acfan2003And, you think prostitution’s bad in HK, Beijing, Tokyo, NYC,
or London??? Here, once you go outside the cruiseship terminal,
you’ll notice a wholy different world — girls by the bus loads and still within
the primes of their low teens, are said to line the streets of this city for survival.My friends cried at the experience.
And, you think prostitution’s bad in HK, Beijing, Tokyo, NYC,
That is sad. BTW, what city are you talking about?
acfan2003Why don’t you learn some english first before trying to post on the internet. I didn’t understand 90% of what you wrote.
However, I think you’re trying to say that Hi-Technology is overrated. Ok, are you saying that you’d be willing to risk your life as a fighter pilot by choosing a lo-tech plane like an SU-27 or Mig29 to fight against an F22 One on One?
If I had to choose, I’d choose to most high tech plane and that is the F22. and I am sure I will beat the living tar out of you before you even are aware of what’s going on.
acfan2003This shows just how far behind China is with the West. China is at least 25 years behind. The J10 is equivalent to an F16, which was made in the 70’s. The XXJ will be stealthy compared to the J10 but I doubt it will be in the F22 class.
India and the rest are even more behind. LOL.
acfan2003I’m sure by then, the F22’s abilites will be increased significantly. Instead of 250km range, it may have 450km range so the same tactical advantage remains.
Whoever sees the enemy first will win. See first, shoot first, and fly away.
That is why dogfighting abilities do not matter as much in the new age of BVR fighting.
Whoever has superior radars, stealth, supercruise, and payload will win.
acfan2003I think what they’re trying to point out to you, and what you’re not understanding is that it will be much more difficult to evade an attack by the F22 than a conventional plane such as the J10 because of it’s superior radar and stealth abilities. You may pick up the missile eventually but by then, you’ll have scant seconds to do anything about it. The F22 will see it’s enemy and fire it’s missiles before they are aware of it’s existence. That gives it total dominance.
A J10 or an F16 is no match for an F22.
China better speed up it’s Active Phased Array radars and it’s JXX program if it wants to even stand a chance against the mighty F22.
acfan2003Originally posted by Hyperwarp
Just some AESA radars1). APG-77 (F/A-22)
The heart of the F-22’s electronics capabilities is the “APG-77” radar system, though it is so much more than a radar that some prefer to call it a “multifunction RF system” instead.
With the APG-77, the F-22 will be able to detect an enemy aircraft’s radar from distances of up to 460 kilometers (250 nautical miles). It will be able to acquire an enemy aircraft with radar at distances of up to 220 kilometers (125 nautical miles), while its “low probability of intercept” radar signal will be very difficult to detect and the “stealthy” F-22 will remain invisible to the enemy’s radar.
Once AIM-120 Extended Range Air To Air Missiles (ERAAM) are available, the F-22 will be able to destroy that enemy at a range of 185 kilometers (100 nautical miles). In many cases, the enemy will be hit without warning.
The APG-77 is built around an “Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA)”, which consists of an array of about 2,000 transmitters-receiver (T/R) modules that are linked together by high-speed processors. The AESA can obtain electronics intelligence; jam enemy electronic systems; provide surveillance; and perform secure voice and datalink communications, all that the same time. The AESA can simultaneously emit several tight beams to perform different functions. “Anything that can be done with X-band RF can be done with that antenna,” one program official commented.
Although the Air Force considered auxiliary side-mounted arrays for the APG-77, they were abandoned due to cost, and the AESA is limited to a field of view 120 degrees across in the forward direction. Other antennas provide missile and radar warning behind the aircraft.
When operating as a radar, the APG-77 transmits waveforms that change from burst to burst, and are sent at random frequencies. Such a changing signal is very difficult for an enemy to detect and analyze. If the enemy does manage to detect the signal, he or she must then try to get a radar lock on the F-22 so it can be attacked. The F-22’s stealthiness makes this tricky in the first place, but to make matters more troublesome, the AESA also analyses the enemy’s radar and sends out a jamming burst to disrupt the lock. The AESA then goes on to other tasks until the enemy radar begins its lock cycle again.
The APG-77 is not intended to give the F-22 a “standoff jamming” capability, such as that provided by electronic warfare aircraft like the Grumman EA-6B Prowler, blinding enemy radars over wide areas on a continuous basis. The APG-77’s mission is mainly to allow the F-22 to fight effectively while remaining difficult to detect. A standoff jamming platform, in contrast, can’t help but advertise its presence.
Between dealing with active threats, the AESA collects information on the “electronic order of battle (EOB)” in the operational area, locating electronic systems, classifying them, and alerting the pilot to possible threats or high-priority targets.
http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avf22.html2). APG-63(V)2 (F-15)
http://www.raytheon.com/products/apg63_v2/3). APG-79 (F/A-18E/F/G)
http://www.raytheon.com/feature/apg79_aesa/4). APG-80 (F-16 blk 60)
5). Mitsubishi Electric active phased-array radar (F-2)
6). AMSAR (EF Typhoon)
http://www.eurofighter.starstreak.net/Eurofighter/sensors7). APG-81 (F-35) ?????
very good contribution here. The F22 is amazing. Thank you!!
acfan2003Hey Chinese Enthusasts! Speak up. I want to know how far China is regarding these radar technolgies.
