What's new

Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

.
Uiuiuiuiuiui ... what a lot to reply !

Funny indeed because It was @long_ who posted it up in his #8077. Of course I maybe wrong if you posted earlier than him. I know it did not say it was a C expressively, that is why We have to make an inferential judgement based on what we got.

I think I posted it in the Zhuhai thread first, but anyway it does not make ac difference. It is the same bird.

What do you mean by one of the two WS-10 powered J-10B? Previously you and me agreed that only 1035(prototype J-10B) and 1004(prototype J-10A) were powered by WS-10 on public knowledge,Right? Do you agree with me now there are more than 1 non-J10A like of J-10 powered by WS-10?

I mean the two WS-10B-trial-equipped final batch 01 J-10B c/n 1-54 & 1-55. So YES, we have altogether four WS-10-powered J-10s of any version confirmed. All more are speculation.


I don't know how the code numbers are written for the production J-10C, but it was said for those 5 prototype J-10C, the c/n were written in small font as J10C1051/2/3/4/5 only on the both sides of the prototype's rudder. Of course, no image on public domain to confirm it. Perhaps you can ask @星海军事 to sort it out.

IMO as by the reports I read in the same way as on all J-1A and B ... now only as J-10C02xx ! But sadly I cannot confirm it since theses numbers are too small to see on the images we know so far.

C'mon, I have just gave your some claimed-to-be-J-10C images, but you just didn't spend time or pay attention to notice the minor differences. I ll use the same images to prove my point again.

Example1.
The following images created by you in your above post shows they are different, so you were in your saying that
"Just look at the tail, it is exactly that bird as shown already so often. It is one of the final two batch 01 J-10B"
Source: https://defence.pk/threads/chengdu-...fighter-air-craft.3218/page-551#ixzz4SZhOl2ja
The left one has one more yellow color device(antenna?) next to the lights on the vertical tale. So there is one more J10 powered by WS-10 other than 1035.


I did look at them ... very closely but IMO You are over-interpreting minor differences like this yellow "thing".



Example 2
This said first production J-10C in the army service has a blade-shaped antenna next to the lights on the tale, which makes it a second one different than 1035.

YES exactly ... that's one of the two WS-10B-trial-equipped final batch 01 J-10B aka c/n 1-54 or 1-55. So YES, this is one of the two other WS-10-powered J-10s besides 1035 & 1004.


2.49 has the same blade and the same location (towards the front edge), but it doesn't have MAW

Correct ... which makes it a plain a simple standard J-10B batch 01 !

Example 3
Another production J-10C seems have a very different nozzle color than the 1035

IMO this darker ring is easily explainable with longer use. The longer this engine - seems to be indeed some sort of modification on the latest WS-10-batch, since it can be seen on some Flankers too - the darker this ring becomes. Not sure why, I really would not jump on that waggon to tell each and every slightly differently coloured engine as a new type.


Just because no images of the production J-10C in yellow with designated c/n doesn't mean it doesn't exist. People have seen them claimed due to the similarity of their appearance we should use "black nozzle is B, white is C" to tell which is which. Using minor changes of antenna or MAW are not reliable because even 2.01/02/03 production J-10B are different than the 2.07 and onwards in the same batch.

It is. If the claim is true that Batch 2 is J-10C, then why there is no single image of the 5 prototype J-10C or any prototype available? Why 5 prototypes had to be produced just for some minor changes of antenna/MAW? Why they are so secret while we have all these so-claimed production J-10C in yellow color posted up here on almost daily basis? It does not make sense, does it?

Agreed, but since we have no prove for green men on Mars, that does not mean they exist. The typical problem with trying to prove something with the absence of a contrary proof.

1. You are the only one who speaks about 5 prototype J-10C ? IMO these are no images, since they don't exist. We only have one confirmed, namely 1051, that's all. As such all Your following arguments are mute ... IMO the differences between B & C are only avionics-wise and if the systems are running, there's no need for additional prototypes, since aerodynamically all tests can be done with J-10B. Again, IMO it makes perfectly sense.

But finally again: You still owe me an explanation, what do You mean with "white" and "black" engines on a J-10B or C. So what's Your difference to tell a J-10 a B and what to call it C ?? I still don't get it.


Maybe the only solution to our discussion is to wait until we get a clear image showing us the c/n.

All the best,
Deino
 
.
Uiuiuiuiuiui ... what a lot to reply !



I think I posted it in the Zhuhai thread first, but anyway it does not make ac difference. It is the same bird.



I mean the two WS-10B-trial-equipped final batch 01 J-10B c/n 1-54 & 1-55. So YES, we have altogether four WS-10-powered J-10s of any version confirmed. All more are speculation.




