PDA

View Full Version : China Close To Testing Next-Gen Fighter




cheetah
November 18th, 2009, 10:35 AM
A Chinese fighter of nominally the same technology generation as the Lockheed Martin F-22 will soon enter flight testing, while a jet airlifter larger than the Airbus A400M should be unveiled by year-end.

Beijing’s fighter announcement suggests a serious failing in U.S. intelligence assessments, mocking a July 16 statement of U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates that China would have no fifth-generation fighters by 2020. Industrial competition looks more remote than strategic competition, however, since China will want to fill domestic requirements before offering the aircraft abroad, even if it judges export sales to be a wise policy.

The new fighter “is currently under development,” says Gen. He Weirong, deputy air force chief. “[It] may soon undertake its first flight, quickly enter flight testing and then quickly equip the forces.

“According to the current situation, [the entry into service] may take another eight to 10 years,” he adds.

No details of the aircraft were given, but it is almost certainly designed for supersonic cruise without afterburning. In April, Adm. Wu Shengli, the navy chief, listed supercruising fighters among equipment that his service needed. Notably, all the other equipment on his wish list looked quite achievable by the end of the next decade, matching the timing that the air force now suggests for the fighter.

China classifies aircraft of the F-22’s technology level as fourth-generation fighters, although they are called fifth-generation aircraft in the West. China’s current advanced fighter, the J-10, is locally called a third-generation aircraft, which in Chinese terms means that it is comparable with the Lockheed Martin F-16.

Work on “the fourth-generation aircraft is now proceeding intensely,” He says.

Whether the upcoming fighter is really comparable with the F-22 remains to be seen. Low radar reflectivity would not be surprising, since aircraft and missiles with stealthy shapes are now popping up in many countries, including South Korea as recently as last month (AW&ST Oct. 26-Nov. 2, p. 42). But sensor performance, information fusion and maximum supercruise speed would also be assessed critically in measuring a claim to have caught up with technology levels that the U.S. did not deploy until 2005.

The existence of a Chinese fifth-generation fighter, usually tagged J-XX, has been rumored for years without official confirmation.

If the aircraft does go into service before 2020, then at that time China may well have jumped past Britain, France and other Western European countries in terms of deployed, domestically developed combat-aircraft technology. That will depend on how quickly those countries move to field combat drones to replace current strike aircraft, says Andrew Brookes of the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
Brookes takes seriously the Chinese objective of technology equivalent to the F-22, and he sees no reason to doubt that the F-22 would be the standard against which they would judge their design. The know-how can be imported.

“The Russians have the technology and the Chinese have the money,” he says. “If they really set that as a target, then I think they can do it.”

The aircraft may not bother Western manufacturers in export markets, Brookes suggests, simply because an equivalent of the F-22 would be a destabilizing export that China would be prefer to keep to itself.

Even if China decides that it wants to export the fighter, Lockheed Martin should by then be well entrenched with the F-35, which should be mature and reliable at that point. Other manufactures may not be so well placed, however.

Gen. He made his remarks during an interview on China Central Television as part of the celebrations of the 60th anniversary of the air force of the People’s Republic of China. (The general’s surname is pronounced as “her” but without the “r.”)

China is probably working on two fifth-generation concepts, says Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center. One of those concepts, appearing most commonly in bits and pieces of evidence that have turned up from time to time, would be a heavy twin-engine fighter probably of about the same size as the F-22. The other is a single-engine aircraft probably closer to the Lockheed Martin F-35.

Gen. He could be referring to either of the aircraft when predicting an entry into service during the next decade. Fisher’s bet is that he is talking about the twin-engine concept.

Like Brookes, Fisher believes China is realistically aiming at the F-22’s technology level. “One has to assume that the People’s Liberation Army is confident in its projections, as it almost never makes such comments about future military programs, especially one that has been as closely held as its next-generation fighter.

“As such, one has to be asking very hard questions: How did the U.S. intelligence community get this one wrong? And inasmuch as no one expects the F-35 to replace the F-22 in the air superiority role, is it time to acknowledge that F-22 production termination is premature and that a much higher number is needed to sustain deterrence in Asia?”

