLAAF will focus on technology, and maintain a moderate size, probably roughtly about a thousand aircraft.

Now this seems incredibly low to me. It's reasonable for today's China, but if the U.S. is any kind of benchmark then presumably they will gradually work their way up to something like 10k aircraft in total (all types).

And the point of ramping up gradually, even if you don't want to end up with thousands of obsolete aircraft, is to increase capacity at a sane rate. This includes integration capacity, as you mentioned.

By 2050, we're not even sure if fighters will still be manned or not.

Yeah, but it's not clear if that makes a difference. Will getting rid of the pilot mean you'll have more or fewer planes? You can argue that fighter-class UAVs will be horribly expensive, so there will be fewer, or you can say that you don't worry so much about making them survivable and go back to producing large numbers more cheaply.

... Ami.

 

[crobato]

If the US is any benchmark, then air forces will continue to shrink in numbers in exchange for technology. Every new generation of fighter is produced less than its predecessor and so on (F-4 Phantom > F-15 Eagle > F-22 Raptor). Even before the Soviet Union fell, you can see even Flanker and Fulcrum unable to match the numbers produced of Floggers, which in turn didn't match that of Fishbeds, which in turn didn't match that of Fagots/Farmers.

Even the USAF, probably with a budget of 110 billion rougly has to cut down its purchases. Even though the USAF buys its planes much more costly than the PLAAF, that's one service whose budget alone still amounts to over twice the entire PLA formal budget.

One cannot assume that Made in China will always stay cheap. Made in Japan, Made in Korea and Made in Taiwan were all labels once associated with cheap, but now they're all mighty expensive. The Reagan Administration mass produced F-16s till the fly away cost was like a mere 8 million dollars for eighties dollars value. Today, J-10 flyaway cost is probably around 20 million of today's dollars.

Thus it is impossible to do a one to one replacement when the general history of miltiary aviation has shown otherwise. Its not just the cost, but to produce aircraft is a lot more complicated these days than a Mustang in World War II. At the same time, so is the training of pilots and the logistics needed.

Unfortunately, economies are not expanding in the same rate to pay for all these toys. Economies expand, yes, but when you factor inflation rate, your real growth is really small, made smaller still if you remove inventory replenishment.

All signs today point to even PLA, trying to become a technology driven lean force, as opposed to hordes of willing volunteers so many you cannot supply proper arms to all.

The model what I see is that like this. A version of J-10/J-11B is produced in a limited batch. Perhaps two to three regiments, before a newer more capable version is produced. This newer version is produced also in the same limited number, before going on to the next, and so on. This way, the PLAAF won't be tied up with too much obsolete inventory, but maintains a decent flow of aircraft to upgrade current concerns. You are seeing a similar model with the PLAN too, where most platforms seem to be limited in production before moving on to the next and the next after that.

Even 054A will be superceded in no time by another frigate perhaps 054B.

You need to keep changing because electronics evolution is happening so fast that what you deem as state of the art sensor, datalink and command systems are obsolete overnight, and so the next batch of platforms will try to host the improved systems, and the next batch after that will host even newer systems. Its like keeping up with PCs. You simply cannot throw too much eggs into one basket.

 

[Ryz05]

If the US is any benchmark, then air forces will continue to shrink in numbers in exchange for technology. Every new generation of fighter is produced less than its predecessor and so on (F-4 Phantom > F-15 Eagle > F-22 Raptor). Even before the Soviet Union fell, you can see even Flanker and Fulcrum unable to match the numbers produced of Floggers, which in turn didn't match that of Fishbeds, which in turn didn't match that of Fagots/Farmers.

Even the USAF, probably with a budget of 110 billion rougly has to cut down its purchases. Even though the USAF buys its planes much more costly than the PLAAF, that's one service whose budget alone still amounts to over twice the entire PLA formal budget.

