J-10, not as bad as you think

[ultrafang]

Basic translation.

Chinese claim that the J-10's capabilities far surpasses the SU-27 and is at a same level as the latest F-15, Jas-39, Mirage 2000, and Mig-29.

Cockpit include 3 large MFDs designed in a westernized style.

The plane's max lift off weight is 18 tons, can carry 7 tons of weapons which include the latest Chinese made short and mid reange SAMS as well as the Russian made R-73, and R-27. The J-10 can also carry the YJ Series (C-801/802/803) anti-ship cruise missiles.

J-10's radar can track 24 targets at a time and engage 4 of them. It has an 140 KM range forward, and 65 KM rare detection range.

Combat radius 1100KM. Max speed Mach 2.0

http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/j10_0018.jpg

http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/11774295_203336.jpg

[highsea]

Chinese claim that the J-10's capabilities far surpasses the SU-27 and is at a same level as the latest F-15, Jas-39, Mirage 2000, and Mig-29. Seems like a pretty broad claim, the AC mentioned are not exactly in the same class.
J-10 is CAPABLE OF SUPERCRUISE!!!! Do you have data on this? I can see perhaps transonic speeds ~1.05 Mach clean, but I kind of doubt it will be able to do that with a warload, since everything is caried externally.

[Pathfinder-X]

higsea, don't take those pictures seriously. It's just some model at a display and made up specs about the plane. China has yet to officially announce that J-10 exist, so most of the so called "Technical Data" is just some dreamy kids making it up.

[dabrownguy]

Damn it when is it gonna be offical!!!!!!
I hate some kids showing diagrams of J-12 or J-13! it is just a imagination! get real!
Btw i really doubt comparing the Su-27 to J-10 is fair. They are completly different!
But comparing the the J-10 to Mirage 2000 is good comparision.
so here goes.
Btw i my only source for Mirage is BR i'll find others.
Specifications

Countries of Origin FranceBuilder team : Dassault Aviation, SNECMA, Thomson-CSF First flight : March, 1978 [Mirage 2000C]
February, 1991 [Mirage 2000D] In-service in the French Air Force : Summer 1983 [Mirage 2000C]
April, 1993 [Mirage 2000D] Similar Aircraft Mirage III/5
Kfir
Viggen
CrewOne
Mirage 2000N & 2000D -- two [ 1 pilot + 1 navigation and weapon officer]
RoleInterceptor [Mirage 2000C]
All weather night and day missions such as Battlefield Air Interdiction (BAI) [Mirage 2000D] Major operational capabilities : [Mirage 2000D]
Automated terrain following at very high speed and very low altitude
All-weather night and day bombing capability
High precision all weather day/night bombing with Thomson-CSF PDL-CT Length 50 ft, 3 in (14.36 m)Span 29 ft, 5 in (9.13 m)Height 5.30 meters Empty Weight 7,600 kg [Mirage 2000C] Maximum Weight 16,500 kg Maximal armament weight : 5,900 kg [Mirage 2000C]
6,200 kg (9 store stations) [Mirage 2000D] Power plant / Thrust : SNECMA M 53 P2 jet engine / 9.7 t with afterburner Maximum Speed Mach 1,2 [low altitude]
Mach 2,2 [high altitude] Rate of Climb 17,000 m/min Ceiling Above 50,000 ft / 16,500 m Combat Radius<LI>800 nm (1,475 km) w/
4 250-kg bombs <LI>1,000 nm (1,850 km) w/
2 1,700-liter drop tanks <LI>1,800 nm (3,335 km) max fuel w/
2 1,700-liter + 1 1,300-liter drop tanks In-Flight RefuelingYesFuel capacity : [Mirage 2000C]
3,950 l internal / 8,000 l maximal / in-flight refuelling [Mirage 2000D]
3,1 t internal / 6,2 t maximal / In-flight refuelling

SensorsRDI radar (interceptor), RWR, Advanced bombsightDrop Tanks1700 L drop tank 1358 kg of fuel for 188 nm of range
1300 L drop tank 1038 kg of fuel for 144 nm of rangeArmamentCannon : 2 GIAT DEFA 554 de 30 mm
Air-air : missiles MICA, Magic 2, Super 530F,Super 530D Sky Flash.
Air-ground bombs : BGL 1000, BM400, BAP 100
<LI>Air-ground missiles : Durandal, Belouga, Armat, Apache, Scalp, AS30L, AM39, ASMP

TYPICAL LOADS
2 AM.39 Exocet, 1 1300 L drop Tank (855 nm)
1 1300 L drop tank, 2 ARMAT, 2 R.550 Magic (885 nm)
1 1300 L drop tank, 2R.500 Magic, 2 R.530D (885 nm)
4 Belouga, 2 1700 L drop tank, 2 R.550 Magic (1094 nm)
18 EU2 250 kg bombs (756 nm) Special equipment : [Mirage 2000C]
Thomson-CSF RDI radar (pulse doppler), look down-shoot down capacity, integrated electronic counter-measures, fly-by-wire, automatic pilot, inertial guidance system [Mirage 2000D]
Fly-by-wire system, 2 inertial navigation systems, Thomson-CSF Antilope 5 terrain following radar, Icare digital map, integrated GPS, integrated countermeasures, laser designation pod with thermal camera (PDL-CT)

NATO interoperability : Protected radiocommunications, identification friend or foe, in-flight refuelling by NATO aircraft, armament and ammunitions in accordance with NATO standards Number of units produced : 526 (all types of Mirage 2000 included) French Air Force inventory : 80 aircraft in 4 squadrons [Mirage 2000C]
60 aircraft in 3 squadrons [Mirage 2000C] User Countries
(all types of Mirage 2000 included) Egypt
France
Greece
India
Peru
Qatar
Taiwan
United Arab Emirates

source was Fas.org


The Jian-10 (J-10) is the multirole fighter aircraft developed by 611 Aircraft Design Institute (Chengdu) and built by Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation (CAC). Development of the J-10 began in 1984 and the first low-rate initial production aircraft was delivered to the PLA Air Force in 2002. The J-10 is available in two variants: the single seat fighter J-10A and the two-seat fighter-trainer J-10B.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/imp.gif?event=noiframe&client=ca-pub-6088315721028977&dt=1109364782425&lmt=1109364782&alt_color=FFFFFF&format=300x250_as&output=html&channel=4655765424&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sinodefence.com%2Fairforce%2F fighter%2Fj10.asp&color_bg=FFFFFF&color_text=000000&color_link=0000FF&color_url=008000&color_border=FFFFFF&ad_type=text&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sinodefence.com%2Fairforce%2F fighter%2Fdefault.asp&u_h=768&u_w=1024&u_ah=738&u_aw=1024&u_cd=24&u_tz=-480&u_his=70&u_java=true
PROGRAMME

The J-10 fighter was developed in the early 1980s as a counter to the Soviet Union’s emerging fourth-generation fighters such as the MiG-29 Fulcrum and Su-27 Flanker. The original requirement was air superiority, but the break-up of the Soviet Union and changing requirements shifted development towards a high-performance multirole fighter aircraft to replace the ageing J-6s and J-7s that are the backbone of China’s air force. The J-10 is based on the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI)’s Lavi fighter. After the Lavi programme was cancelled in 1987, its design was taken over by CAC, and IAI carried on with the development of avionic equipment.

The PLAAF originally planned to fit the J-10 fighter with Western-made turbofan engine and fire-control radar. Following the event in June 1989, the U.S. and other Western countries imposed an arms ban on China, which almost traumatised the J-10’s development. However, the end of the Cold War enabled China to seek advanced aviation and defence technologies from its new alley Russia, who agreed to provide the AL-31F turbofan engine to power the J-10. As a result, the rear portion of the J-10’s airframe had to be re-designed to fit the Russian powerplant, and this has caused further delays in the aircraft’s development.

The J-10 first flew in 1998, but the aircraft suffered serious problems with the fly-by-wire (FBW) software, which resulted in the loss of the No.2 prototype and its pilot in 1999. After some re-design work, the revised J-10 successfully flew in 1998. By 2000 a total of six prototypes (1001~1006) had been built. Three more prototypes (1007~1009) were built between 2000 and 2002. The low-rate initial production of the J-10 was authorised in 2002, and the first batch is expected to include about fifty aircraft fitted with Russian AL-31F engines. The two-seat J-10B fighter-trainer aircraft successfully flew in 2003.

The J-10 is expected to achieve initial operating capability by 2005~2006, and the first operational regiment of the J-10 is reported to be the PLAAF 44th Aviation Division based in Sichuan Province. The PLAAF was estimated to have a total requirement of 300 aircraft, but this may be reduced to less than 100 as a result of the introduction of the more capable Su-30MK multirole fighter. The CAC is also trying to replace the Russian AL-31F with the indigenously developed WS-10A, which is said to be a Chinese copy of the AL-31FN. The J-10 may become available for export market in 2005~2006.

DESIGN

The single-engine J-10 fighter is similar in size to the Lockheed Martin F-16, with a rectangle belly air intake, low-mounted delta wings and a pair of from canard wings. The design is aerodynamically unstable, to provide a high level of agility, low drag and enhanced lift. The pilot controls the aircraft through a computerised digital fly-by-wire (FBW) system, which provides artificial stabilisation and gust elevation to give good control characteristics throughout the flight envelope. The J-10 is also the first Chinese-made fighter to be fitted with a large two-piece bubble canopy to give the pilot a better view in close air combat.