In his July 16 speech, Gates said that even in 2025 China would have but a handful of fifth-generation aircraft.
The new Chinese fighter could come from the Chengdu or Shenyang plants of Avic Defense.

Gen. He says the Chinese air force plans to emphasize development of four capabilities: reconnaissance and early warning, air strike, strategic supply, and air and missile defense.

The J-10 began large-scale service entry in 2006, state media say.

When Wu raised the prospect of a supercruising fighter, an easy answer seemed to be an advanced version of the J-10. That looks less likely now that He describes the future concept as a full generation ahead of the J-10.

“I believe the Chinese have a difficult road if their design is tied to the J-10,” says a U.S. Air Force officer involved in the development of the F-35. “Significantly reduced signature requires more than coatings. It requires an integrated design philosophy with the right shaping, the right structure and the right surface coatings.”

Fisher assumes that China is developing improved fourth-generation fighters in parallel with the fifth generation.

The existence of the airlifter has been known for several years, if only because pictures of it have appeared fleetingly in presentations by the Chinese aviation conglomerate Avic.

As expected, it turns out to be a product of Avic’s large-airplane subsidiary, Avic Aircraft and, more specifically, of the subsidiary’s core plant, Xi’an Aircraft.

Avic Aircraft General Manager Hu Xiaofeng says the airlifter is in the 200-metric-ton class and will be unveiled at the end of this year.

In fact, its design has already unveiled in pictures shown by state media. The four-engine aircraft adopts the universal high-wing, T-tail configuration. The wing is mounted on top of the circular body, rather than passing through a deep segment of it and cutting out much of the usable cross-section. In that respect it is like the A400M, Ilyushin Il-76 and Kawasaki C-X but unlike the C-17, whose embedded wing presents less frontal area.
The main gear of the Chinese aircraft is housed in very protuberant sponsons, like those of the C-17.

A photograph of the cockpit shows five electronic displays of moderate size and conventional transport-style control columns. Engines are not revealed but would presumably be imported from Russia. A wind-tunnel model shows the engines are enclosed in long nacelles, like those of the Perm PS-90 from Russia.

The PS-90 has a standard maximum thrust of 35,300 lb. in its latest version. The C-17, with a gross weight of 265 tons, is powered by four Pratt & Whitney F117 engines of 40,400 lb. thrust.

The airlifter’s fuselage appears to be of conventional metal construction. The aircraft will be significantly larger than the A400M, which has a 141-metric-ton gross weight.

Hu says it has been independently developed in China. However, his parent company, Avic, has a long history of cooperation with Ukrainian airlifter specialist Antonov.


With David A. Fulghum in Washington.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/CHINA111309.xml&headline=China Close To Testing Next-Gen Fighter

Admin. Up until this point you were doing fine. Don't however try to bait other members or trot out silly comments or you will end up being treated as a troll. It wasn't necessary and you have polluted your credibility by posting such drivel. Take it as a warning - and from a Mod who has asian blood coursing through their veins.




dtwn
November 18th, 2009, 12:10 PM
Testing, by no means IOC. For the matter, General He himself states 9-10 years, and 9-10 years = 2019/2020? Add another year or two to achieve IOC and you have it at 2020 or later. Sure, Gates may have estimated 2025, but considering the secretive nature of Chinese development, does it surprise you that the estimates are off?

And your part 1) is simply inflammatory and pointless.

Feanor
November 18th, 2009, 07:37 PM
Additionally I would treat with a healthy does of skepticism the supposed capabilities of this fighter. If it's nominally fifth gen, what does this mean in practical terms? We're skeptical of even the Russian PAK-FA, and Russia has AESA, has experience in RCS-reduction (including operationally on the Tu-160, and experimentally on the Su-47) and has extremely advanced 4.5th gen aircraft. Even so, it's questionable on how capable a next-gen fighter will be. Even more so with this Chinese announcement.

tphuang
November 18th, 2009, 11:43 PM
I wrote this in my blog in the second half of this entry
China Air and Naval Power: US/China relations + PLA transparency (http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2009/11/uschina-relations-pla-transparency.html)
to sum up, this will happen. The deputy commander of PLAAF will not come out to talk about a strategically important project like this without assurances from people below with fear of embarassment. When it mentions service entry, that means FOC if you look at the fact that it referred to J-10's service entry as 2006.

