What's new

China - J-11 Modernization program

Things you are mentioning are post installation. Installing a finished product should not take much time.

Radars are tested on a testbed and improved prior to installed on fighters.
 
Wait, so if my white race stops using paper and compass, will you stop using everthing else which is pretty much invented by whites? Because if it weren't for whites, your father would've been a Japanese slave and commit suicide after finding out that your mother was pregnant with a bastard child from a Japanese soldier. And of course, there won't be you breathing and polluting Canadian air.

Your product page is blank. Unless you're trying to prove your point that a Chinese fighter-borne AESA does not currently exist, you are just a Chinese crying for global significance in light of national destitution.

And your defective yellow race (google jointed babies) invented what's so called smokeless or yellow gunpowder. Its explosive energy does not even come close to the black gunpowder we used to force opium down your throat.
I'd say more to reply you, but looks like you've been sent back to the mental institution for a while.
 
I dont think the PLAAF have a operation AESA radar on fighters yet.
FYI isn't AO333 a Chinese Canadian?
 
I dont think the PLAAF have a operation AESA radar on fighters yet.
FYI isn't AO333 a Chinese Canadian?

China's KJ-2000 and KJ-200 AWACs using AESA radars if these count
 
Things you are mentioning are post installation. Installing a finished product should not take much time.

You test a radar on a testbed before you install it on a fighter. You improve it before you produce it and install it on a fighter.

---------- Post added at 05:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 PM ----------

I dont think the PLAAF have a operation AESA radar on fighters yet.
FYI isn't AO333 a Chinese Canadian?

The J-10B is entering service this year. The J-15 has an AESA and the J-11B is getting AESA upgrades as well.
 
If you call PLAAF official's words "fantasy", then you are right.

Why your own official said that your fighter jet engines were ready since long but still you are buying russian engine
 
Why your own official said that your fighter jet engines were ready since long but still you are buying russian engine

J-20 prototype, J-15, J-10B, J-11B all use WS-10 engines.

J-10A will get WS-10 engines as well.
 
Why your own official said that your fighter jet engines were ready since long but still you are buying russian engine



http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/3218-j-10-fc-20-mrca-334.html

The engine is a complicated issue.it's hard to say the J-10B will not use the AL-31fn,it's a quantity problem that the current FWS-10s production capacity is not big enough to feed the needs. The Niming factory just reached 100 copies of the FWS-10 seriers capacity in 2010 by the official AVIC newspaper report,in 2009 and 2010 they needed to fit the FWS-10s on:
1.around 50 J-11Bs that had no engines and sat on the SAC airfield for two years due to the FWS-10 issue on 2007/2008
2.every year 40 new J-11Bs produced by the SAC and soon 10 copies of the J-15 for the navy
So there's no FWS-10s left for the J-10s which has to rely on the AL-31FN.The situation can only change until 2014 when the second FWS-10 production line is set and reach a 200+ copies capacity.The Niming factory still need time to train the workers making them experenced.Untill 2014 we can talk to fit the FWS-10s massivelly on the J-10s and export it.What will happen to the FWS-10 mostlikely will be:
1.In 2012 a 110 copies capacity reached to fit on 50 J-11s and J-15,40 J-10A and J-10B in CAC have to rely on the AL-31FN
2.In 2013 a 140 copies capactity reached,110 for the J-11s and j-15,rest 30 for the J-10s
3.In 2014 a new line is set to reach 220 copies,110 for the J-11s and J-15,50 for the J-10Bs and the rest to replace the AL-31FN that fitted in the J-10As since 2004 which will need the MLU during the time frame.
:bounce::bounce::bounce:
 
The J-10B is entering service this year. The J-15 has an AESA and the J-11B is getting AESA upgrades as well.
I;d rather see it before i;d take your word for it. I remember 5 years ago with a lot of speculation that this or that had this, but turns out it didn't.

China's KJ-2000 and KJ-200 AWACs using AESA radars if these count
what park of these aircraft is fighter?
 
I;d rather see it before i;d take your word for it. I remember 5 years ago with a lot of speculation that this or that had this, but turns out it didn't

Sure. Go search up J-10B, J-15, J-11B on Google. This is information is given by a top PLAAF official who have announced accurate information regarding J-10.
 
Both aircraft have RAM and composites, but they lack airframe upgrades like DSI or conformal bays.