Give specifics and details.
acfan2003how far is China on the jxx program? no news at all?
is that picture of the wind tunnel model the real picture? what about all those 90 degree angles? don’t they know that’s bad??
acfan2003Originally posted by crobato
The 10 years sound like more in the sense of a hyperbole in the same sense the ROCAF air chief once said the PLAAF can’t catch up with them in fifty years.But the fact the Sukhoi official said “can’t” implying technologically, instead of “not allowed” implying legally, means a lot of what it says within the contract.
disagree about your interpretation of the word can’t. if they can make a 100% domestic j10 within 10 years, surely they can make 100% domestic j11. i think what the offical meant was, they won’t allow china to make a 100% su27.
acfan2003I feel stupid now. :confused:
I thought radar worked similarly to the way bats use sonar waves to see. Doesn’t sonar use sound saves?
acfan2003how fast does a pulse move? speed of sound?
what happens if a plane is travelling at mach 2? how does radar work then?
acfan2003Does anyone know if J10C version is being worked on? if so, who is working on it? THat’s the version I’m interested to see happen.
acfan2003Originally posted by Srbin
sorry but I’ve never heard of these aircraft you claim, could you provide me some links.I agree on with you that China should think on the outside of the box but why dont they build this, why dont they build that? They simply cannot, they dont have the technology. It takes a while, a good while.
links about the space bomber.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2001/010814-space.htm
acfan2003Originally posted by Srbin
I think theres a reason between u and USAF, they are alot smarter and they know what they are doing!.There is still a LONG time till missiles with much longer ranges can have a very good hit ratio. Even the AIM-120C has a lower hit ratio, longer range missiles like the Phoenix can be easily dodged by manuverable fighter, but they were designed to hit bombers. It still takes time to perfect BVR missiles, but for now there is a reason why they still want smaller, stealthier and manuverable fighters, not huge ass planes with big radars and BVR missiles.
And that reason is?
Probably the only reason such a plane doesn’t exist is because it would be too expensive and maybe the technology isn’t there yet. I think the Chinese should try to think more creatively rather than just try to match what the USA does step by step, ie build a stealth fighter to counter F22. They should think outside the box.
If China could build such a plane that had stealth, lasers, super radar, 100+ long range ram jet missiles, it would scare the **** out of the USA, F22 notwithstanding. That is a fact.
Look at the USA. They are always creating new planes. They are going to build a space bomber that can go anywhere in the planet in 1 hour. Such a plane is untouchable by SAMs because it is so fast and so high in the air. If the USA builds it, nobody will be able to defend against such an attack. Its like a manned ICBM missile.
BVR and unmanned vehicles are the future. One day, you may see thousands of drones the size of a car being used to wage air warefare. Are the chinese building drones? Are the chinese working on a space ship that can attack anywhere in one hour?
acfan2003Originally posted by kya bidu
No crobato you cliam you have the data, and then quote unofficial sources. May work for fantasy and speculation, but we are looking for proof, not conjecture. Or do you want the discussion on Chinese engines to be based on only on unsubtantiated rumors? That will only leave questions open for the future.If the WS10A specifications have been published, then you should also have the specifications. You cannot claim to have the thrust specifications and at the same time claim that other specifications are secret. That is a pure propoganda attempt. Don’t give me rubbish about what specifications are published or not published. If thrust specifications are published then other specifications such as dimensions and weight should also be available. The number of HP stages are also a good comparitor.
If these are not available as you say (while they are available for all other military engines including the one powering the F22) then very clearly the thrust specifications are unsubstantiated.
It will be very easy to compare the AL31 and the WS10A dimensions HP stages and the other things I have asked for. If the WS10A has something bigger and better than the AL31 then it is capable of greater thrust. If it is the same or lower then it is not. The comparison is very easy. The more air the engine sucks in, the greater the pressure ratio, the greater the thrust.
Since you are unable to provide such basic data I must conclude your conjecture remains conjecture till it is actually proved. For all I know the WS10A is a rip-off from the AL31 and the TV nozzle is a direct copy of Sturn TVC made for the AL31 FP. Your guess is as good as mine since you are unwilling or unable to provide concrete supporting evidence to show greater thrust or independent development of TV nozzle by the Chinese.
Please don’t ask me search for eveidence to support your theories. You made the claim you have to support it. I don’t have to prove you right you have to do that for yourself. Don’t back away from providing proof, because all it does is suport my position that those specifications are speculative and not substantiated.
You are unneccessarily becoming abusive again. You want me to prove your theories right, you want me to concede to your speculation as reality. How about some actual evidence proving you know what you are talking about and backing up your reportage? Can you do it without getting abusive or spouting obcenities? I feel it may be difficult for you – You can talk the talk, but you find walking the walk difficult – It reduces your debate to personal attacks and desparate whines for me to do the search for myself and prove you right. 😀 😀
How droll!!!
Hydropod, you obviously are frustrated that your fantasy is not accepted. I don’t have to prove anything, the Chinese posters have made the claims – it is the Chinese posters who have to prove it to be true. Thats how it works.
I have searched these forums and others but all I get from all the numerous threads are speculative conjectures and fantasy. There is no solid evidence to back up anything. For instance if you think the WS10A specifications are absolutely on the dot, then you can provide me with its dimensions, weight, fan stages, HP stages, by-pass ratio, weight, and fuel consumption.
If you can’t most of us will be forced to conclude that the specifications provided are goals to be achieved not reality.
Till then, Chinese engines which can suprecruise are simply speculative fantasies of a group of posters.
whatever. get over it you green eyed baboon.
everyone knows the ws10a’s facts were published. maybe not officially but it’s specifications have been published online. it was also tested in a su27. we all know you are green with jealousy because your crappy kaveri doesn’t work. without foreign help, most likely your kaveri will never work. you guys haven’t even made a turboject. you guys can’t even make a single bullet. you guys are a bunch of losers, pathetic failures. all you have is green faced jealousy, and that is a pathetic thing to witness.
good luck going to the moon. ha.
😀
Sign In
