• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Chengdu J-10 Topic

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
According to an article in Aviation International News, Tuesday Issue Farnborough 2006, the Russian SIBNIA institute (who were intimately involved in developing the T-10M definitive version of the Su-27, the Su-33 and Su-34) have been assisting both Shenyang and Chengdu.

Their involvement with China stemmed initially from

helping the Chinese to understand how their Su-27s actually performed and how Chinese industry could improve in its efforts to license assemble and support these aircraft. But SibNIA found itself acting as an instructor and scientific "guide" in helping the Chinese understand how to design aa new aircraft from the bottom up.

According to SibNIA, the J-10 is a melting pot of foreign technology and acquired design methods. "The aircraft is more or less a version of the Lavi", say those Russian designers who have worked with the Chinese on this program, "but there are a number of other pieces of other aircraft that are part of the configuration that they have acquired from different sources". Those who have observed the process of the J-10's design also stress that the Chinese not only needed help in acquiring the building blocks of hte aircraft, they also needed assistance to synthesise all the elements they had acquired ito a cohesive design.
 

paralay

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
140
Reaction score
5
Website
paralay.world
It not a secret, in projects J-10 and FC-1 designers of MiG. ;)
L-15 - Yak participated.
FC-1 – izd.41 OKB MiG (1981)

1981 (under other data 1984-85) - the single-engine easy{light} fighter designated by the code{cipher} «41». It was supposed, that at the first stage the airplane will be equipped with engine RD-33 with thrust{link} 8300 кгс, and at the second stage - the modified engine with thrust 10000 кгс. The fighter was originally projected{designed} on a normal aerodynamic configuration, it{he} had a wing with inflow and lateral air intakes. The take-off mass with two rockets R-73 made 9,5 т.
At the first stage the radar of type "Komar" with a usual parabolic-reflector aerial, at the second stage - station with the phased antenna lattice should be established{set}. Speed limited number М=1,7, take-off and landing from a ground were provided. Computational range reached 2000 km, with auxiliary tanks - 3000 km. On a fighter rockets of near fight R-60 or R-73E could be suspended, the shooting arms consisted of gun ГШ-301, the weight of bombing loading made up to 3,5 т.
In the second version of aerodynamic layout the fighter had no horizontal tail unit, and before a wing placed small ПГО (the forward stabilizer). This version on летно-characteristics and a take-off mass practically did not differ from the first. More careful study of the air intake has shown a capability of increase in a Mach number up to 1,84.

... Normal takeoff weight - 9800 kg, weight of fuel 2900 - 3000 kg, engine RD-33K, a radar is similar MiG-29M, lost MiG-29 on the established{set} manoeuvre (as thrust\weight ratio below), won on not established{set} manoeuvre (wing load), confidently left on greater{big} angles of attack, greater{big} altitude performance and subsonic range.
There it was possible to depart "slightly" from the scheme in which it is executed{designed} JAS 39 Gripen that has given a number{series} of advantages, and in unevidently connected directions. For example, on stability{immunity} on greater{big} corners{angles} + reduction{decreasing} of weight of a glider + serious decrease{reduction} in labour input of operation.
The "classical" configuration was simultaneously drawn also, but it{she} seriously lost - in so small dimension "classics" difficultly to extend on a good level.
 

Attachments

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
paralay said:
It not a secret, in projects J-10 and FC-1 designers of MiG. ;)
...
FC-1 – izd.41 OKB MiG (1981)
Is that izd.41 designation confirmed as I never heard of that before ?? ??? Otherwise are there any connections between this izd.41 and the Romanain IAR-95 which resembles much more the final FC-1 configuration than the always mentioned "MiG-33" (I know this designation is wrong !)

Thanks in advance, Deino
 

paralay

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
140
Reaction score
5
Website
paralay.world
The fighter 41 is similar on JAS-39.

1981 (on other data 1984-85) - the one-impellent light fighter designated by the code «41». It was supposed, that at the first stage the plane will be equipped with engine R-33 with draft 8300 kg, and at the second stage - the modified engine with draft 10000 kg. The fighter was originally projected{designed} under the normal aerodynamic scheme{plan}, it{he} had a wing with inflow and lateral air inlets. The take-off weight with two rockets r-73 made 9,5 t. At the first stage it should be established{installed} radar type "Mosquito" with the usual parabolic aerial, at the second stage - station with the phased antenna lattice. Speed was limited to number М=1,7, rise and landing{planting} from a ground were provided. Settlement range of flight reached{achieved} 2000 km, with ПТБ (Pendant tank) - 3000 km. On a fighter rockets of near fight r-60 or r-73e could be suspended, the shooting arms consisted of gun GCH-301, the weight of bombing loading made up to 3,5 t.
In the second variant of aerodynamic configuration the fighter had no horizontal tail plumage, and before a wing settled down small ПГО (Forward horizontal plumage). This variant on characteristics and take-off weight practically did not differ from the first. More careful study of an air inlet has shown an opportunity of increase in number of M up to 1,84.
... The normal take-off weight - 9800 kg, weight of fuel 2900 - 3000 kg, engine RD-33K, ПрНК is similar MiG-29M (it is cut down in a mode "air-surface"), lost MiG-29 on the established{installed} maneuver (as тяговооруженность (Draft of the engine / weight of the plane) below), won on not established{installed} maneuver (loading on a wing), confidently there were on greater{big} corners of attack, greater{big} altitude and subsonic range.
There it was possible to depart "slightly" from the scheme{plan} in which it is executed "JAS-39" that has given a number{line} of advantages, and in unevidently connected directions. For example, on stability at greater{big} corners + reduction of weight of a glider + serious decrease{reduction} in labour input of operation.
The "classical" configuration was simultaneously drawn also, but it{she} seriously lost - in so small dimension "classics" difficultly to extend on a good level.
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
Thanks a lot ... but are there any connections to that Romanian IAR-95 project ????