COCKPIT

The J-10's cockpit is fitted with three flat-panel liquid crystal multifunction displays (MFDs), including one colour MFD, wide field-of-view head-up display (HUD), and possibly helmet-mounted sight (HMS). It is not know whether the HMS is the basic Ukrainian Arsenel HMS copied by China's Luoyang Avionics, or a new helmet display featured briefly at the 2000 Zhuhai air show.

The pilot manipulates the J-10 by the Iron Bird quadruple (four channels) digital fly-by-wire (FBW) system. The pilot is also aided by advanced autopilot and air data computer.

RADAR

The J-10 is reported to be fitted with an indigenous KLJ-3 pulse-Doppler fire-control radar developed by Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology (also known as 14th Institute). The KLJ-3 radar, which might be based on early variant AN/APG-66/68 technology, is said to have a maximum detecting range of 100~130km (attacking range 80~90km), and is capable of engaging two targets simultaneously. The radar system was tested on a Y-7 aerial radar testbed before being fitted on the J-10.

Russian company Phazotron is prompting its Zhuk-10PD, a version of the system in later Su-27s, with 160km search range and ability to track up to six targets. Israel has also offered its Elta EL/M-2035 radar for competition.

For low-level navigation and precision strike, a forward-looking infrared and laser designation pod is likely to be carried F-16-style on an inlet stores station. A Chinese designed pod similar to the Israeli Rafael Litening was revealed at the 1998 Zhuhai air show.

POWERPLANT

The initial low-rate production J-10s are powered by the 27,500lb-thrust (120kN) Russian Lyulka-Saturn AL-31F turbofan rated at 17,857 lb (79.43 kN) dry and 27,557 lb st (122.58 kN) with afterburning. The same powerplant is also being used by Chinese air force's Su-27s and Su-30s. Lyulka-Saturn reportedly delivered 54 AL-31F turbofan engines to China between 2002 and 2004. These are the AL-31FN model with special modifications to be fitted in the J-10.

China is also developing its own WS-10A turbofan powerplant, and it could be fitted on the later versions of the J-10. An all-aspect vectored-thrust version of the AL-31F was revealed for the first time at Zhuhai Air Show 1998, leading to speculation that this advanced engine may wind up on the J-10, potentially conferring phenomenal manoeuvrability.

WEAPONS

The fixed weapon on the J-10 is a 23mm internal cannon. The aircraft also has 11 stores stations - six under the wing and five under the fuselage. The inner wing and centre fuselage stations are plumped to carry external fuel tanks. Fixed weapon is a 23-mm inner cannon hidden inside fuselage.

In addition to the PL-8 (http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/weapon/pl8.asp) short-range infrared-guided air-to-air missile reportedly derived from Israeli Rafael Python-3 technology, the J-10 could also carry Russian Vympel R-73 (http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/weapon/r73.asp) (AA-11) short-range and R-77 (AA-12) medium-range missiles equipped by Chinese Flankers. It may also be fitted with indigenously developed PL-11 or PL-12 medium-range AAM for BVR combat.

For ground attack missions, the J-10 will carry laser-guided bombs, YJ-8K (http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/weapon/c801.asp) anti-ship missile, as well as various unguided bombs and rockets. Some missiles currently under development such as the YJ-9 ramjet-powered anti-radiation missile may also be carried by the J-10.

SPECIFICATIONS

Crew: 1 (basic variant); 2 (fighter-trainer variant)
Dimensions: N/A
Weight: N/A
Max Speed: Mach 1.2 (sea-level) or Mach 2.0 (high altitude)
Range: Combat radius over 550km
Service Ceiling: N/A
Max Climb Rate: N/A
G Limit: N/A
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j10.asp

wow there pretty evenly matched! We now the Mirage for its safetly, easy handling and easy mantence. J-10 is probabily requires higher mantaince being that it has cranked delta wings and huge intakes like the Mig-29s and Su-27s. Close combat looks to be in favour of the J-10 seeing that it has the Archer. The mirage has the Matra though. very capable missile. I believe that both have liting pods while the other has some duplicate copy? As for strike role i think the Mirage wins hands down. It was very effective in high altitudes and proven.:coffee

[SABRE]

Damn it when is it gonna be offical!!!!!!.........
Btw i really doubt comparing the Su-27 to J-10 is fair. They are completly different!
But comparing the the J-10 to Mirage 2000 is good comparision.

It should be made available as soon as the export versions are available. According to "sinodefence" J-10 export version will be available by the end of 2005/6.

Comparing J-10 with Su-27 is quite fair enough. J-10 was built in competition to Soviat MiG-29s. MiG-29 were considered by Chinese as the only threatening AC as at some time in the past Chinese-Russian relations had gone a bit rusty + the Indians were buying MiG-29. Th idea was to make an AC that can take on MiG-29 but than later China & Russia armed relations got better & China started to buy Russian ACs again. When Chinese got the Su-27 which is similar to MiG-29 or a bit better Chinese decided to upgrade the J-10 program to much better aircrafts. Hence Chinese turned their focus from MiG-29 counter to Su-27 competition. This time they did this to make some thing better. This delayed the program a bit + J-10 proto type No.2 crashed killing the pilot. This delayed it bit further as J-10 again went into modifications. It was actualy suppose to completed by 2003.

China has extensively tested J-10 against Su-27 & when finaly Chinese J-10, after various modifications, defeated J-10 it was made public.

Not only Chinese claim but also experts from other country who have a bit of a knowledge of J-10 program say that the final version of J-10 would be better or superior to Russian Su-27 & MiG-29, French Mirage2000 (mirage2000-5/9/N upgrades have not been compared), Sweden's JAS-39 Gripen, USA's F-16s, F-18. Final version is actualy suppose to be capable of taking on F-15Es.
But the only problem China had was of better avionics technology which will now be available to China as EU has lifted the arms embargo.

J-10 is not as bad as you realy think. But I'll believe the experts when I see
J-10 perform.

Good or bad, I see Pakistan buying it. If its realy good we may even opt for ToT & modify the J-10 to F-10 & input our favored equipment & avionics like we are suppose to do with FC-1/JF-17. PAF might resist current J-10 as they r using AL-31FN TurboFan engine from RUSSIA. J-10 will be highly favored in Pakistan once it comes integrated with WS-10A engine which Chinese made.
Who knows, like F-86 SABRES (retired 1980s from PAF) & F-16s may be one day J-10 (F-10, if start making them) too would capture the emgination of Pakistani people.

[P.A.F]

we souldn't be so confident in comparing the J-10 to any aircraft we like. you can only do that when it proves itself.

[highsea]

I expect the J-10 to be a very good AC. I just think it's unfair to compare it to a heavy fighter like the SU-27 or F-15. How it stacks up to other light/medium fighters like F-16 and Gripen is yet to be determined- that will depend mostly on avionics and weapons. ECM notwithstanding, a MiG-21 with modern SRAAM and HMCS could be considered a match for a Raptor close in (well, almost ;) ).

I am more sceptical about claims of supercruise, especially with a warload. This seems unlikely considering the numbers...

[doggychow14]

But the only problem China had was of better avionics technology which will now be available to China as EU has lifted the arms embargo.




EU hasn't lifted the arms embargo yet. The prediction is by June if the EU if the EU manages not to give in to US pressure. Final version is actualy suppose to be capable of taking on F-15Es. The j-10's were are meant to go up against Taiwan's f-16s. F-15's are out of the j-10's league. Does any1 know how the progession of the ws-10 on the J-10? Or how much a TVN on a ws-10 will increase its combat effectiveness? Also does any1 know if the sd10/pl-12 entered service yet?

[adsH]

Cockpit include 3 large MFDs designed in a westernized style.


according to AFM PAF helped Design the Avionics system utilizing the Mass Resources of the Chinese Aviation industry. !!! thats where the Western input came form !!!!

[dabrownguy]

It should be made available as soon as the export versions are available. According to "sinodefence" J-10 export version will be available by the end of 2005/6.

Comparing J-10 with Su-27 is quite fair enough. J-10 was built in competition to Soviat MiG-29s. MiG-29 were considered by Chinese as the only threatening AC as at some time in the past Chinese-Russian relations had gone a bit rusty + the Indians were buying MiG-29. Th idea was to make an AC that can take on MiG-29 but than later China & Russia armed relations got better & China started to buy Russian ACs again. When Chinese got the Su-27 which is similar to MiG-29 or a bit better Chinese decided to upgrade the J-10 program to much better aircrafts. Hence Chinese turned their focus from MiG-29 counter to Su-27 competition. This time they did this to make some thing better. This delayed the program a bit + J-10 proto type No.2 crashed killing the pilot. This delayed it bit further as J-10 again went into modifications. It was actualy suppose to completed by 2003.

China has extensively tested J-10 against Su-27 & when finaly Chinese J-10, after various modifications, defeated J-10 it was made public.

Not only Chinese claim but also experts from other country who have a bit of a knowledge of J-10 program say that the final version of J-10 would be better or superior to Russian Su-27 & MiG-29, French Mirage2000 (mirage2000-5/9/N upgrades have not been compared), Sweden's JAS-39 Gripen, USA's F-16s, F-18. Final version is actualy suppose to be capable of taking on F-15Es.
But the only problem China had was of better avionics technology which will now be available to China as EU has lifted the arms embargo.

J-10 is not as bad as you realy think. But I'll believe the experts when I see
J-10 perform.

Good or bad, I see Pakistan buying it. If its realy good we may even opt for ToT & modify the J-10 to F-10 & input our favored equipment & avionics like we are suppose to do with FC-1/JF-17. PAF might resist current J-10 as they r using AL-31FN TurboFan engine from RUSSIA. J-10 will be highly favored in Pakistan once it comes integrated with WS-10A engine which Chinese made.
Who knows, like F-86 SABRES (retired 1980s from PAF) & F-16s may be one day J-10 (F-10, if start making them) too would capture the emgination of Pakistani people.
i disagree. the j-10 facts were probabily fruitified. Flankers stand next to best aircraft in the world meant for air domanince!:mad: Do you see a J-10 doing a hook? no.

[fieldmarshal]

J-10 is yet to be acknowleged by the chinese offically, to them it does not exists so as a result their are no confirmed stats of j-10 that could shed a light on its performance envelop. So to say that its better than this or that ac is premature. But one thing is for sure that china is lookin to counter the taiwanese more than india as it considers taiwan a bigger and immidate threat. So j-10 has to be in the league of f-16 block 52 mirage 2000 5/9 n the f-18( to counter the us fleet) as it will be the main stay of the chinese for some time. N if aint as good or better than the ac mentioned above than their was no point in waistin this much time, energy n money. So u can bet ur bottom dollar that the j-10 willbe good.

The flanker series of ac are all hype in terms of a complete package ie ac, avionics, pilot training and supportin equipment, as whenever they will come against western ac like f-16 desert falcon/ sufa or even f-16 block 15 with mlu they will be be out classed. The russians know it but cant to any thing as they lack the funding to do any thing about. In an other couple of years when the like of typhoon n f-22 become the main stay of most western airforces, flanker/super flanker will be obsalete as these western ac will runs circles around the flankers.

I have always though of the flanker as a circus act, which with its cobra manouver looks good, but since its insecption has nothin to show for in combat.

[dabrownguy]

Typhoon has a 5-1 kill ratio aganist super flankers. according to some tests if i remember accuratly. while the raptor had 10-1. That isn't bad compared to what a flanker cost and can do. But really do you really think it'll be hard for Russians to catch up? With less sanctions aganist the Russians they can "barrow" technology lets say from france and make something that can be on par with probabily the Typhoon. BTW the flanker if i remember can do a cobra maneuver loaded. its not all show.

[adsH]

Typhoon has a 5-1 kill ratio aganist super flankers. according to some tests if i remember accuratly. while the raptor had 10-1. That isn't bad compared to what a flanker cost and can do. But really do you really think it'll be hard for Russians to catch up? With less sanctions aganist the Russians they can "barrow" technology lets say from france and make something that can be on par with probabily the Typhoon. BTW the flanker if i remember can do a cobra maneuver loaded. its not all show.

Thats all good!! but really what matters is that who's actually flying the Dam AC. the Typhoon is potentially placed at that position becasue its operators along with the support it receives from its Auxiliaries are top notch. the Pilots that fly are really well trained the subsystems are kept upto date. And about the raptor wel... at that price i'd expect it to do some miracles. These are force multiplier, AC's the Russians are still somewhat backwards and they still have the Overwhelming strategy "Masses". Russians are still behind us in research they have to invest in developing there own infrastructure first. R&D comes as a luxury to them. Russia cannot compete with the totall Combined R&D resources of the western world which to an extent can be put as a "collaborating bunch"

[fieldmarshal]

Typhoon has a 5-1 kill ratio aganist super flankers. according to some tests if i remember accuratly. while the raptor had 10-1. That isn't bad compared to what a flanker cost and can do. But really do you really think it'll be hard for Russians to catch up? With less sanctions aganist the Russians they can "barrow" technology lets say from france and make something that can be on par with probabily the Typhoon. BTW the flanker if i remember can do a cobra maneuver loaded. its not all show.

By ur account all the russian airforce will be dead n burried before they can get some meaning full kills.
At the moment typhoon is not fully developed by the time it is nothin that the russkies can throw at the opperaters of this ac will come close to touching it,let along stand a chance in a meaning full combat. N as far as the f-22 goes it even at this stage is way ahead of any thing the russian got even on the drawing board. N by the time they thing of somthin meaningfull to match the capabilities of these birds, by that time we will see american n european plans with thrust vectoing control, with such super super movouarability that will be somthing to be hold.etc
so my friend as things stand today russia is too far back in not just military tech but in every sphere of life n with the position thier eco is at the moment, they got just one way to go n that is down, as they already have morgageed their sole to world bank/imf. ;)

[ajay_ijn]

Russians are still behind us in research they have to invest in developing there own infrastructure first. R&D comes as a luxury to them. Russia cannot compete with the totall Combined R&D resources of the western world which to an extent can be put as a "collaborating bunch"
They are behind just becoz they don't have money.
Give them Money and They can Compete with US/Europe R&D or even overtake.
Things would be Much much different if Soviet Union didn't collapse.




MiG-21 with modern SRAAM and HMCS could be considered a match for a Raptor close in
That would be the most horrible thing USAF would ever imagine.
Costliest Fighter Vs the Cheapest/45 year old Fighter .
But Still it isn't a match.

[adsH]

They are behind just becoz they don't have money.
Give them Money and They can Compete with US/Europe R&D or even overtake.
Things would be Much much different if Soviet Union didn't collapse.


I dobt they would be able to compete even if they had Money Today as we stand our R&D sector along with the US is probably the most potent sectors of our economies. Do you have any IDea how it the R&D works we'r not dealing with One Defense sector R&d it is the tottal combined R7D sectors of the Most developed and Richest Economies of the world. Everything is merging so the defense sector borrows tech that they need from other Comercial R&D sectors. Russia on its own can NEVER catch up !!










That would be the most horrible thing USAF would ever imagine.
Costliest Fighter Vs the Cheapest/45 year old Fighter .
But Still it isn't a match.

Ever heard of High hacks,

Even tho the fact that the Mig would be lighting up on the Raptor Radar/sensor screen like a Glowing bee on a rainy night. The raptor would engage the AC well before the Mig even knew what was looking at it. the USAF if put in this situation would have the Entire Package in place including Jstar and E3's so any 45 year old jet on a Loner mission would be mice meat by the time it would have taken off its base.

[ajay_ijn]

Even tho the fact that the Mig would be lighting up on the Raptor Radar/sensor screen like a Glowing bee on a rainy night. The raptor would engage the AC well before the Mig even knew what was looking at it. the USAF if put in this situation would have the Entire Package in place including Jstar and E3's so any 45 year old jet on a Loner mission would be mice meat by the time it would have taken off its base.

Thats what I was saying,it was not me but high sea was saying that Mig-21 was match to F-22.

I dobt they would be able to compete even if they had Money Today as we stand our R&D sector along with the US is probably the most potent sectors of our economies. Do you have any IDea how it the R&D works we'r not dealing with One Defense sector R&d it is the tottal combined R7D sectors of the Most developed and Richest Economies of the world. Everything is merging so the defense sector borrows tech that they need from other Comercial R&D sectors. Russia on its own can NEVER catch up !!

Remeber Soviet Union Did gave the Real Shock To Whole Western World on 15 May 1957 by Spectacular Launch of the First ICBM/Space launch Vehicle R-7.
US Never Imagined that Soviets Could do that and also US was years away from doing that.

Russia on its own can NEVER catch up !!
Don't underestimate them,They can and also are capable of giving Surprise to the western world.


Do you have any IDea how it the R&D works we'r not dealing with One Defense sector R&d it is the tottal combined R7D sectors of the Most developed and Richest Economies of the world
So whats Special if they have richest economies.
Are their brains more capable than Russian Scientists.
I agree that Borrowing the Technology is an Advantage.
But Russia/Soviets Never had the nessicity of Borrowing the Tech from others becoz they themsleves have number of R&D Facilities.
They have some 1500 Research and Design Facilties.
They developed some of the best weapon systems without borrrowing the technology.

I agree Russian Defence Industry is down now,But underestimating them would be a Fatal Mistake,which often Western nations do.

[adsH]

Ajjay What i am trying to tell you is that, the Russians even if they wanted now would not be able to compete, since we have the infrastructure in place, we have Private Public and Academic research institution, I’m sure your probably aware of the Defense Budget of the Americans and there capabilities. But that’s not all we as the Smaller Western nations with rich economies have dispensable cash. And everything takes Money, the Russians cannot hire there R&D staff by feeding them a loaf of bread, barter system is long gone. The Russians need to live up to the Fact. Every penny they invest in defense R&D is a penny opportunity Cost away from there poverty stricken population. they need infrastructure and they need basic amenities to live. The larger part of the western world has the infrastructure in place, we have the system and the resources allocated for it so whatever we spend on R&D is for self improvement. The Russian were Building Weapons to prove there empire was the greatest they borrowed concepts from the Germans that by my count were the pioneers of most modern day trendy Weapon systems. Were not trying to prove to the world that we’re an empire that has capabilities far beyond anyone plus we have a stable flow resources and ideas. We’re trying to develop ourselves our technology and whatever we develop, if it helps the defense sector then so be it.

[P.A.F]

The bottom line here is that Russian tech can not compete with Americas. END OF STORY.

now can we please get back to the topic of J-10. russia and america have nothing to do with it!!!