IMO as by the reports I read in the same way as on all J-1A and B ... now only as J-10C02xx ! But sadly I cannot confirm it since theses numbers are too small to see on the images we know so far.




I did look at them ... very closely but IMO You are over-interpreting minor differences like this yellow "thing".





YES exactly ... that's one of the two WS-10B-trial-equipped final batch 01 J-10B aka c/n 1-54 or 1-55. So YES, this is one of the two other WS-10-powered J-10s besides 1035 & 1004.




Correct ... which makes it a plain a simple standard J-10B batch 01 !



IMO this darker ring is easily explainable with longer use. The longer this engine - seems to be indeed some sort of modification on the latest WS-10-batch, since it can be seen on some Flankers too - the darker this ring becomes. Not sure why, I really would not jump on that waggon to tell each and every slightly differently coloured engine as a new type.




Agreed, but since we have no prove for green men on Mars, that does not mean they exist. The typical problem with trying to prove something with the absence of a contrary proof.

1. You are the only one who speaks about 5 prototype J-10C ? IMO these are no images, since they don't exist. We only have one confirmed, namely 1051, that's all. As such all Your following arguments are mute ... IMO the differences between B & C are only avionics-wise and if the systems are running, there's no need for additional prototypes, since aerodynamically all tests can be done with J-10B. Again, IMO it makes perfectly sense.

But finally again: You still owe me an explanation, what do You mean with "white" and "black" engines on a J-10B or C. So what's Your difference to tell a J-10 a B and what to call it C ?? I still don't get it.


Maybe the only solution to our discussion is to wait until we get a clear image showing us the c/n.

All the best,
Deino
Can you give us the image of 1-55? I thought batch 1 ends on 1-54.

As to what is the attribute categorizing B and C, my answer is the upgrade engine with bigger thrust (white nozzle) to replace the previous engine(black nozzle, it is not the avionics changes. As you said, we really need to wait for the images of yellow birds powered by white nozzle, preferably with the c/n printed becoming available.

And please consider this, it will be very unwise, if not stupid, to use some of the technologies acquired from the making of the J-20 into the making of the J-10 by CAC, which should be a troublesome practice. China needs a J-10C with superior capabilities than J-10B in all aspects before considering to export the J-10B to other countries.
 
.
Can you give us the image of 1-55? I thought batch 1 ends on 1-54.

Regrettably not, since both aircraft were only seen already painted with the c/n no longer visible. Hover it is based on severla reports (including Huitong).

As to what is the attribute categorizing B and C, my answer is the upgrade engine with bigger thrust (white nozzle) to replace the previous engine(black nozzle, it is not the avionics changes. As you said, we really need to wait for the images of yellow birds powered by white nozzle, preferably with the c/n printed becoming available.

Agreed, but even if I agree with You, the engine would be a fine item to differ between a B and a C, it is IMO not that way. As such I still don't get it, since You miss the regular - can we say "blue" nozzle J-10B ? But what are then the J-10B powered by AL-31FN called ???

Maybe to sort out - IMO we have:
  1. the whole batch 01 J-10B ranging from 1-01 to 1-53 powered by AL-31FN Series 3
  2. the final two batch 01 J-10B 1-54 and 1-55 powered by WS-10B (with that lighter ring in front of the nozzle) ... You call them J-10B; so I agree.
  3. The whole batch 02 - IMO called J-10C - ranging so far from 2-01 to 2-49 also powered by AL-31FN Series 3
  4. ... here are two images so far hinting a "dark" nozzle on a WS-10-powered aircarft ... IMO this is not a new engine but simply a sign of use.

And please consider this, it will be very unwise, if not stupid, to use some of the technologies acquired from the making of the J-20 into the making of the J-10 by CAC, which should be a troublesome practice. China needs a J-10C with superior capabilities than J-10B in all aspects before considering to export the J-10B to other countries.

Agreed, but an AESA is that mayor increase in capabilities ... and as such a new letter C is justified. The engine so far is it not, since there are simply no more than four confirmed WS-10-powered J-10s.

Deino
 
.
J-10B
USxnXr2.jpg
OlbYZOU.jpg
 
. . . .
Thank You so much .... so we are close to the end of batch 02 if it also has 55 aircraft.

Will be interesting, what comes next.

Deino
 
.
Thank You so much .... so we are close to the end of batch 02 if it also has 55 aircraft.

Will be interesting, what comes next.

Deino
55 can't be the total number for batch 2, or batch 1. The reason is simple; first, it is an odd number, second, the number is not the multiple number of the total number of J-10 deployed/to be deployed in each regiment. If you look back at your list of how many J-10A were produced in each batches, then the pattern is quite clear.