Cheers, Deino ???
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
A new pic of the two seat J-10
 

Attachments

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
paralay said:
The fighter 41 is similar on JAS-39.
Just another question on this "secret project" as it is omitted in Tony Buttler’s book …. But there a short note of an earlx LFI related project called “4-12” of about 1983 which would fit into this timeframe !

Are they the same ??? … or different ???

Cheers, Deino ???
 

rousseau

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
315
Reaction score
5
paralay:

So as you said, that J-10 actually designed by Russia not taken from Lavi, you've described it a lot already, could u upload some pix to prove what did you say? We all know that you have to test many model to chose what's kind of configration is the best to request, so there must be some layout before J-10 if it is not developed upon Lavi. Would u mind give some pix? ??? ???
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
Rousseau, Paralay is talking about the FC-1 being based on a Russian design, not J-10. For what its worth I don't agree.
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
"delta-winged fighter designated the F-10, and the subsequent development of the more advanced F-12".

It suggests that the F-12 might use technology from the 1976 transfer of one or more MiG-23s from Egypt, but it might be an original design, and be powered by two Spey turbofans.

Air International January 1978
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
overscan said:
"delta-winged fighter designated the F-10, and the subsequent development of the more advanced F-12".

It suggests that the F-12 might use technology from the 1976 transfer of one or more MiG-23s from Egypt, but it might be an original design, and be powered by two Spey turbofans.

Air International January 1978

Quite interesting that the J-10 and J-12 designation is used for those "new" projects related to the MiG-23. I even found them mentioned in an East German magazine. Nut as it turned out, the delta-winged fighter seems to be the Chengdu J-9 which was still under development during that time in parallel to the J-8 (and finally given up) and an often refered "more advanced" version was the chin-intake-equipped MiG-23. But that bird was not proposed as a fighter, but as a fighter bomber namely the Nanchang Q-6.

All other designations J-10 and J-12 refer to eralier projects which were finally canceled: The J-10 was a huge interceptor often referred to be equipped with a variable wing and maybe shown as a desk-top model with a delta-wing similar to a MiG-25/F-108/CF-105 !
The J-12 was one of the few designs that actually flew. It was built by Nanachng as a competitor to the first Shenyang J-11 light-weight-fighter (similar to a Mirage F1 in appearance), flight tested and then canceled too.

Cheers, Deino
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
rousseau said:
paralay:

So as you said, that J-10 actually designed by Russia not taken from Lavi, you've described it a lot already, could u upload some pix to prove what did you say? We all know that you have to test many model to chose what's kind of configration is the best to request, so there must be some layout before J-10 if it is not developed upon Lavi. Would u mind give some pix? ??? ???

Huiii ... quite interesting times for the J-10 as there are several very "hot" discussions in several forums under way !! :eek:

Maybe worth to note is this article here published in "Combat Aircraft" http://www.ianallanpublishing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=49503 and called "China's Hidden Power" - Background Article on PLAAF with a general hitorical review of the development trends until the latest fighters like the Chengdu J-10 (sadly as the second part to be published next month !)

For my opinion I like that article very much ... it was a very good read even if some things can be discussed it’s for my opinion the first article in a Western magazine that not only repeats that J-10 = Lavi-copy theme !

One thing surly wrong is the history of the J-9 as a modified J-8 and the note that it already reached prototype status .... (maybe worth to wait for an upcoming AIR Enthusiast article !! ;))

Anyway ... here it is:

[ARTICLE REMOVED BY MODERATOR. See forum rules]
 

JCage

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
overscan said:
Rousseau, Paralay is talking about the FC-1 being based on a Russian design, not J-10. For what its worth I don't agree.
Had a chat with an IAF officer, fwiw (in a manner of speaking)- the FC-1 is taken to be a Russian design or at least heavily drawing upon the MiG light fighter project. They have some detailed input into the design & stuff, but he wouldnt go into all that with me. It was offered to India in lieu of the LCA project but wasnt taken up.
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
Deino said:
Thanks a lot ... but are there any connections to that Romanian IAR-95 project ????

I still don't think that there were no connections ! ??? ...esp. as the Spey is sometimes substituted by a WS-9 !

Cheers, Deino ???
 

