weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
China's J-11
- Thread starter T-95
- Start date
goldenpanda
New Member
Weasel, I'd certainly like to think Chinese are more "ingenious" than the 200 countries that cannot build either a fighter or an engine. I imagine Chinese just twiddle with their thumbs, then "poof", some thing will come out from the deepness of their "ingenuity"...
Editted Out: Please do not insult another poster
Editted Out: Please do not insult another poster
Last edited by a moderator:
Long break? Perhaps because the JH-7 wasn't given an odds on favorite to succeed, and development of the licensed version, the WS-9, was facing problems. Rather than just copy the Spey, the WS-9 may also be boosting the power, and that was probably hard for the Chinese state of metallurgy, which also prevented them from making an R-27 copy (engine of the MiG-23). The WS-9 went into production in 2004 after China mastered single crystal blade production. With that development, everything fell into place, including the WS-10A.
Big wrongo there. The Su-27 was licensed to China. The AL-31F wasn't.
Big difference.
With the licensing of Su-27 techs, the Chinese knew well enough of the plane to make modifications of their own, like they did with the Z-9, J-7, T-55, etc,.
Yes, but B-2 and AEGIS techs seem even more guarded, and China apparently still got their ways.
WS-10A appears for me having a more western bent. Even the power ratings are similar to the PW F-100-220, -229 and GE F110-129, 24,000lbs for WS-10 and 29,000lbs for WS-10A. But why didn't they go for 27,500lbs like AL-31F?
Physically like the American engines, the Chinese engines seem to have a larger diameter than the AL-31F, and I placed the weight around 1760kg based on 7.5 to 1 TWR. That weight puts it right on the same weight as the F110 engines, and more than the AL-31F at 1574kg. Oddly enough, it is GE that has a limited partnership with Shenyang Liming developing stationary powerplant engines.
So Weasel1962, you don't have any proof but just some personal speculations.
I have no problem with that. I was just interested in finding out whether you have any information (rather than speculation) on WS10A or not.
Anyway here are some bits that I know:
1. WS9/Spey license production was a pure political decision made a former Chinese leader Wang Zhen. He's a famous brave army general who knew nothing about aviation. But he had made some personal impact on China's military aviation development. His decision on buying Spey license was one of his famous jokes in china's aviation industry. Basically most people in the industry disagreed with that idea. The selected manufacturer and the R&D institute in XiAn city had no interest in this project. Coupled with the fact that PLAAF rejected the plane (JH7) in the early 1980s that this engine was targeted, WS9 did not make much progress until early 1990s when PLANAF's interest in JH7 reignited WS9. But still the manufacturer and design institute was not interested in it. They were seriously proposing to use WS10 on a modified JH7. As far as I know, it's only in the mid-late 1990s that WS9 was finally restarted, probably because China thought it'd better to make do with the current JH7 design and discard all the radical design changes.
2. WS10 was started in the mid 1980s, and it has been the top priority of China's aviation engine R&D and manufacturers. AL31 was never licensed to China. Even India only got the license in the last few years. China only got the complete overhaul tech transfer, not for manufacturing. Given the amount of resources poured into WS10, if WS10A is a license copy of AL31, it would be really a shame to spend 20+years to just start limited serial production last year ratther than full speed mass production.
Compare to India who only got AL31 license 3 years (?) ago, now they can produce TVC AL31 for their Su30MKI, as far as I HEARD.
I have no problem with that. I was just interested in finding out whether you have any information (rather than speculation) on WS10A or not.
Anyway here are some bits that I know:
1. WS9/Spey license production was a pure political decision made a former Chinese leader Wang Zhen. He's a famous brave army general who knew nothing about aviation. But he had made some personal impact on China's military aviation development. His decision on buying Spey license was one of his famous jokes in china's aviation industry. Basically most people in the industry disagreed with that idea. The selected manufacturer and the R&D institute in XiAn city had no interest in this project. Coupled with the fact that PLAAF rejected the plane (JH7) in the early 1980s that this engine was targeted, WS9 did not make much progress until early 1990s when PLANAF's interest in JH7 reignited WS9. But still the manufacturer and design institute was not interested in it. They were seriously proposing to use WS10 on a modified JH7. As far as I know, it's only in the mid-late 1990s that WS9 was finally restarted, probably because China thought it'd better to make do with the current JH7 design and discard all the radical design changes.
2. WS10 was started in the mid 1980s, and it has been the top priority of China's aviation engine R&D and manufacturers. AL31 was never licensed to China. Even India only got the license in the last few years. China only got the complete overhaul tech transfer, not for manufacturing. Given the amount of resources poured into WS10, if WS10A is a license copy of AL31, it would be really a shame to spend 20+years to just start limited serial production last year ratther than full speed mass production.
Compare to India who only got AL31 license 3 years (?) ago, now they can produce TVC AL31 for their Su30MKI, as far as I HEARD.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
When the J-10 program started in 1986, the original idea was to equip GE F110. Due to the Tiananmen Square incident and breakup of the Soviet Union, it was no longer an option after 1989. An alternative was needed, which came from Russia. The AL-31F needed more air intake than the F110, which caused a major redesign of the inlet, and the six support beams to be added to the intake.