[SABRE]

By the time Russians come up with some thing like F/A-22, USAF & USNavy would already be operating on the un-manned (no pilot) stealth fighter AC being developed by Northorp Grummen & by than USA will be considering to export F-22 to its allied nations, which puts Russia in pressure. The question is can Russia creat some thing like F-22. They could but they need money & they r running out of it. India & China are the main source but with China involved in self reliance projects such as J-10 & J-XX, Russia only will have India as its main buyer, but at the moment it seems that USA is even trying to pull India away from Russian Airnotical technologies.
Not only Russia has problem in making newer advance fighters they have problems mainting their current inventory. According to some reports if Russia even succeeds in making PAF-FA, they wont be able afford much of them. This is a big trouble for the Russians.

Seems like Chinese are more pro-active than re-active, they r trying & pulling out of Russian AirArms market. If they dont start making their own jets, they might end up with nothing in the end if Russia goes down on World Class AirCraft manufacturing.
For Chinese FC-1 (Jf-17) & J-10 may be the first two steps but they r the biggest one as well.

Russia is loosing its prospects & they r doing nothing about it. Unlike USA they have still kept the doors shut to their cold war rivals.

[highsea]

Thats what I was saying,it was not me but high sea was saying that Mig-21 was match to F-22.
Ajay, do not quote me out of context. I was describing a specific scenario, ie., the MiG has modern IIR seeker SRAAM and HMCS. And I did not say it was a match- I said some people would consider it ALMOST matched up. Simply because with IIR seekers, if the SRAAM got the Raptor in it's area of regard, it would be a threat.

I was not referring to BVR encounters. The probability of the MiG 21 getting to WVR against the Raptor is very low, and the Raptor is armed with AIM-9x with IIR seeker, and the Raptor can cue the missile with his helmet sight.

[Attila]

This topic makes me think of a plane which I'm not sure is being created or has already been developed under a veil of secrecy: the MIG 1.42 and 1.44.

If China has developed a fighter such as the J-10 described above, then one would wonder why the Russians would even consider keeping these planes on their list of possible sale items to allies. Would it not be cheaper to simply buy a few from Russia and make everyone happy?

Finally, as we all should know by now, the best planes are the planes that will never be acknowledged until they are proven in combat. Doesn't matter if they are American, Russian, Chinese, French, British, German, whatever...they'll only be announced after they're either developed or have been successful in a global theatre.

On a personal note though, I've always liked the lines of the F-15 and its newer cousin the F-22. The very fact that they can engineer planes like these makes me wonder how far they can actually push that envelope.

Aurora anyone? :)

[highsea]

The reason that I have faith in the J-10 is exactly because it has so much US engineering in it. Had the US allowed the program to come to fruition under Israeli auspices, China wouldn't even be close today. It was Israel selling the LAVI to China (which I haven't forgiven them for) that makes this discussion possible.

Again, it all boils down to the weapons and avionics. If the J-10 doesn't have it in the cockpit and on the pylons, it doesn't matter how neat the platform is.

[aaaditya]

r73dm2 also has helmet cueing system.this missile is in service with the indian airforce.(www.bharat-rakshak.com (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com))

[Pathfinder-X]

The reason that I have faith in the J-10 is exactly because it has so much US engineering in it. Had the US allowed the program to come to fruition under Israeli auspices, China wouldn't even be close today. It was Israel selling the LAVI to China (which I haven't forgiven them for) that makes this discussion possible.

Again, it all boils down to the weapons and avionics. If the J-10 doesn't have it in the cockpit and on the pylons, it doesn't matter how neat the platform is.

The Israelis backed out of the deal in the early 1990's and the Russians were helping the Chinese develop the J-10. Based on that, I think most U.S contents found on J-10 comes from the Pakistani F-16A/B that Chinese obtained in late or mid 1990's. Don't forget the fact the J-10 project went through several stages of redesigning.

According to Sinodefence and centurychina, the J-10 is equipped with the Type 1743/K JL3 pulse doppler radar, which is based on American AN/APG-66/68 further reinforces my view that the J-10 has more in common with the F-16 from Pakistan. Well since the Lavi is based on F-16 so I guess we're back to where you started. :D

[highsea]

The question of when Israel actually pulled out of the J-10 is up for debate. Officially they backed away around 1990, but they maintained offices in China for several years afterwards, probably still today. In any case, Israel delivered a complete design. There were already 2 flying prototypes, and 4 more in construction when the US pulled the plug.

The J-10 project did go through a few redesigns, but we can ignore anything pre-Lavi as irrelevant. The only design changes relevant to the J-10 today are the post-Lavi changes. The J-10 is not an evolution of a previous design with Lavi influence- it is the end product of the Lavi design with Russian and Chinese influence.

I would guess that the Russian help was mostly re-engineering the aft fuselage and modifying the airframe to accept the AL-31 engine, and possibly some cooperation from Phazotron on the radar. They may have helped some with manufacturing details on the composites in the wings, etc, stuff that was too high tech for China's manufacturing capabilities at the time. There's really not as much F-16 in the Lavi as it appears. The forward fuselage and intake are similar, but the airframe and wing are all Lavi.

So 90% of the J-10 is still Lavi, and 90% of that development was US dollars. 40% of the components were being made in the US when the program got the ax. All in all, it was a disaster from the US perspective. 2.4 billion dollars down the drain, and much advanced technology given away.

[SABRE]

highsea things happen u knw...no point crying spiled milk now...remember that the British were the 1st to research the Super Sonic Jets, but they couldnt get the engine config. right so they contacted USA. USA agreeed to help out, this gave US 1st hand knowledge of Super Sonic jet Engines & USA became the 1st country to fly super sonice AC. This did piss off the British but whose complaining.

[Pendekar]

as far as i remember, it is an american pilot who first break the sound barrier. but if i'm not mistaken, it is the Canadian who was the first to developed a true, fly by wire supersonic fighter (Avro Arrow) though never go far from six prototypes before it was scrapped. it is also the first manned aircraft to reach the edge of space.

[SABRE]

The british were 1st to design Super Sonic AC but it never flew cause of British were unable to configure the engine thats y they shared the engine with USA. USA did not only help British but they secretly transfered the tech to their R&D & made the first Super Spnic AC before the British.

[highsea]

Okay guys, let's stay on topic...J-10. ;)

[Attila]

Tough to stay on topic when there is no official information on the fighter..lol

Attila

[SABRE]

I doubt that the official Information would differ in any ways from the privately publsihed information on the net.

Official info might be released later this year as China would bring out the first Export version of J-10. Offcourse with export versions u'll need the official information. Export version is due at the end of 2005 & beginning of 2006.

So far China has tested J-10 against Su-27 with Chinese pilots on both the ACs. So we cant realy say if J-10 truely defeated the Su-27. The other pilot might have played softly. China should test the AirCraft with Russian pilots, if not than with Pakistani pilots. May be even test it against JF-17. Or even better test it against Israeli F-16s. This would even give Israel some info on how the Levi would have performed if they had persued it to be manufactured & inducted into the Israeli AirForece.

[adsH]

I doubt that the official Information would differ in any ways from the privately publsihed information on the net.

Official info might be released later this year as China would bring out the first Export version of J-10. Offcourse with export versions u'll need the official information. Export version is due at the end of 2005 & beginning of 2006.

So far China has tested J-10 against Su-27 with Chinese pilots on both the ACs. So we cant realy say if J-10 truely defeated the Su-27. The other pilot might have played softly. China should test the AirCraft with Russian pilots, if not than with Pakistani pilots. May be even test it against JF-17. Or even better test it against Israeli F-16s. This would even give Israel some info on how the Levi would have performed if they had persued it to be manufactured & inducted into the Israeli AirForece.

This is all just bunch of rumors but its not far from reality, I guess. J-10 have been flying in and around Karachi, as far as i can recall one person stating that. it was here i think.

[SABRE]

J-10 never flew Karachi....If it did I would have known or most probably I would have. I live in Karachi & one of the AirForce Base (Korangi) is nere my university. J-10 cant land at Faisal as it only houses Mirage 3 & 5 (mostly 5), Super Mushaq & couple of K-8. The largest base is always busy with F-7s taking off & landing, Oqaab's college is there, if J-10 was there he would have told us.
Even if J-10 was in Pakistan it would have been at PAC Kamra or at Sargodah base or 1 out 10 chances it would have been at Peshawar. There is no chance of J-10 flying in the skies of Karachi. If it flew some where else in Pakistan, it would have been made known even by the media. Keeping J-10 in Pakistan is not like its a crime, it would have been made public just like JF-17 (actualy early version that stats Super-7 on the tail, is in Pakistan). It went super sonic over Rawalpindi causing a sonic boom with a panic in the city & PAF publicly apologized & stated that the Super-7 was being tested for the speed.

Believe me J-10 is not in Pakistan but it would be probably even before export versions & official announcements are released.

May be JF-17 flew from PAC Kamra to Karachi & it was reported as J-10. But thats unlikely too.

If u r refering to J-10 being tested against PAF F-16s, than who ever told u this has lied. All F-16s r at Sargodah. 2ndly Pakistan wnt test J-10 against this F-16s this soon. Why???

1. Dady is thinking of buying us new F-16s

2. Dady will get angry if we play with cousin China's toy along with ours.

3. Cousin China's toy at the moment is better in targeting & range so no point testing F-16 A/B against them as J-10 would win any ways. But if we get Block 50/52+ than its going to be fun game. May be we could arrange a small war game.

