wow ..that is pretty confident.
It tends to build when one faces an onslaught of anti-Pakistan noobs after every post in other forums.
I'll be waiting
Then your conclusion on the J-10s maneuverability was based on what?
Please do so.
No, I haven't, although common sense indicates that just like the chinese haven't come up with an inter galactic spaceship yet, and most of what they produce is of the same stock as the rest of the world, their missile weapons cannot be anything different... follow me so far?
since then I have witnessed some of the peak weapons of the west and east being fired and evaluated, I am telling you I have no reason to believe a chinese AA missile is going to be better than any of the ones I have seen. And I know what those missiles can do and cannot do.
I agree with you here, I'm not claiming superiority of Chinese A2A weaponry, I want to know what makes you think it is inferior, what is your assessment based upon? How did you come to the conclusion that the J-10B will be inferior to it's Western Counterparts?
The russians have array radars operational for a very long time. perhaps even the first to field array radars.. the west ..well the benefits of technology know how are evident.
Why would I come to believe that the AESA radar on a J-10 would be any better than the AESA on the MiG-35? The number of modules does not guarantee anything more than the potential of the design, or even hides some weaknesses.. How come you are so sure that the number of T/R on the J-10 AESA is such to mask software or signal processing deficiencies ??? Do you know ? Have you been involved with the tests? or the building of said radar ?
Now for the war of 'if's?
What makes you think that the 1200 T/R modules are there because of a deficiency?
Going by that the APG 63v2 and APG 77 must have some sort of deficiency
you think that perhaps if the J-10 AESA radar has 1200 modules and the one on the F-16 has 1000 the J-10 radar is 20% better or something along those lines? I'd say .. maybe not..
Not at all, number T/R modules alone doesn't cut it, you must also understand that just because you can't see something, it doesn't mean that it isn't there. There is nothing to suggest the J-10B's AESA's inferiority, but going by what we know... all that we know about is the number of T/R modules, possible power output and Radome, that's it!
the F-16 of the top of my head I can tell you that yes the two planes have 9/-3.5 (16) and 9/-3 )10).
But .. and an important but here.. we don't know what the fuel load on the J-10 is for that rating.
also the sustained rate for the F-16 is 18/sec and inst. 26/sec. it has a 1.1:1 twr and a very good transonic acceleration.
In combat conditions, the twr gets to about 1.25:1 as the fuel goes down.
J-10A has.. I believe around .95 or so .. not so good. also it has a delta wing. Bleeds speed. So the relative agility advantage you claim it has, needs the extra power, that it does not have.
The F-16 has up to 144Kn rated engines.. and an amazing FBW system. Combat proven.
J-10A much less than that .. i think about 80KN or so .. and FBW of what heritage ???
No mate, the Al-31 has 122.5kN, the WS-10A 132kN, but the supposed variant of the WS-10 for J-10...
has 155kN which would bring the TWR to around 1.2. Not under powered at all!
Now the J-10B is said to have TVC and a bigger engine .. perhaps it does. although you have to know that TVC engines work best in pairs. Think about it.
TVC for single engine? I doubt it.
You see the 2nd dimension (other than pitching) will aid in yaw and not in improving the roll rates...which does bring any significant change in the maneuverability of an aircraft....
as for the RAM coatings and the stealthier redesign, .. ''mate'' it is carrying its weapons on pylons under the wings.. what are you talking about.. in any decent cap mission the missiles and pods and pylons and tanks would be the major contributors ..
Not once did I mention the word stealth, but RCS reduction.
You see... obviously without internal weapons bays there birds will have their RCS increase exponentially with exposed weapons and tanks.
But every bit of RCS reduction buys you valuable space before detection. Also, I'm pretty sure this is the case for even the Eurofighter and Rafale, and unless the J-10B uses weapons pods, the RCS will almost always climb way above 2-3m^2 in a real engagement.
I have doubted the F-35 numerous times.. I have fought with Gambit over that plane countless times.. but at the end of the day, LM has proven in the past that they can make planes.. so a minimum level of performance is given and granted.
Why would I doubt the F-15SE .. ??? it can only be improved and it is an excellent plane. It is not something that is nobody has seen before.
In case you forgot, you were knocking J-10 for not being battle proven, my point was that just because an aircraft is yet to see a real engagement doesn't mean that it is in anyway superior, by that measure Spitfires and P-51s would rule the skies while the F-35 and F-15SE would be the lower end.
Off topic: IMHO the F-35 will be a success, of course the money invested is ridiculous but in terms of avionics the F-35 is the best there is.
No. Considering things, the J-10A may have comparable, (but perhaps not equivalent) avionics to F-16s delivered for service in the 90s .. i.e. designed in the 80s.
by that token I was generous to have likened it to F-16A and B in overall performance since it has weaker engines and a delta wing.
The J-10B, is an upgrade, so it can be anything, but can it be comparable to something like the block 52/60 ?? have a read to see what those planes can do in some of their configurations, and don't judge by the ones in your country, they may have come with downgraded avionics.
Matey, my own patriotism and love for the PAF has lead me to know enough of what the F-16 is capable of.
But I can't understand why you can't match up the j-10 to the Block 40. They are not only similar in size, weight but also avionics and weaponry.
Now the J-10B is said to use avionics straight form the J-20 project, similarly the F-16 E/F would use technologies found on 5th gen birds.
how good is that LPI? what did they test it against?
may well have, but we wont know, the Chinese are very secretive.
At least as good as the IRST on Su-30s....
What leads me to believe this is that, they could have easily reverse engineered the Su-30's IRST, but it's likely after almost 2 decades of having that technology they would have improved it.
So expect it to be at least as capable as the Russian IRST on the Su-30 variant Flankers if not better.
do we know? the HMDS is good, but everyone has one these days, F-16s included,
Search the Chinese TK series HMDS.
the avionics suite of the J-20 cannot be installed on the J-10.. there is a size element here.
It can be installed, only some components like the Radar have to be downsized... for example the J-10B's AESA has 1200 T/R modules, the J-20's is said to be the same radar but with a planned 2200 T/R modules.
as for the airframe and the powerplant.. speculations.. we don't know.
We do know about the AL-31.
We can be sure about the WS-10, but the WS-10G/X and FWS-10 are still a little shady.
the F-16 tech buddies were telling me that if a 16 pulled a 9.5g they would have to do a structural check (which it did in my AF regularly) .. and to this date only a handful of cases were some repair work or more inspection was needed came up. that is in 21 years of service. One of those cases the plane pulled a 9.8g .. we had LM people flying in to give us a hand with the structural inspection.. can't remember what the outcome was, but I remember seeing the plane again on scramble duty after the inspection... (!)..
when the J-10 does that for someone.. then we will talk..like I said. .
I gave it a shot...
Well mate... we can't really debate this properly unless all is revealed about the J-10, till then I can only assume that it would be comparable to the F-16E/F because of the upgrades planned, because of the aim of the variant of the aircraft, the role it will play..
Take the PAF... they have F-16 Block 52+ with good Avionics/weapons packages, but still they went for the J-10B/FC-20 as their top end fighter and cut numbers of F-16s.
I'm not knocking the F-16, it is an excellent fighter.