Your claim was that Chinese aircraft has surpassed the Europeans (Typhoon and Rafale). Without choosing sides lets take a look at your points.

Firstly, lets assume that both Europeans and Chinese aircraft use RAM and composites this tells us one thing--absolutely nothing. The DSI nonsense that Chinese aviation enthusiasts hyped to epic proportions needs to be toned down. You do not need DSI to reduce or hide compressor blades, the Rafale uses 'S ducts' and you knew that very well yet to awe your fellow Chinese enthusiasts or make Chinese aircraft look extraordinary you threw in 'DSI'.

And what exactly do the J-20's weapons bays have anything to do with the Typhoon or Rafale? You are comparing fully operational and matured platforms to a prototype.

The Rafale currently uses a Thales RBE-2 PESA radar. An AESA is in development for 2012, but until it gets ready, the Rafale still uses PESA. Eurofighter's CAPTOR will be set for 2013. India selects their aircraft for their prices and availability, not just capability. For example, India rejected the MiG-35 not because of its capability, but its engine. Are you implying that the MiG-35 can not compete with Eurofighter or Rafale because India rejected it?



What makes you think that an aircraft with AESA is automatically superior to one with PESA? A radar and aircraft can be broken down in to many parts in terms of systems avionics. Important features in a radar include range, resolution, A2A-A2G modes, targets tracked, targets engaged, yada, yada, yada.

AESA=better than PESA. AESA equipped aircraft does not necessarily mean it is better than PESA equipped aircraft. And the latest report was that it was not because of engines. Politics and needs certainly played a role but besides that the aircraft were very much judged on capability, I believe that all aircraft were judged on a 600 point scale? And although much of the point scale was likely technical data some of it was likely simple performance such as high altitude performance which was one of India's requirements. But cutting threw all the MRCA nonsense we know that the Indians evaluated all aircraft on a comprehensive scale that numbers in the hundreds.

Meaning they broke down the performance of individual parts in to many--the radars could have been judged on dozens of different functions.



The Super Hornet has a stealthy airframe (slanted vertical stabilizers, redesigned intakes) as well as an AESA radar already. And then there is the maneuverability. The Eurofighter and Rafale are not up to par with the Super Hornet in BVR combat. SPECTRA adds LPI to the radar, which is already achieved by an AESA radar or a stealthy airframe. Nanjing competing with Thales is a very real possibility. They revealed an AESA radar 3 years earlier than Thales. They built, according to an employee, the world's largest AESA radar to be installed on a 5th generation fighter. They are now testing a similar SPECTRA system. What evidence do you have that suggests they can't potentially compete?

I assume you speak from experience? Or know something that most of us do not? The Typhoon for one has been know to dominate in A2A combat there is also a story some years back to one managed to achieve an F-22 lock, I do not know if it's true or not but even if we disregard that news you can not disregard the fact that the aircraft's systems as a whole is what achieves victories not just one system. You are completely ignoring systems such as data-links, passive systems and weapons, or even RWR's and their ability to acquire a threat.

And please stay on topic, the conversation is about you claiming that Chinese aircraft air superior to European ones, there is no need to branch off in to off topic subjects or compare US aircraft to the Europeans when the topic is not about US aircraft. If I didn't know better I would say that you are going in circles.

What subsystems are you talking about?


A I mentioned the various parts and features of a radar, data-link, passive as well as active systems and weapons, ect, ect. For all you know the Spectra can deny a an AESA to see the Rafale, so again, what makes you think that that simply because an aircraft has AESA that it is a superior aircraft? And notice how a say aircraft (aircraft as a whole)--not radar.
 
The Flankers have a lot of potential for growth, new engines and active EW suites on the lines of Rafale can make it potent. However, the fact remains that its still a 4th generation airframe that is heavy on the maintenance. The MKIs that India has use a setup similar to the Typhoon in that it tells where the stress and damage is on the airframe.
BTW the Rafale and Typhoon have not matured. Both these aircraft were designed with out RCS reduction on the likes of F-22 etc... but will relay on other methods that are just as useful especially since counter measures will develop over time to detect stealth fighters.
PS the Chinese don't have a AESA radar for fighters that has achieved FOC. Also, stop puting AESA on a pedestal, its not that magnificent. It is better, but not revolutionary.
 
Back
Top Bottom