Feanor
November 19th, 2009, 05:41 AM
So best case, everything goes as planned, it will be at FOC aroudn 2018-19.

King Comm
November 26th, 2009, 05:42 AM
Additionally I would treat with a healthy does of skepticism the supposed capabilities of this fighter. If it's nominally fifth gen, what does this mean in practical terms? We're skeptical of even the Russian PAK-FA, and Russia has AESA, has experience in RCS-reduction (including operationally on the Tu-160, and experimentally on the Su-47) and has extremely advanced 4.5th gen aircraft. Even so, it's questionable on how capable a next-gen fighter will be. Even more so with this Chinese announcement.
If you think about it, China already has a lot of the things necessary for a true 4th generation fighter.

For one, China already has three types of AESA in service, in KJ-2000 and KJ-200 AWACS and Type 052C destroyer, one that can fit into a fighter shouldn't be beyond reach. Advanced avionics,

JF-17 features a total glass cockpit, a weapon and mission management computer built around a powerful processor, and distributed power management system. J-10B features a wide angle holographic HUD, large LCD displays have being displayed in various air shows.

Engines, the reason why most people believe that China won't come up with a sufficient engine in time is because of the time it took the Americans to come up with F119 after F100. However, work on F119 only started after F100 was completed, if the new Chinese engine didn't start after WS10 was completed, but ran parallel to it, than it could come out a lot sooner than people expect, and even if the new engine can not be ready in time, Saturn 117S is still available.

As to the aerodynamic layout, as early as 2001, the designer of J-10, Song Wencong, proposed a radical design featuring high degree of instability in the pitch axis, delta wings with LERX, directional control canard, and small all moving rudders, though the original paper discussed Caret type intake, judging by what we have seen so far, DSI is more likely. Over the years, LERX was tested on JF-17, DSI was tested on both JF-17 and J-10B, and directional control canard was tested on J-10.

So the only thing we know virtually nothing about is stealth capability. But rumour has it that China obtained pieces of the downed F-117 from Serbia.

DarthAmerica
December 2nd, 2009, 04:11 PM
There is a lot going under the hood and external to the F-22/35 that make them so great. Again, think systems. Even if the Chinese could make an aircraft like the F-22 with it's exact performance characteristics it would still not have the avionics or benefit from the external enablers all USAF platforms do. This isn't a realistic threat until will into the 2020's considering the bar will continue to be raised and they are playing catch up. The rate of advance is exponential and not linear.

-DA

Feanor
December 2nd, 2009, 05:44 PM
If you think about it, China already has a lot of the things necessary for a true 4th generation fighter.

For one, China already has three types of AESA in service, in KJ-2000 and KJ-200 AWACS and Type 052C destroyer, one that can fit into a fighter shouldn't be beyond reach. Advanced avionics,

JF-17 features a total glass cockpit, a weapon and mission management computer built around a powerful processor, and distributed power management system. J-10B features a wide angle holographic HUD, large LCD displays have being displayed in various air shows.

So first thing is first. AESA arrays on destroyers, AWACS, and GBAD is different from operational AESA on a fighter. Not to mention I would state that it takes 2nd or 3rd gen AESA for a true 5th gen. Yes China can produce capable 4th gen fighters (though not without some help). They are not a few years away from an operating 5th gen.

Engines, the reason why most people believe that China won't come up with a sufficient engine in time is because of the time it took the Americans to come up with F119 after F100. However, work on F119 only started after F100 was completed, if the new Chinese engine didn't start after WS10 was completed, but ran parallel to it, than it could come out a lot sooner than people expect, and even if the new engine can not be ready in time, Saturn 117S is still available.

Provided that Russia is willing to export license and ToT for the Al-41 (117S). Hasn't been the case recently. And if it's developed in parallel, how much more advanced really is it? Without operating experience from the WS-10, a new engine design would be limited in terms of how far it can improve.

As to the aerodynamic layout, as early as 2001, the designer of J-10, Song Wencong, proposed a radical design featuring high degree of instability in the pitch axis, delta wings with LERX, directional control canard, and small all moving rudders, though the original paper discussed Caret type intake, judging by what we have seen so far, DSI is more likely. Over the years, LERX was tested on JF-17, DSI was tested on both JF-17 and J-10B, and directional control canard was tested on J-10.

So the only thing we know virtually nothing about is stealth capability. But rumour has it that China obtained pieces of the downed F-117 from Serbia.

The airframe issue is one of combining multi-aspect LO with aerodynamic viability. The F-117 is ancient in this regard, practically useless. How much they could glean from obtaining some pieces of it is questionable.

Again the Chinese are moving fast, but not that fast. Some things require time to build up.

tphuang
December 7th, 2009, 01:21 AM
There is a lot going under the hood and external to the F-22/35 that make them so great. Again, think systems. Even if the Chinese could make an aircraft like the F-22 with it's exact performance characteristics it would still not have the avionics or benefit from the external enablers all USAF platforms do. This isn't a realistic threat until will into the 2020's considering the bar will continue to be raised and they are playing catch up. The rate of advance is exponential and not linear.

-DA
actually, avionics is one part that they are not as far behind the West. If they can get the radar signature down to the level of F-22, that would be amazing. And let's not forget, engine remains the achille's heel of PLA

Toptob
December 15th, 2009, 05:33 PM
I wrote this in my blog in the second half of this entry
China Air and Naval Power: US/China relations + PLA transparency (http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2009/11/uschina-relations-pla-transparency.html)
to sum up, this will happen. The deputy commander of PLAAF will not come out to talk about a strategically important project like this without assurances from people below with fear of embarassment. When it mentions service entry, that means FOC if you look at the fact that it referred to J-10's service entry as 2006.

Aww bitchin, I totally dig your blog dude. Just a shame you dont post more often :(, but keep up the good work and the valuable insights!

actually, avionics is one part that they are not as far behind the West. If they can get the radar signature down to the level of F-22, that would be amazing. And let's not forget, engine remains the achille's heel of PLA

If you say so, tho I remain sceptical. Because the F-22 and especially the F-35 avionics are realllllly advanced, and the level of integration and the amount of computer power are quite staggering.

So first thing is first. AESA arrays on destroyers, AWACS, and GBAD is different from operational AESA on a fighter. Not to mention I would state that it takes 2nd or 3rd gen AESA for a true 5th gen. Yes China can produce capable 4th gen fighters (though not without some help). They are not a few years away from an operating 5th gen.


I think I dare to add that every system works different on aircraft. Think about it, power supply, weight, size are ,much less of an issue on a ship or a large airborne platform than on a fighter plane.

King Comm
December 22nd, 2009, 07:03 PM
So first thing is first. AESA arrays on destroyers, AWACS, and GBAD is different from operational AESA on a fighter. Not to mention I would state that it takes 2nd or 3rd gen AESA for a true 5th gen. Yes China can produce capable 4th gen fighters (though not without some help). They are not a few years away from an operating 5th gen..
Well, from Chinese official source, about the feats of the director of 607 institute, (http://xy.nuaa.edu.cn/xyh/news.aspx?id=612) mentioning the completion of AESA for the "X gen" fighter as one of his major achievments. The prototype was completed in 2008 and tested on an airborne testbed (Y-8CB?). And now the Chinese have 8-10 years to perfect it.

Provided that Russia is willing to export license and ToT for the Al-41 (117S). Hasn't been the case recently. And if it's developed in parallel, how much more advanced really is it? Without operating experience from the WS-10, a new engine design would be limited in terms of how far it can improve.
Keep in mind that WS-10 is based on the older WS-6 and CFM-56, both came out in the 70's, the technologies were already quite mature when WS-10 started, the new engine could have just used a lot more newer, and untested technologies, which explains why it takes much longer to complete than WS-10. But for the first flight which will happen soon, both WS-10A and AL-31F or even D-30K can be used, Supercruise capability is not needed for the maiden flight and ground testing.


The airframe issue is one of combining multi-aspect LO with aerodynamic viability. The F-117 is ancient in this regard, practically useless. How much they could glean from obtaining some pieces of it is questionable.
Pieces of the F-117 provides information on radar absorbent materials.