[rafale_2k5]

rest assure the day j10 comes in paf colours , these western airforces shall be qued up 4 testing / evaluating this aircraft against their own n the flood gates of exercises would open up 4 paf, same anology as in indian case .....

[dalden]

Cousin China's toy at the moment is better in targeting & range so no point testing F-16 A/B against them as J-10 would win any ways. But if we get Block 50/52+ than its going to be fun game. May be we could arrange a small war game.

A small war game with China and Pakistan!!! could there be such a thing?? the reaction from the other major regional player would be most interesting.;)

[P.A.F]

actually now that a war game has been mentioned. well china and pakistan haven't had one in ages. sould have one soon. hopefully.:)

[rafale_2k5]

Theres another disturbin rumour but no official response of course regarding tailoring down of JF-17 order to 75 instead of original 150, inlight of bush administration's willingness to provide f-16s, may be the rumour may turn out to be right !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! some worthy member may put me wise on this if somebody has a better picture of the oer all issue !!!!!!

[Salman78]

Can J-10 carry medium range AAM's like Mirage 2005, F-15/14/18 Su-27 etc ? or are they for air to ground ordinance.
I would like to see J-10 carrying its under fuselage missiles.

Anyone has pics of it ?

[SABRE]

Can J-10 carry medium range AAM's like Mirage 2005, F-15/14/18 Su-27 etc ? or are they for air to ground ordinance.
I would like to see J-10 carrying its under fuselage missiles.

Anyone has pics of it ?

J-10 will carry SD-10 BVRAAMs (Beyound visiual range air to air missile) these are medium range missiles & according to its chinese developers the initial versions' capability lies with AIM-120B AMRAAM.

SD-10 will also be mounted on FC-1/JF-17s.

[Salman78]

J-10 will carry SD-10 BVRAAMs (Beyound visiual range air to air missile) these are medium range missiles & according to its chinese developers the initial versions' capability lies with AIM-120B AMRAAM.

SD-10 will also be mounted on FC-1/JF-17s.

I know what J-10 can carry dude . Everyone has seen tons of pics of JF-17 & J-10 carrying 2 SD-10's on its center underwing pylons.

What i wanted to know/findout is if J-10 has an arrangment of under Fuselage pylons for AAM's . for example Rafale, Hornet, Mirage 2000-5 etc

[VICTORA1]

Hello,


The time is late 60's. Israel is eagerly awaiting delivery of its Mirage aircraft from france, which I believe they had paid for upfront. Suddenly they find out that sanctions have been imposed upon the delivery. No more planes. Israel really wanted the mirage. It didnot go the reverse engineering route from available samples, it looked for other venues, knowing reverse engineering was too damned difficult and results were not the greatest and it consumed too much time.

Switzerland had the rights to manufacture the fighter but were not doing so. They had the blue prints for the mirage stored in a minimum security almost no security storage. Israel found a way to get the blue prints. It took them almost six months for that.The blue prints weighed over ONE TON, almost closer to two tons. It took time to shift the paper without being too obvious.

Same thing with the J 10. The plane obviously is a ditto copy of the lavi and if israel would not have given the design, the only thing that the chinese would have come out would have looked something like a russian fighter rather than an american. Just by having access to an F 16, you can look at its virtues, but making a better copy , chinese don't have that experties.

[Oqaab]

Same thing with the J 10. The plane obviously is a ditto copy of the lavi and if israel would not have given the design, the only thing that the chinese would have come out would have looked something like a russian fighter rather than an american. Just by having access to an F 16, you can look at its virtues, but making a better copy , chinese don't have that experties.

I dont think J-10 was a copy of LAVI. LAVI project failed long ago. It was a joint venture between China and Israel but both the countries had different requirements so China decided to work on J-10 and Israel went for LAVI. Still, Chinese J-10 may use Israeli Elta 2035 Radar.

[SABRE]

Same thing with the J 10. The plane obviously is a ditto copy of the lavi and if israel would not have given the design, the only thing that the chinese would have come out would have looked something like a russian fighter rather than an american. Just by having access to an F 16, you can look at its virtues, but making a better copy , chinese don't have that experties.


Well I believe if China had worked on J-10 with out the understandings of Levi they would have come out with some thing like MiG-29. But calling J-10 American Like would be wrong. J-10 is delta wing, Americans dont fly Delta. Up untill now I think with F-22 which has some delta wing structure but not compeletly.

Levi was delta because of Israeli engineers study on French Dessault Mirge (3/5) Series. As we all know that all Mirages are delta winged aircrafts.

Besides J-10 still lacks that American idea of sophisticated aircraft but it still is a good work. Lets see J-XX.

[Oqaab]

Besides J-10 still lacks that American idea of sophisticated aircraft but it still is a good work. Lets see J-XX.

Well, its not that bad. Even the americans consider it as a threat to their Super Hornets. Lets not forget they even blamed China for stealing F-16's tech for J-10.

[Paxter]

Well, its not that bad. Even the americans consider it as a threat to their Super Hornets.

Where did you get that info? hehehehehe ... you are funny :D

[Salman78]

Where did you get that info? hehehehehe ... you are funny :D

In july 2004, Peruvian air force held its air combat exercise against USNAF.
By all accounts, Mirage 2000's of FAP (Peruvian air Force) showed off their ability to out turn the super hornets in high g turns and won majority of air to air battles.

Do you think J-10's turn performance is inferior to that of Mirage 2000's ? Do you know that J-10 is fitted with AL-31F engines ? Do you know that J-10's will be equipped with SD-10 active radar guided AAM's ?

:)

[ROCK45]

Salman78
In july 2004, Peruvian air force held its air combat exercise against USNAF.
By all accounts, Mirage 2000's of FAP (Peruvian air Force) showed off their ability to out turn the super hornets in high g turns and won majority of air to air battles.

Hi Salman
I would be interested in reading about the Peruvian and the USN. Could you provide a link to that. I'm a fan of the J-10 I just wish more public info was released, thanks

[Aussie Digger]

In july 2004, Peruvian air force held its air combat exercise against USNAF.
By all accounts, Mirage 2000's of FAP (Peruvian air Force) showed off their ability to out turn the super hornets in high g turns and won majority of air to air battles.

Do you think J-10's turn performance is inferior to that of Mirage 2000's ? Do you know that J-10 is fitted with AL-31F engines ? Do you know that J-10's will be equipped with SD-10 active radar guided AAM's ?

:)

Obviously AMRAAM wasn't a part of the air exercises then and Super Hornet's weren't carrying JHMCS and AIM-9X either...

On top of this, were the SH's "red air or blue air"?

Were the Peruvians allowed to re-generate "killed aircraft" or not?

Were the Super Hornets flying profiles to mimic typical "threat" aircraft for the Peruvian's or were they flying typical USN profiles and operations-?

There is a famous story about a Super Hornet "killing" an F-22 getting around on the Internet. The very first aircraft to do so in fact. Now I'm a fan of the Super Hornet, no doubt about that, however when one looks at that exercise, the Super Hornet was playing "red air" and was allowed to "regenenerate" in the exercise scenario as a way of boosting the threat the "blue air" had to overcome.

The SH that claimed the "kill" on the F-22 was a regenerated aircraft who broke the exercised rules of engagement in a dangerous manner in order to get it's "kill".

In reality it had already been killed with an AMRAAM shot by the F-22 and therefore only the rules of the particular exercise allowed it to get it's kill.

Reality and exercises as can be seen are vastly different and it's a big call (too big in fact) to claim one aircraft is superior to another based on exercise results...

[Incognito129]

Lets summarize all this:

F-22 beats all.

We win. Copyright US of A

[jaffo4011]

Lets summarize all this:

F-22 beats all.

We win. Copyright US of A

very funny......unless of course your opponent is a typhoon!

"There was little surprise that Typhoon, with its world-class agility and high off-bore sight missile capability was able to dominate "Within Visual Range" flight but the aircraft did cause a surprise by getting a radar lock on the F22 at a surprisingly long range. The F-22s cried off, claiming that they were "unstealthed" anyway, although the next day´s scheduled two vs. two BWR engagement was cancelled, and "the USAF decided they didn´t want to play any more ."

Source: "international AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45. - ISNB: 1-880588-91-9 (case bound) or ISBN: 1473-9917.

as per aussies caveats though,i wouldnt have any idea of blue/red status of the encounter,or the regeneration issues but it does add a little note of caution and realism to un-informed cries of ''my f22's better than yours....period''this is clearly not the case and you shouldnt always blindly believe the hype(of any manufacturer or govt).the proof is in the pudding.

still this is a debate on the j10 so i digress.

id love to see them invited to red flag this year(LOL)

[ROCK45]

Aussie Digger - I agree knowing the rule of the engagement red, blue, etc. is important. Mirage 2000's do well against most aircraft high and fasts too not just Hornets. Let them a make a few turns and that's another story.
I'm a Hornet fan myself.

I can't wait until China lets this aircraft lose in the public one must assume equipped with a AL-31 on a mid size frame that it must be a hot rod. I understand what's on the inside is important not just going fast. I questioned the Chinese radar/system/SD-10 for only one reason. If good or why did Pakistan look around for a radar & missiles for there JF-17? I think China doesn't want to release there good stuff to even Pakistan yet, being that Americans are in there country. I know that doesn't happen nor allowed nobody else sees each other aircraft or equipment etc, just difficult to believe. Pilots talks and so do maintenance personnel I'll leave at that. This is a great platform for China what seems light years ahead of the aircraft produced in the past. I really look forward to learning more about the J-10 and the J-11. To be honest I don't really no much about the J-11.