Attachments

E

Exit

Guest
Deino said:
Huiii ... quite interesting times for the J-10 as there are several very "hot" discussions in several forums under way !! :eek:

Maybe worth to note is this article here published in "Combat Aircraft" http://www.ianallanpublishing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=49503 and called "China's Hidden Power" - Background Article on PLAAF with a general hitorical review of the development trends until the latest fighters like the Chengdu J-10 (sadly as the second part to be published next month !)

[ARTICLE REMOVED BY MODERATOR. See forum rules]
About this article I got something to say, they confounded the radius with range (1,300 nm is more for a F-15/SU-27 aircraft class).
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
Isn't she a beauty ????? ::)



Looks like from the this might be the induction ceremony of the 2nd batch for for 131. Regiment / 44. Fighter Division in Kunming in 2004. J-10 for PLAAF No.44 Division !!

Enjoy, Deino ;D
 
E

Exit

Guest
Wow haven't seen so much J-10's in only one photo ! Nice found Deino ! ;)
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
After so much time ... the J-10A has finally be declassified by official Chinese authorities !!!

... via Xinhua:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2006-12/29/content_5547063.htm

... and also at AVIC !!!!

http://www.avic1.com.cn/web/index.htm
http://www.avic1.com.cn/web/02.htm


Cheers, Deino
 

Attachments

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
Sadly I don't speek Chinese ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kvJsrCbJiY&eurl=

Deino ;D
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
Just some notes as the details revealed by these pictures are much more interesting than the fact of its unveilance itself !!

Therefore I just strated to "collect" some notes ...

- the very first picture with the complete line-up shows late-updated aircrafts (with that white antenna behind the canopy) with numbers within 1054x are from the 3rd. Division ... and the last two (at the end of the line-up) aircraft are twin seaters with their larger canopy. Additional the other line-up picture showing the right side clearly shows an aircraft numbered 10741 ... are these from a second regiment ???

- Most serials have beed PS-ed but the one picture with the J-10 + J-11 shows a number 50754 indicating - as noted by crobato - a very high number of J-10's within the 44. Division ... this may led to the question if the 44. Div is something similar to the USAF Luke AFB with its many F-16 sqaudrons acting as a training, tactics and testing base for that type ! :confused:

- additional this 44. Div aircraft is clearly a modified or late-production model .

- colourS: these two birds on the end of that video numbered No. 22 and 26are early machines from the 44. Div. ! Here's interesting that no. 22 has the old numbering system "41252" in dark grey whereas no. 26 wears a yellow number on its tail with still a grey 26 !

- IFR-probe: Here I thougt until now it's more a probe similar to the French Mirage's but now it's clearly a bolt-on system similar to the J-8H/F's attached about in the middle of the right front fuselage. Besides that I always thought that the IFR-tests prototype was 1005 ... here I tend more to 1006 which was related to air-to-ground-weapons testing !

- air-to-ground-weapons testing are not only captive tests but also actual live droppings ... and rocket-pods too !

- and my most favourite is the very clear picture of the original white 01-prototype showing not a Lavi-clone but clearly a near serila-standard AL-31FN-powered J-10 !!!

... just some thoughts for now ... maybe some more later !

CHeers, Deino
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
I'd be careful making judgements of force size based on serial numbers.

I'd already said that "01" was a standard J-10 based on photographic comparison of the old blurry image.

I will say that the closeups of the J-10 look more like Su-27 manufacturing than, say, Eurofighter Typhoon.
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
Hmmm Huh ... maybe I was misleading, but I didn't try to make a "judgements of force size based on serial numbers", even if an assumption is quite possible for the first three regiments of the 44. Division and the numbers of hangars recognizable via Google Earth, the numbers of J-10's so far identified.

Regarding that “hint” of no. 01 being a Lavi-clone it was not addressed to You as I know You !

But just regarding Your last remark: Do You think of manufacturing quality Huh … therefore I think it has a higher standard than – esp. some Russian – Su-27 !

PS: this is Shenyang’s answer to the official unveilance of the Chengdu J-10 … it’s own J-11B armed with the indigenous PL-12 !!

Deino Grin
 

Attachments

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
Most serials have beed PS-ed but the one picture with the J-10 + J-11 shows a number 50754 indicating - as noted by crobato - a very high number of J-10's within the 44. Division
What you said indicated that this serial number alone indicated a very high number of J-10s.

Here's some Eurofighter closeups I tooke at Farnborough 2006;
 

Attachments

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
Having reviewed the pics, yes, they look more like recent Russian production Su-30 than the oldest Su-27 examples.
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
Deino, site is really slow, took me a couple of hours to get that one pic, hopefully a few more will turn up for morning.
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
89
Thanks a lot ... my attempt to download finally failed :-[, but I "dictored" a little bit with the one You posted !

Thanks a lot, Deino ;D
 

Attachments

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,178
Reaction score
8
I wonder what they're censoring out underneath the wings of a lot of those images? Also, a lot of the jets are shown with the small pylons under the intake, that's definitely interesting.
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,068
They are censoring the weapons. I'm not entirely sure why, though some of them may have been carrying SD-11 missiles. The standard armament of PL-8 and PL-10 seems an odd thing to censor.
 
Top