Note that F-22's aerodynamic layout was set in the early 80's, understandings of aerodynamics, flight control, and signature reduction progressed massively since then, just look at the X-36 technology demonstrator, the ideas are way ahead of F-22, and it's from the mid-90's, So basically, if the Chinese can reach the same level in aerodynamics and flight control as the US in the late 90's, something with superior maneouverability and supercruise capability, and comparable or slightly inferior low observability is achievable.

gf0012-aust
December 22nd, 2009, 08:00 PM
Pieces of the F-117 provides information on radar absorbent materials.

Note that F-22's aerodynamic layout was set in the early 80's, understandings aerodynamics, flight control, and signature reduction progressed massively since then, just look at the X-36 technology demonstrator, the ideas are way ahead of F-22, and it's from the mid-90's, So basically, if the Chinese can reach the same level in aerodynamics and flight control as the US in the late 90's, something with superior maneouverability and supercruise capability, and comparable or slightly inferior low observability is achievable.


US sig management is not based around the F-22. Bear in mind that the F-22 is fundamentally their 3rd iteration of an operational deliberately designed LO platform. It's a bow tie design which is already being supplanted. In development terms although the JSF is not as "superior" at an RCS level, the tech for it as generationally (physical) more advanced. Its RCS is relative to its mission. In other areas bear in mind that the US is also on an equiv 6th physical generation of unmanned asset and that in technical terms, those platforms are also technically superior to the F-22.

also, looking at RAM for the F-117 is really 30 year old technology, and in real terms (from Have Blue genealogy) its close to 40 years old. That RAM was also specific to that iteration of sig management - it is positively archaic in contemp terms in fact its not that far removed from what the US was doing with their ferret surveillance lightning bugs.

You just can't pull tech from one asset and attach it to something else, thats not how it works at an engineering level

Wall83
March 10th, 2010, 11:35 AM
So I found this article and picture on another forum. Looks intresting.
Its just a mockup but it sure looks like the chines has come a long way.

3997

optionsss
March 10th, 2010, 12:25 PM
So I found this article and picture on another forum. Looks intresting.
Its just a mockup but it sure looks like the chines has come a long way.

3997

It is a nice CG done by someone, but it is fake and it is really old too.

SABRE
March 10th, 2010, 01:14 PM
So I found this article and picture on another forum. Looks intresting.
Its just a mockup but it sure looks like the chines has come a long way.

3997

Its a Photoshop. The person who made this pic cleared it up on Sinodefenceforum right when the picture began to appear all over the internet.

lizs
March 11th, 2010, 03:54 PM
Certain internet rumor said the prototype is already finished for taxiing test. The deadline for maiden flight would be around April 30, 2010. Let's wait and see.

Feanor
March 11th, 2010, 05:17 PM
If it's flying this early, it's not likely to be a 5th gen. Probably a 4.5th gen, something like an advanced F-15, or F-16, with limited RCS reduction worked in.

latenlazy
March 11th, 2010, 11:36 PM
If it's flying this early, it's not likely to be a 5th gen. Probably a 4.5th gen, something like an advanced F-15, or F-16, with limited RCS reduction worked in.

The only thing I have more trouble believing than the notion that the J-xx is a 4.5 gen is the notion that it's almost ready for maiden flight. I don't expect to see it for another year, at least.

Feanor
March 12th, 2010, 12:58 AM
Well what do you think it is?

latenlazy
March 12th, 2010, 02:21 AM
Well what do you think it is?

Overzealous fanboys. A lot of Chinese nationalists don't like being seen underneath Russia's shadow. The PAK-FA's first flight will definitely be getting some push back from Chinese netizens. In any case Chinese internet rumours are worse than gossip in a sowing circle.

Chrisious
March 12th, 2010, 12:15 PM
May have seen an overhead shot from the rear of the airframe on Wall83's photo. Unfortunately haven't been able to find it again so if it was then it has possibly been pulled. The photo showed it still in yellow primer with engineers working on the upper surfaces. Definitely had twin tail fins which would point to twin engines. Could have been something else, though believe I was looking around at photo's of the J-10 at the time.