One cannot assume that Made in China will always stay cheap. Made in Japan, Made in Korea and Made in Taiwan were all labels once associated with cheap, but now they're all mighty expensive. The Reagan Administration mass produced F-16s till the fly away cost was like a mere 8 million dollars for eighties dollars value. Today, J-10 flyaway cost is probably around 20 million of today's dollars.

Thus it is impossible to do a one to one replacement when the general history of miltiary aviation has shown otherwise. Its not just the cost, but to produce aircraft is a lot more complicated these days than a Mustang in World War II. At the same time, so is the training of pilots and the logistics needed.

Unfortunately, economies are not expanding in the same rate to pay for all these toys. Economies expand, yes, but when you factor inflation rate, your real growth is really small, made smaller still if you remove inventory replenishment.

All signs today point to even PLA, trying to become a technology driven lean force, as opposed to hordes of willing volunteers so many you cannot supply proper arms to all.

The model what I see is that like this. A version of J-10/J-11B is produced in a limited batch. Perhaps two to three regiments, before a newer more capable version is produced. This newer version is produced also in the same limited number, before going on to the next, and so on. This way, the PLAAF won't be tied up with too much obsolete inventory, but maintains a decent flow of aircraft to upgrade current concerns. You are seeing a similar model with the PLAN too, where most platforms seem to be limited in production before moving on to the next and the next after that.

Even 054A will be superceded in no time by another frigate perhaps 054B.

You need to keep changing because electronics evolution is happening so fast that what you deem as state of the art sensor, datalink and command systems are obsolete overnight, and so the next batch of platforms will try to host the improved systems, and the next batch after that will host even newer systems. Its like keeping up with PCs. You simply cannot throw too much eggs into one basket.

Really nice post, Crobato. What happens when technology advances faster than they can be fielded is to field what you have right now, then follow it up with more advanced models. This will make sure that whatever's in development won't become obsolete by the time it's finished and battle-ready. General Patton said something about a developed plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed a week later. So while the PLA is fielding planes like the J-10, it is also developing new models and improving on the current design.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Although fighter jets might not be produced in great quantity now as compared with that during the Cold War, it might be harder to say in the future when unmanned air combat vehicles come into being. I can imagine air forces mass producing UACVs, as there's zero or minimal training involved, thus allowing mass production. After all, quantity is quality all in its own.

 

[AmiGanguli]

Indeed, good post. Agree with most of it.

There's a limit to how much inventories will be reduced though, but I don't know what that limit will be. Clearly you won't end up with each country having just one really advanced fighter, so the numbers have to stabilize at some point.

... Ami.

 

[crobato]

If one studies USAF/USN aviation history from the fifties to now, you will be amazed by the sheer number of designs and creativity of the planes. But as time goes further, costs and complexity begin to eat at this variety. You get joint project this, joint project that. The sheer number of designs in the fifties and sixties began to cut down to a few by seventies. In the fifth generation, you are now only down to two.

Third Generation:

F-100 Super Sabre
F-101 Voodoo
F-102 Delta Dagger
F-104 Starfighter
F-105 Thunderchief
F-106 Delta Dagger
F-111 Aadvark

F-4 Phantom
F-5A/E Freedom Fighter
F-8 Crusader
F-11 Tiger

A-4 Skyhawk
A-6 Intruder

3.5 to 4th Generation, you are down to four.

F-14 Tomcat
F-15 Eagle
F-16 Viper
F-18 Hornet

Fifth Generation, we are down to 2.

F-22 Raptor
F-35 Lightning II.

At the same time, companies began to consolidate.

Republic and North American was among the first to be gone. Then McDonnel Douglas. Then General Dynamics quit the business and sold to Lockheed. Grumman quit and consolidated with Northrop who also quit the aircraft making business altogether. Now you are left with Lockheed-Martin Marietta and Boeing, none of whom actually designed the four "teen" aircraft originally. F-14 (Grumman), F-15 (McDonnell Douglas), F-16 (General Dynamics), and F-18 (Northrop).

Its possible if the trend goes, by the sixth generation, there will only be one unified fighter.