I like this web sitehttp://www.defencetalk.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif
Smile

[Aussie Digger]

Aussie Digger - I agree knowing the rule of the engagement red, blue, etc. is important. Mirage 2000's do well against most aircraft high and fasts too not just Hornets. Let them a make a few turns and that's another story.
I'm a Hornet fan myself.

I can't wait until China lets this aircraft lose in the public one must assume equipped with a AL-31 on a mid size frame that it must be a hot rod. I understand what's on the inside is important not just going fast. I questioned the Chinese radar/system/SD-10 for only one reason. If good or why did Pakistan look around for a radar & missiles for there JF-17? I think China doesn't want to release there good stuff to even Pakistan yet, being that Americans are in there country. I know that doesn't happen nor allowed nobody else sees each other aircraft or equipment etc, just difficult to believe. Pilots talks and so do maintenance personnel I'll leave at that. This is a great platform for China what seems light years ahead of the aircraft produced in the past. I really look forward to learning more about the J-10 and the J-11. To be honest I don't really no much about the J-11.

I like this web sitehttp://www.defencetalk.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif
Smile

Fair enough.

For what it's worth I think the Mirage M2K's are a nice little package too...

[Ozzy Blizzard]

very funny......unless of course your opponent is a typhoon!

"There was little surprise that Typhoon, with its world-class agility and high off-bore sight missile capability was able to dominate "Within Visual Range" flight but the aircraft did cause a surprise by getting a radar lock on the F22 at a surprisingly long range. The F-22s cried off, claiming that they were "unstealthed" anyway, although the next day´s scheduled two vs. two BWR engagement was cancelled, and "the USAF decided they didn´t want to play any more ."

Source: "international AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45. - ISNB: 1-880588-91-9 (case bound) or ISBN: 1473-9917.

C'mon mate! That is a joke! So the poor raptor "didnt want to play anymore"? Sure mate :rolleyes: . What does "supriseingly long range" mean anyway? 20k's? 30ks? 50ks? Any more than that and I guess VLO is useless, those dumb americans huhg wasteing all that money. I wonder what the range was when the F-22A had a fireing soloution on the typhoon? 150k's? Geesh i wonder who would have walked away from that encounter? As for the Typhoon "dominating" the WVR fight, the article says it, "off broadsight missiles".... AIM 9M vs AIM 132. Aerodynamics dont decide dogfights anymore, missiles do, and ASRAAM is a generation better than the '9M. I wonder how tiffie would have faired vs the AIM 9X??? This paragraph has NO bearing on said platforms capabilities WHATSOEVER. The last line pretty clearly incates the intent of the author (i.e. to hype typhoon as much as possible).

as per aussies caveats though,i wouldnt have any idea of blue/red status of the encounter,or the regeneration issues but it does add a little note of caution and realism to un-informed cries of ''my f22's better than yours....period''this is clearly not the case and you shouldnt always blindly believe the hype(of any manufacturer or govt).the proof is in the pudding.

Do you disagree with his contention (however badly put) that there is a more capable air superiority platform operational today? If not than what is? Judgeing from your reply perhaps you think a typhoon? Well if so i will be amused to hear you attempt to back up that claim, epecially if this is you "evidence".

[jaffo4011]

C'mon mate! That is a joke! So the poor raptor "didnt want to play anymore"? Sure mate :rolleyes: . What does "supriseingly long range" mean anyway? 20k's? 30ks? 50ks? Any more than that and I guess VLO is useless, those dumb americans huhg wasteing all that money. I wonder what the range was when the F-22A had a fireing soloution on the typhoon? 150k's? Geesh i wonder who would have walked away from that encounter? As for the Typhoon "dominating" the WVR fight, the article says it, "off broadsight missiles".... AIM 9M vs AIM 132. Aerodynamics dont decide dogfights anymore, missiles do, and ASRAAM is a generation better than the '9M. I wonder how tiffie would have faired vs the AIM 9X??? This paragraph has NO bearing on said platforms capabilities WHATSOEVER. The last line pretty clearly incates the intent of the author (i.e. to hype typhoon as much as possible).



Do you disagree with his contention (however badly put) that there is a more capable air superiority platform operational today? If not than what is? Judgeing from your reply perhaps you think a typhoon? Well if so i will be amused to hear you attempt to back up that claim, epecially if this is you "evidence".

i was waiting for this ozzy,i didnt think you would be able to resist......

as per my 'badly put'(but correctly spelt) piece,the proof is in the pudding and as,when and if the f22 bests the tiffy in combat (and i include red flag exercises),you will be able to make a similar statement.until then,the f22 can be hyped up by its somewhat blinkered supporters but without actual evidence in the field.

incidentally,if the u.s just wanted a missile carrier and not a more manoueverable aircraft then perhaps then could have gone back to the early f111 fighter development which would be just the job.
in fact the us navy realized that air to air combat in the close in regime is still very much required and necessary in the modern age and invested in the superb f14 tomcat(with the same main systems and ultra long range weaponry developed specifically for the f111)instead which was extraordinarily agile for its size and more than a match for the soviet aircraft of the era.
(presumably the f22 was given the much lauded thrust vectoring to gain a similar advantage or why did they bother if it isnt necessary?)

the fact is ozzy,you are unable to see that the f22 is not all conquering and that its disadvantages could still cause it problems against more agile opponents in the future.
i would ask that you take off your blinkers and swallow your pride on this one.(and stop making excuses!!!!):onfloorl:

MODS;Im aware that this thread has gone off topic somewhat and its partly my fault.im sure ozzy will agree(after his reply!)

back to the j10.....

[onslaught]

The J-10 had extensive problems with its airframe and engines during its development phase. I think they solved the engine problem, but I don't know how well they fixed the airframe problem. Does anybody have any info on that or is China still being really secretive about the J-10?

[DefConGuru]

The J-10 had extensive problems with its airframe and engines during its development phase. I think they solved the engine problem, but I don't know how well they fixed the airframe problem. Does anybody have any info on that or is China still being really secretive about the J-10?

Which phase? The trouble you speak of regarding the air fame and engine were well taken care of as a brand new prototype went under development after the first program. The production J-10s with the proper avionics and weapons could take on SU30, F16 and Mig 35, and later on the engines will be replaced by the Chines WS 10A for better capabilities. :finger

[onslaught]

Which phase? The trouble you speak of regarding the air fame and engine were well taken care of as a brand new prototype went under development after the first program. The production J-10s with the proper avionics and weapons could take on SU30, F16 and Mig 35, and later on the engines will be replaced by the Chines WS 10A for better capabilities. :finger

IIRC, there were some airframe problems when they did some wind tunnel testing. Do you have any sources to support that the J-10 have punch to take on an Su-30 (especially an MKI), or an F-16 (black 50/52/60), or a MiG-35. What excersises have the J-10 flown in and how did it do?

[hallo84]

IIRC, there were some airframe problems when they did some wind tunnel testing. Do you have any sources to support that the J-10 have punch to take on an Su-30 (especially an MKI), or an F-16 (black 50/52/60), or a MiG-35. What excersises have the J-10 flown in and how did it do?

Look into PLAAF DACT exercises.
1st, 2nd div J11(su-27) vs J10.

J-10 is used a blue flag agressor units and engagements all end in favor of J-10.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

i was waiting for this ozzy,i didnt think you would be able to resist......

geesh you pommies never quit do you...... Cant wait 'till the Ashes so we can give you boys a right kicking again!:D

as per my 'badly put'(but correctly spelt) piece,the proof is in the pudding and as,when and if the f22 bests the tiffy in combat (and i include red flag exercises),you will be able to make a similar statement.until then,the f22 can be hyped up by its somewhat blinkered supporters but without actual evidence in the field.

First of all when i said padly put i was refereing to the guy you were quoteing.

Second the Tiffie and F22A will never meet in combat, and red flag is hardly a substitute (as has been explained many many times by many many members). Exercises have virtually no bairing on the capability of a platform because they are stacked in one or the other sides favor. They are not designed to demonstrate capability but train pilots. THAT is all. Therefore useing the outcome of a patricular exercise (this one isnt even confirmed) to justify a claim on platform A's capabilities vs platform B's, you will be wasteing your time. So even after they are both at red flag that will reveal nothing about which one is a more capable platform.

Anyway war isnt fought platform vs platform, its systems that count, and what matters in a platform is how its various capabilities fit into and complement the wider system. In this context F-22A provides many capabilities that EF-2000 does not, includeing VLO (the big one), a very capable AESA and LPI.

incidentally,if the u.s just wanted a missile carrier and not a more manoueverable aircraft then perhaps then could have gone back to the early f111 fighter development which would be just the job.
in fact the us navy realized that air to air combat in the close in regime is still very much required and necessary in the modern age and invested in the superb f14 tomcat(with the same main systems and ultra long range weaponry developed specifically for the f111)instead which was extraordinarily agile for its size and more than a match for the soviet aircraft of the era.
(presumably the f22 was given the much lauded thrust vectoring to gain a similar advantage or why did they bother if it isnt necessary?)