J-11B is NOT a twin seater. I like to think of it as China first successful attempt to make a fighter-bomber. Previous planes such as J-11A and J-10, capable as they may be, are designed mainly for air superiority. The JH-7A flies like a brick and cannot equipped medium range A2A missiles if I'm right. J-11B is the first one that can do both, having it all in one package.
The best way to tell a J-11B apart from Su-27SK and J-11A is the holographic HUD in the cockpit. It also features the first working PESA developed by Nanjing 14th institute as one insider in Chinese forums pointed out, but he didn't give out much more than that.
J-11B is NOT a twin seater. I like to think of it as China first successful attempt to make a fighter-bomber. Previous planes such as J-11A and J-10, capable as they may be, are designed mainly for air superiority. The JH-7A flies like a brick and cannot equipped medium range A2A missiles if I'm right. J-11B is the first one that can do both, having it all in one package.
The best way to tell a J-11B apart from Su-27SK and J-11A is the holographic HUD in the cockpit. It also features the first working PESA developed by Nanjing 14th institute as one insider in Chinese forums pointed out, but he didn't give out much more than that.
Some points.
The AL-31F does not use more air than the GE F110. Its more like the other way around, because of the GE's greater power. In addition the GE also weighs more and has a larger diameter. Perhaps you are either referring to the PW F100 engine (used in the F-16A) or the PW F1120 engine (used in the Lavi). The support/blades would still be there regardless of engine used. If you checked behind the J-8II intake, you will see similar support/blades.
The JH-7A official mockup (or FBC-1A in defense expo displays) show PL-11 and PL-12 under the wings. The maneuverbility level should be comparable to an F-4 Phantom.
The best way to tell apart a J-11B from the other J-11s is that the plane has an entirely black nose that looks its made of carbon. Electrostatic strips appear on the sides of the nose. There is no way you can mistake that with other Russian made Flankers either. Other Flankers feature either a white or a grey nose. The PLAAF Flankers use a dark grey nose with a mouth like cutout in the bottom. Except for the J-11B.
J-10s and J-8Fs also feature carbon black radomes with strips. JH-7As however use either a green or grey radome.
The radar on the J-11B is not a PESA but a mechanically scanning slotted array.
Another simple way of identifying a J-11B is the missile it carries---PL-8, PL-11 or PL-12.
The AL-31F does not use more air than the GE F110. Its more like the other way around, because of the GE's greater power. In addition the GE also weighs more and has a larger diameter. Perhaps you are either referring to the PW F100 engine (used in the F-16A) or the PW F1120 engine (used in the Lavi). The support/blades would still be there regardless of engine used. If you checked behind the J-8II intake, you will see similar support/blades.
The JH-7A official mockup (or FBC-1A in defense expo displays) show PL-11 and PL-12 under the wings. The maneuverbility level should be comparable to an F-4 Phantom.
The best way to tell apart a J-11B from the other J-11s is that the plane has an entirely black nose that looks its made of carbon. Electrostatic strips appear on the sides of the nose. There is no way you can mistake that with other Russian made Flankers either. Other Flankers feature either a white or a grey nose. The PLAAF Flankers use a dark grey nose with a mouth like cutout in the bottom. Except for the J-11B.
J-10s and J-8Fs also feature carbon black radomes with strips. JH-7As however use either a green or grey radome.
The radar on the J-11B is not a PESA but a mechanically scanning slotted array.
Another simple way of identifying a J-11B is the missile it carries---PL-8, PL-11 or PL-12.
J-11A should be more or less equal to 80x F-15C. J-11B should be about somewhat better than current F-15C - but then again we dont know much reliable info about J-11B.
Is China's quality control better than Russia's cuz i know for a fact the IAF are having trouble with the Su-30MKI's engine and said it only lasts for 300 some hours before it has to go into maintenance again but then again it's a complex engine that is still in the test stages plus TVC puts a huge burden on maintenance.
Remember what whatever MTBO is given for engines or other system is just "generic" value, what is greatly depended on usage conditions. It is perfectly possible what IAF used engines on more heavy regimes than "average" and as such engines do not reach listed "generic" MTBO values. In that case obviosly "low" engines life is no-one fault. Of course, there could be problems with new TVC'ed engines also.
china doesn't have AESA, does it
no AESA radar for production aircraft, but AESA radar for just about everything else. I'm waiting to see the next Y-8 radar plane pictures, because it's alleged to be testing the new AESA radar for J-10.china doesn't have AESA, does it
Is it true that J-10 is going to be fitted with TVC, I know that the F-16 will have that upgrade available in 2010-2015?
If it true, why don't they do that with the J-11's and it's variants? Wouldn't it make it infinitely better than the F-15C (in dog-fights at least)?
well, they would have to do modifications to accomodate the TVC engine. It is going to be tougher to do it to J-11 than J-10, since they know J-10's structure/aerodynamics far better. Also, the main issue is that J-10 is China's best A2A platform, whereas J-11 is better for its range and payload. So, J-11's future development is going more in the F-15E and naval direction. Whereas J-10 will continuously upgraded for better A2A capabilities.
AESA is not a new thing, problem is how to made it in an appropriate size to fit in to an aircraft.