What happens when technology advances faster than they can be fielded is to field what you have right now, then follow it up with more advanced models. This will make sure that whatever's in development won't become obsolete by the time it's finished and battle-ready. General Patton said something about a developed plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed a week later. So while the PLA is fielding planes like the J-10, it is also developing new models and improving on the current design.

There are two forms of technology current going on.

One is the platform technology. That remains fairly stable and long lasting.

The second is electronic technology. This happens too fast and is fairly abrupt.

Electronic technology can cycle itself into many generations on the same time span as a single platform generation, whose generational change is much slower. Thus, your platform should make allowances for electronic generational changes.

Lets use the J-10 as an example.

You cannot make too many samples of the current J-10 because its electronics is already outgrown even by Chinese standards. Both FC-1 and J-11B are showing electronic features not present even in the current J-10.

So you have to put an end to the current version

J-10 + Avionics/Radar set A + Engine A

to pause, develop, then produce the next batch.

J-10 + Avionics/Radar Set B + Engine B.

Then later, we progress to

J-10 + Avionics/Radar set C + Engine C

And so on.

So you have an entire production run, that are subdivided into blocks, and each block has improvement over the other. The Block system used on the F-16 makes a very excellent way to express this, where you have one constant platform, but the electronics change and evolve from block to block.

IMO, the current J-10 is ready to be stopped and put aside for the next block of J-10s. The current block appears to be already using a second generation (by Chinese standards) planar array radar; the original KLJ-1 on the first J-8C/D/F/H, JL-10A on the JH-7A, and the KLJ-3 used on the J-10 prototypes and evaluation models represent the first generation slotted array for Chinese terms.

The next block should feature a better cockpit with 9x13 MFDs, a third generation slotted array, probably improved RWR and MAWS, a more robust and higher bandwidth datalink, holographic hud and quite likely WS-10A engines. One may view the plane as mainly a refinement.

Down the line, maybe one can expect more powerful versions of the WS-10A, ESA radar (passive phase array or AESA), maybe TVC, and so on.

If historical trends are considered, we see that Chinese military industrial complex loves to continue refinining designs to the nth degree, while producing them indefinitely even in the face of more advanced models. By 2020, what are the chances do you think China may be making J-10 or J-11? I say quite likely, although these planes may now be in the bottom pecker of the pyramid in lieu of more advanced plane types.

 

[Scratch]

On 2nd may there was a nice article on

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

about a conference that was -among other isues- about future US aquisition policy.
It was warned that in the future high-tech weapon fielding may become too expensive to afford and take too long. The speaker advertised cheaper "low-tech" systems that can be introduced faster and in greater numbers.
Also the consolidation of the defence industry hinders DoD competition, leading to less innovation and higher costs.

Looks like the lead nation now comes to a point were always better leads into a dead end.
I'm sure that China also will inevitably come to a point were buying more less advanced systems will bring more benefit than to aquire the most advanced ones. However, this point is still some time away, maybe decades.

The J-11 is a somewhat given design wich the chinese seek to improve, while the J-10 seems to be their testing product from wich on they might design comming gens of fighters. In the wake of trends to go stealthy, an IRST should also be an option for the J-10.

As regards the 2020 timeline, form my outside standpoint, I would guess a J-xx to become operational, J-11B, J-10 block X and FC-1 to be the main force, augmented by JH-7B and J-8II filling gaps.

 

[aikea]

Newest J10 picture. Finally, the mustache disppeared.

------------

Forgot link to the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[crobato]

Plane has the FTTC style camo. FTTC plane perhaps? No. The FTTC J-10S didn't have this pattern at all, even though the single seaters did. The FTTC J-10S were all plain colored.

It also appears that the antenna has been moved down the spine.

Seriously might be a new block version of the J-10S. Is PLAAF going back to adding camo patterns?

 

[fishhead]

P
Seriously might be a new block version of the J-10S. Is PLAAF going back to adding camo patterns?

Chinese site already said it's the one with WS-10A. So it's the first fielded J-10 with domestic engine.

WS-10A just goes on J10 today.