Because heaters were not at the same technological level they are now. Anyway maneuverability is usefull, sure, but it wont be the defineing factor in WVR combat. Consider this: The AIM 9X and AIM 132 have 290 degree and 360 degree enguagement envilopes respectively, can pull 50g's+ and have a phocal plane array that according the the manufacturor "can not be defeated by maneuver alone". Considering that, how is a low wing loading or faster turn rate going to counter HOBS heater capability I ask you?????? Let me answer, it WONT. Thats why they didnt bother with thrust vecotring on the F35, its a waste of money in the current missile environment. IRCM is much more usefull than turning ability in WVR. That my freind is a FACT! If it degrades to a gun fight then the Typhoon will probably have the advantage, but not if they are within heater range.

the fact is ozzy,you are unable to see that the f22 is not all conquering and that its disadvantages could still cause it problems against more agile opponents in the future.
i would ask that you take off your blinkers and swallow your pride on this one.(and stop making excuses!!!!):onfloorl:

MODS;Im aware that this thread has gone off topic somewhat and its partly my fault.im sure ozzy will agree(after his reply!)

back to the j10.....

Dont claim to know what i can and cant see mate, i justify my opinions with logical evidence, not just some unconfirmed rumors of exercise results, that still dont acount for when the Typhoon was locked and fired on by the Raptor.

I dont think the Raptor is some unbeatable god, but i do think it is the most capable Air superiority fighter on th plannet, which would make sence considering it is the most expenseive and had the largest R&D budget of any fighter (pending F35). In sertain sircumstances, could a more maneuverable fighter stand its own? Sure, but those sircumstances are very very narrow. BVR not a chance... F22 has a better radar and more comprehenseive VLO than anything flying now (apart from rhino B2 with the APG 79), which means it see's first, shoots first & kills first every time, and that will NOT change untill someone makes a platform with comperable VLO & radar which is unlikely to say the least. Also its kinematical performance is much better than anything else flying which again will give the raptor an advantage in BVR. WVR well, its probably prety even with most other advanced 4.5th gen platforms becasue of comperable HOBS heater capability. An RAAF pilot at red flag last year stated that he could actually see the platform but could not track it with his radar (talk about frustrating). This can be countered to an extent by an IRST, although the Raptors IR supression would help aswell. F-22A is a BVR killer and NOTHING can stand toe to toe with it in this engagement regime, not even the mighty typhoon. WVR well, considering HOBS heaters the effect of VLO and IRCM and raptors raw performance, once F-22A is fitted with AIM 9X and JHMCS, it would be hard to argue realistically that any platform is any better. The only reason it wont perform at the moment is becasue its WVR missile is a generation behind the ASRAAM/AIM 9X. The reason it has not been upgraded to this level is becasue at the moment it doesent need to. It will pretty easilly kill anything opponent in BVR anyway, altthough it may not be allowed to in exersises (the pilots on both sides may not learn much that way).

I know you pommies love your Typhoon. Its a truely beutifull aircraft and a seriosly capable platform. However you have to be reasonable... have a look at the capabilities of the aircraft, without those nationalistic sunglasses. The F-22A is true VLO platform, has superior kinematical perforrmance and a better radar. Considering those things alone it will be a much much better BVR performer. Blind Freddy could see that. It is clearly a more capable air superiority platform, and considering the money put into the project it bloody well should be. Your the one who should be swallowing his pride mate (i have no investment in the platform, I'm an aussie and we didnt build it, i like the F35 better and i'd rather have a model of a Typhoon, no kidding), The typhoon is a great platform and a huge achievement, worthy of the pride you have in it. But dont let that cloud your judgement, It lacks some serious capabilities that only the F22 & F35 will have, & those capabilities will make them more effecteive air superiority fighters. They have either been developed later or with more moey (both on the last count i think) so there is no shame in it. Typhoon is at least a match for any other operational fighter anyware, but 5th gen it aint my friend.

Honestly, I mean really honnestly (without the nationalism) do you think in a no rules fight than a flight of Typhoons would stand a chance of surviveing (let alone defeating) a BVR engagement with a flight of Raptors???

p.s. nice photo's, i've got over 200 typhoon shots myself, i think i've got 2 of those allready.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Look into PLAAF DACT exercises.
1st, 2nd div J11(su-27) vs J10.

J-10 is used a blue flag agressor units and engagements all end in favor of J-10.

AFAIk J10 is equiped with PL12's (R77's) while J11 is still only equiped with R27's. Considering that i dont think said exersises illuminate anything on said platforms capabilities, it would have been a shooting range for the J10 for that reason alone.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

IIRC, there were some airframe problems when they did some wind tunnel testing. Do you have any sources to support that the J-10 have punch to take on an Su-30 (especially an MKI), or an F-16 (black 50/52/60), or a MiG-35. What excersises have the J-10 flown in and how did it do?

Untill we know the capabilities of the radar & combat management system, we really cant say. It might be great, personally i'm scheptical.

[crobato]

AFAIk J10 is equiped with PL12's (R77's) while J11 is still only equiped with R27's. Considering that i dont think said exersises illuminate anything on said platforms capabilities, it would have been a shooting range for the J10 for that reason alone.

Hmm no. The J-11s and I mean the "classic" ones, not the J-11B, are confirmed by media report (Jane's) and in photos to be R-77 capable. Their radars have an additional computing module to support extra radar modes and the R-77 missile.

[funtz]

Look into PLAAF DACT exercises.
1st, 2nd div J11(su-27) vs J10.

J-10 is used a blue flag agressor units and engagements all end in favor of J-10.


Now what did they say about red flag blue flag


The red air players are training aids. They are supposed to follow the rules and die like men when blue air is executing well. If, however, the blue air screws something up and they have an opportunity to kick some tail, they are expected to do so. Violating the ROE by using a capability that is restricted, shooting beyond a specified range, or not adhering to an established ID criteria is considered a training rule violation and is dealt with severely. Several pilots have been sent home from exercises and have even been reassigned because they didn't like to follow the rules.

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1157

Hardly seems to make any sense talking about an Air force exercise without knowing how it was done?
I mean reports from the 90s seem to suggest that the sea harriers were able to stand up and give the Tigers of the IAF(Mirage-2000s) "a run for their money", in DACT, come on!


The J-10 should be the best plane ever for PLA-AF, 'cause its indigenous development/production, as soon as they fit the that jet engine/radar/missiles the work is done nothing else will ever stand up, good to see that, in another generation or two all of the military aviation there will be absolutely indigenous.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Hmm no. The J-11s and I mean the "classic" ones, not the J-11B, are confirmed by media report (Jane's) and in photos to be R-77 capable. Their radars have an additional computing module to support extra radar modes and the R-77 missile.

Got a link on that one bud?

[hallo84]

Got a link on that one bud?

You have to follow up on chinese Su-27 upgrade reports by official Russian suppliers.
The radar sets were shipped back to Russia to receive the upgrades.

[hallo84]

Now what did they say about red flag blue flag


http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1157

Hardly seems to make any sense talking about an Air force exercise without knowing how it was done?
I mean reports from the 90s seem to suggest that the sea harriers were able to stand up and give the Tigers of the IAF(Mirage-2000s) "a run for their money", in DACT, come on!

The J-10 should be the best plane ever for PLA-AF, 'cause its indigenous development/production, as soon as they fit the that jet engine/radar/missiles the work is done nothing else will ever stand up, good to see that, in another generation or two all of the military aviation there will be absolutely indigenous.

I have no idea what you are trying to prove. Do PLAAF train the same way as IAF? Both planes can be produced in China independently of Russia. If J-11 is indeed superior then PLAAF will shift it's attention toward J-11B production. The Shenyang lobby has much more influence with PLAAF than Chengdu ever did. Is there even any need to justify staging engagements ending in favor of J-10?
What we do know is that Su-27 units from 1st and 2nd div had their planes for far longer than any of the J-10 units and flanker units is arguably the most aggressively trained in PLAAF.

[crobato]

Got a link on that one bud?


I don't post Jane's articles text by text, but I can assure you there are two of them as I have the articles saved in my hard drive, one is around 2003 and the other is 2004, both authored by senior editor Robert Hewson (not a small fish in Jane's) and the upgrades were done by a Russian company called Technokomplex. In addition, we already have pictures in the CDF where a J-11 is spotted with R-77s in its belly. We also have pictures of nonstandard modifications of the J-11's cockpit, which adds a small MFD on the right side and top of the dashboard. The box is clearly seen in closeup pictures of J-11s and even on the last batch of Su-27UBKs.

And don't bud me I'm not your buddy.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I don't post Jane's articles text by text, but I can assure you there are two of them as I have the articles saved in my hard drive, one is around 2003 and the other is 2004, both authored by senior editor Robert Hewson (not a small fish in Jane's) and the upgrades were done by a Russian company called Technokomplex. In addition, we already have pictures in the CDF where a J-11 is spotted with R-77s in its belly. We also have pictures of nonstandard modifications of the J-11's cockpit, which adds a small MFD on the right side and top of the dashboard. The box is clearly seen in closeup pictures of J-11s and even on the last batch of Su-27UBKs.

Was there a number of sets ordered, published? I mean did they just do the prototype work on a couple examples or is it a fleet wide upgrade?


And don't bud me I'm not your buddy.

No need to get defenceive, you had a piece of information i hadn't read and i was asking were i could find it thats all. The "bud" was meant to let you know i wasnt questioning your statement but asking form information.

But if you dont wanna my freind, well, i guess i'll just have to deal with it, but i wont like it... :cry

[crobato]

Was there a number of sets ordered, published? I mean did they just do the prototype work on a couple examples or is it a fleet wide upgrade?

It was a fleet wide upgrade, at least about more than a hundred sets were ordered. Note that this is not the full Su-27SKM type upgrade, it only adds R-77 capability and an MFD, it doesn't change the entire dashboard layout to the SM/SKM style, or add TV guided PGM capability which requires another subsystem module.




No need to get defenceive, you had a piece of information i hadn't read and i was asking were i could find it thats all. The "bud" was meant to let you know i wasnt questioning your statement but asking form information.

But if you dont wanna my freind, well, i guess i'll just have to deal with it, but i wont like it... :cry

I can be your buddy too if you want :)

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I have no idea what you are trying to prove. Do PLAAF train the same way as IAF? Both planes can be produced in China independently of Russia. If J-11 is indeed superior then PLAAF will shift it's attention toward J-11B production. The Shenyang lobby has much more influence with PLAAF than Chengdu ever did. Is there even any need to justify staging engagements ending in favor of J-10?
What we do know is that Su-27 units from 1st and 2nd div had their planes for far longer than any of the J-10 units and flanker units is arguably the most aggressively trained in PLAAF.

Without knowing the particluar's of the individual exercises, they dont really shed light on the capability of the aircraft or organizations envolved. Look at cope india as an example. An exercise designed to help train Indian pilots, with ristrictive ROE's placed on USAF F15's, and becasie IAF "won" (which was the point) many have used this as "evidence" that the SU 30 (not even MKI's) are much better than F15C's, that indian pilots are better and the that the IAF is a more capable organization. I mean even indians should find such a conclusion ludicris (at least reasonable ones).

In real terms an exercise designed to train is rarely going to be a good indication of capability purely becasue they are designed to train. The fact that Flanker units have had their fighters longer might explain this, the new units are the ones who need training. In most occasions the red side isnt designed to meet up and "duke it out' on even terms with the blue force to see which one is better, there is only limited training value in such an exercise. The red force acts in a way that will give maximum training benifit to blue force. Therefore useing the results of said exercise as a justification of a platforms superiority is pretty useless on the vast majority of occasions.

[tphuang]

Was there a number of sets ordered, published? I mean did they just do the prototype work on a couple examples or is it a fleet wide upgrade?

I have a Kanwa article that interviewed sukhoi and mentionned 70 su-27sk (basically of them) and the earliest J-11 have been upgraded to fire R-77 and use N-001VE. This of course does not count the 3rd batch of 26 ubk that already had N-001VE.
I wasn't too clear if J-11A already had R-77 and N-001VE installed or not.

Without knowing the particluar's of the individual exercises, they dont really shed light on the capability of the aircraft or organizations envolved. Look at cope india as an example. An exercise designed to help train Indian pilots, with ristrictive ROE's placed on USAF F15's, and becasie IAF "won" (which was the point) many have used this as "evidence" that the SU 30 (not even MKI's) are much better than F15C's, that indian pilots are better and the that the IAF is a more capable organization. I mean even indians should find such a conclusion ludicris (at least reasonable ones).

They have used many different scenario between J-10 and sk/mkk. They've done WVR and BVR exercises. They've had exercises where flankers far outnumbered J-10s. The reported figures for different exercises generally had really lopsided results for J-10s. Actually, according to big shrimps on Chinese bbs, the results have never been anything but lopsided in J-10's favour. And it's easy to see why if you get to follow the planes in plaaf. Of course, they've got J-11B now, which uses the more powerful WS-10A engine, same (might be newer) generation of avionics/radar to J-10 + PL-12, so the battle should be more even. But, they can't possibly buy anymore su-30 or build more J-11A, because it's just that much inferior to J-10.

[Thery]

I do not think use exercises result without knowing the detail can judge any jets' performance. There is a news not long ago clam that J8B give a J10 a run in a dog fight. But without the detail we can not make any conclusion from this. At least I don’t think anyone will seem J8B is a better jet compare to J10.

[jaffo4011]

Without knowing the particluar's of the individual exercises, they dont really shed light on the capability of the aircraft or organizations envolved. Look at cope india as an example. An exercise designed to help train Indian pilots, with ristrictive ROE's placed on USAF F15's, and becasie IAF "won" (which was the point) many have used this as "evidence" that the SU 30 (not even MKI's) are much better than F15C's, that indian pilots are better and the that the IAF is a more capable organization. I mean even indians should find such a conclusion ludicris (at least reasonable ones).

In real terms an exercise designed to train is rarely going to be a good indication of capability purely becasue they are designed to train. The fact that Flanker units have had their fighters longer might explain this, the new units are the ones who need training. In most occasions the red side isnt designed to meet up and "duke it out' on even terms with the blue force to see which one is better, there is only limited training value in such an exercise. The red force acts in a way that will give maximum training benifit to blue force. Therefore useing the results of said exercise as a justification of a platforms superiority is pretty useless on the vast majority of occasions.

of course the uninformed may just see this as excuses.......(and ozzy has in no way come to this conclusion through the f22's recent losses against the typhoon during exercises........in fact im sure the us pilots wern't even trying)

[funtz]

I have no idea what you are trying to prove. Do PLAAF train the same way as IAF? Both planes can be produced in China independently of Russia.

If J-11 is indeed superior then PLAAF will shift it's attention toward J-11B production. The Shenyang lobby has much more influence with PLAAF than Chengdu ever did. Is there even any need to justify staging engagements ending in favor of J-10?

What we do know is that Su-27 units from 1st and 2nd div had their planes for far longer than any of the J-10 units and flanker units is arguably the most aggressively trained in PLAAF.

Ouch your aggressive for sure, its all relative, look at what i was replying to genius, what i meant was that just mentioning a exercise doesnot prove anything at-all.

To all that i know these two do not even serve the same purpose (not the type) so it can be a worthless comparison, and if they are to be compared for all i care J-10 might fly, carry a 100 chaps, return to fight and bring eternal world peace.

[tphuang]

I do not think use exercises result without knowing the detail can judge any jets' performance. There is a news not long ago clam that J8B give a J10 a run in a dog fight. But without the detail we can not make any conclusion from this. At least I don’t think anyone will seem J8B is a better jet compare to J10.

and you believe that kind of rubbish report? The reports of J-10 whipping flankers have appeared in many official reports and confirmed by numerous interviews and big shots. There was a report a while back about su-27 beating J-10 which turned out to be a complete hoax.


of course the uninformed may just see this as excuses.......(and ozzy has in no way come to this conclusion through the f22's recent losses against the typhoon during exercises........in fact im sure the us pilots wern't even trying)

F-22's losses to typhoon? when was this. And it shouldn't be too surprising that typhoon can get the odd kills on super hornets.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

of course the uninformed may just see this as excuses.......(and ozzy has in no way come to this conclusion through the f22's recent losses against the typhoon during exercises........in fact im sure the us pilots wern't even trying)

:onfloorl: :rolleyes:

[Ozzy Blizzard]

F-22's losses to typhoon? when was this. And it shouldn't be too surprising that typhoon can get the odd kills on super hornets.

"Unconfirmed" you see. The story was aired by a UK reporter. Aparently the yanks were soooo embaressed that typhoon trounced raptor that they did a cover up becasue if the public knew how much money they had wasted on 5th gen when they just could have joined the Eurofighter consortium, there would have been massive public outrage (had to protect the integrity of the state you know). :onfloorl:

Apparently this total devistateing "loss" jaffo is refering too which shows the inferiority of the raptor was an unconfirmed "rumor" that a typhoon got a lock on the F-22 at "supriseingly long range" and "dominated" the WVR fight because of its maneuverability and HOBS missile capability. All great news for you typhoon fanboys but i have only a couple of questions: 1) at what range was the thyphoon killed by an AMRAAM or was the F-22A "out of ammo" or not alowed to take a maximum range AMRAAm shot? 2) As for the WVR fight how does this shed any light on the platforms capabilities when one is HOBS heater equiped and the other is not (anyone familiiar with the capabilities of the AIM 9L vs the AIM 132 should now exactly why the F-22A may have lost in a real dogfight)? What do you think the value of such a report is?????

[jaffo4011]

"Unconfirmed" you see. The story was aired by a UK reporter. Aparently the yanks were soooo embaressed that typhoon trounced raptor that they did a cover up becasue if the public knew how much money they had wasted on 5th gen when they just could have joined the Eurofighter consortium, there would have been massive public outrage (had to protect the integrity of the state you know). :onfloorl:

Apparently this total devistateing "loss" jaffo is refering too which shows the inferiority of the raptor was an unconfirmed "rumor" that a typhoon got a lock on the F-22 at "supriseingly long range" and "dominated" the WVR fight because of its maneuverability and HOBS missile capability. All great news for you typhoon fanboys but i have only a couple of questions: 1) at what range was the thyphoon killed by an AMRAAM or was the F-22A "out of ammo" or not alowed to take a maximum range AMRAAm shot? 2) As for the WVR fight how does this shed any light on the platforms capabilities when one is HOBS heater equiped and the other is not (anyone familiiar with the capabilities of the AIM 9L vs the AIM 132 should now exactly why the F-22A may have lost in a real dogfight)? What do you think the value of such a report is?????

hey,dont shoot the messenger.....i only deal in facts with reliable sources;

Source: "international AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45. - ISNB: 1-880588-91-9 (case bound) or ISBN: 1473-9917.

they will all be at red flag this year tho,so the f22 may have a chance to redeem itself(at which point ozzy will no doubt be extolling the benefits of such exercises!)