Agreed, but an AESA is that mayor increase in capabilities ... and as such a new letter C is justified. The engine so far is it not, since there are simply no more than four confirmed WS-10-powered J-10s.
But J-10B never used PESA; it used AESA from the day one.
According to the interview of the deputy chief designer of the Chinese AWCAS including ZDK03, China never developed PESA.There was no single image of PESA on J-10B. Your argument of the radar upgrade to AESA justifying the using of C is invalid.

This is what Mr Cao at CETC said in the interview:" 我国以机载预警雷达为突破口,实现了机载雷达装备从机械扫描到有源相控阵的跨越,没有搞无源相控阵,在世界上首次装备二维有源相控阵预警雷达,也就是说雷达波束在水平方向上和高度方向上都能电子扫描,由此也带动了战斗机火控雷达装备采用有源相控阵。"
http://club.china.com/data/thread/12171906/2736/26/18/9_1.html

1.jpg
 
.
55 can't be the total number for batch 2, or batch 1. The reason is simple; first, it is an odd number, second, the number is not the multiple number of the total number of J-10 deployed/to be deployed in each regiment. If you look back at your list of how many J-10A were produced in each batches, then the pattern is quite clear.


Sorry ... then You need to explain please:

1. Why does the number of aircraft per batch has to be even ?
2. Concerning the J-10A batches ... IMO they fit quite nicely to the number of known aircraft: Or what is Your revised estimation of batches and number of J-10A build in overall ? ... and why has this pattern to be the same with the J-10B?

Thanks in advance,
Deino
 
.
Sorry ... then You need to explain please:

1. Why does the number of aircraft per batch has to be even ?
2. Concerning the J-10A batches ... IMO they fit quite nicely to the number of known aircraft: Or what is Your revised estimation of batches and number of J-10A build in overall ? ... and why has this pattern to be the same with the J-10B?

Thanks in advance,
Deino
A lead plane with a wingman is a basic 2-plane battle formation. When a country buys fighter jets, the total number is normally an even number, like 32, 24,18 and so on.

A full size of the J-10 regiment is thought consisting of 24 jets. Some mixed regiment will have maybe 2/3 of the J-10 plus some J-10S or else. That is why I think 55 ore 110 can't be the total number, whereas 54 + 54 sounds fitting well in this theory.
 
.
A lead plane with a wingman is a basic 2-plane battle formation. When a country buys fighter jets, the total number is normally an even number, like 32, 24,18 and so on.

A full size of the J-10 regiment is thought consisting of 24 jets. Some mixed regiment will have maybe 2/3 of the J-10 plus some J-10S or else. That is why I think 55 ore 110 can't be the total number, whereas 54 + 54 sounds fitting well in this theory.


Ok. ... but what was wrong with the number of aircraft for the J-10A batches or did I mistunderstand Your reply ?

What's Your guess then on the number of J-10B/C build so far and You mentioned, that they are already assigned to 6 regiments: Care to explain which ones ?
As far as I know only the 170. Brigade FTTC, a Regiment within the 2. Division and 19. Division are confirmed. For the C there are also reports about another maybe within the 44. Division and Huitong also mentions the 21. Division and 176. Brigade, but for the 21. Div these were J-10A as far as I know and for the 176. I don't think the PLAAF will add another plane to the J-20s. I think they are more likely also within the 170. Brigade complementing the J-10B.

So what do You know, what's Your guess?

Thanks in advance,
Deino
 
.
55 can't be the total number for batch 2, or batch 1. The reason is simple; first, it is an odd number, second, the number is not the multiple number of the total number of J-10 deployed/to be deployed in each regiment. If you look back at your list of how many J-10A were produced in each batches, then the pattern is quite clear.


But J-10B never used PESA; it used AESA from the day one.
According to the interview of the deputy chief designer of the Chinese AWCAS including ZDK03, China never developed PESA.There was no single image of PESA on J-10B. Your argument of the radar upgrade to AESA justifying the using of C is invalid.

This is what Mr Cao at CETC said in the interview:" 我国以机载预警雷达为突破口,实现了机载雷达装备从机械扫描到有源相控阵的跨越,没有搞无源相控阵,在世界上首次装备二维有源相控阵预警雷达,也就是说雷达波束在水平方向上和高度方向上都能电子扫描,由此也带动了战斗机火控雷达装备采用有源相控阵。"
http://club.china.com/data/thread/12171906/2736/26/18/9_1.html

View attachment 360174

这里说没有搞无源相控阵,指的是机载预警雷达没搞无源相控阵,并非机载火控雷达没搞无源相控阵。
 
.
这里说没有搞无源相控阵,指的是机载预警雷达没搞无源相控阵,并非机载火控雷达没搞无源相控阵。

Exactement, yesterday in an another TV footage, one of the academicians from CETC 14th confirmed that they have already developed PESA for fire control radar.

Henri K.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom