tphuangWhen operating a warship in the littorals as this Israeli warship was doing the crew will not have much if any time to react to a missile launch. I do not know how far off the beach the ship was but if it was providing gun fire support I suspect no more than 10 miles off the coast. If that was the case if this was an Iraninan Silkworm missile as I suspect we are talking 60-120 seconds before impact with the ship. I am not familiar with the Israeli CIWS for this class of ship but her crew I am sure was already at GQ (general quarters) but the CIWS opearators would have to be on the ball to engage a missile at such a short range.
C-802 is not silkworm, it’s the export version of YJ-8 series that uses turbojet engine.
tphuangI do agree but up to certain degree i feel the J-10 represents a JAS-39 Gripen concept, contains several non chinese elements and the Eurofighter will be also upgraded.
The main real factor that is to be consider is production numbers, the Eurofighter is not an aircraft that can get large number of exports orders and the J-10 might be produced in large numbers prompting the need for fighters such as the F-35 in th pacific and north asian region
A lot of people would put J-10’s performance at the Gripen and F-16 block 50/52 level. That’s definitely a better comparison than to Eurofighter/Rafale. Now, when this modified J-10 comes out, it might be at the typhoon level. But until then, I would think DoD is just driving up this china threat.
tphuang:rolleyes: didnt you know?
not sure what you meant by that, but F-14 and F-15 have lower numbers than F-16 and F-18 too, but they are considered to be better fighters.
tphuangI dont understand why the super secret chinese J-10 be then superseded in model number by the J-11’s
why has that happened?
and American Trechary? give it a break! who has been the traitor? how many helos did the PA get to fight terror in the eastern front? how many missiles and bombs? and how many taliban are back in afghanistan fighting the NATO forces?
F-22 < F-35 in model number, so that means F-35 is better than F-22?
Generally speaking in plaaf ranks, J-10 is looked far more favourably than J-11.
tphuangUsing that reasoning to arrive at the conclusion that J-10 = Su-30MKI is absurd. They’re nothing alike and will never be equivalent. The J-10 is outclassed purely by virtue of being a much smaller aircraft, never mind the total lack of information about its avionics, which is a very important part of the aircraft.
hmm, how is being smaller meaning inferior? So according to you, F-35 is inferior to mki?
The thing about PAF and J-10 is that all the report of PAF purchasing J-10 has come from Pakistani side. There hasn’t been any report on Chinese side that J-10 is getting exported.
tphuangRAFALES
French company offers upgraded fighter jet
AK DHAR NEW DELHI, FEB 21 (PTI)
With the Indian Air Force close to floating international tenders for acquisition of 126 multi-role combat aircraft, French defence major Dassault Aviation has offered to sell its latest fighters Rafale.The French offer was made by Chacks Edelstenne, CEO of Dassault Aviation, when he called on the Minister of State for Defence Rao Inderjit Singh here yesterday. The Deputy Chief of the Air Staff Air Marshal AK Nangalia was also present.
Edelstenne told PTI his company informed the Minister of Dassault’s decision not to field its upgraded Mirage 2000-5 for the Indian deal. The French Mirages were leading contenders for the Indian sale, as the IAF already has 40 Mirage-2000D aircraft in its inventory.
“We are on the verge of closing the Mirage fighter assembly line and want to offer India a quantum jump in technology in the shape of upgraded new multi-mission Rafales”, he said.
“Though India has not not floated the Request for Proposals (RFP), we have conveyed to India to supply 40 Rafale multi-mission fighters in single source deal”, the Dassault CEO, who is currently here as part of French President Jacques Chirac business entourage, said.
And in a major move, French aviation engine giant, Snecma, which is bidding for DRDO’s joint collaboration project on the Kaveri engines, has offered to mount them in two Rafale fighters. Snecma is already collaborating with public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited on production of aero engines powering the Advanced Light Helicopters.
Dassult’s surprise bid to pitch in its Rafale fighters for the IAF’s multi-role combat aircraft project appears significant indicating that India could opt for two types of fighters in its moves to cover the shortfall in squadron strength.
Besides, Dassault, four other companies American Boeing and Lockheed-Martin, Swedish Grippen and Russian Mig-29S are competing for the Indian sale. IAF Chief S P Tyagi has said that once the RFP was floated,other bidders were also welcome to join in.
Rafale, along with Boeings F-18 , both of which have some of the features of the fifth generation fighters are expected to be priced higher.
During a closed door meeting with accompanying French Business delegation here yesterday, President Chirac is understood to have told them that Indian market was now highly competative and French companies would have to offer latest technology if they was to make deep inroads here.
wow, the French are really desperate for this deal. It definitely bodes well for India.
tphuangI’m not sure about the differing angles of HMS and the missile itself. IMO, the missile FOV given is for earlier version of PL-9. And there have been upgrades since then. Remember, China has had R-73 for 15 years now. It has had plenty of time to take all of its attributes and improve them. And then you have PL-8, which is the domestic version and should have a larger FOV.
Also, I agree with Crobato in that the IRCCM and accuracy are the more critical part of a short ranged AAM. So, even if your FOV is not as large, but if you use more updated digital processor and pursuit software + more resistant IR seeker, you have a more deadly SRAAM.
tphuangTphuang
The Python 3 built in China is not more advanced than current Python V or R-73, the Python V has 360 degree of angular engagement capability same is the ASRAAM and AIM-9X, the R-74 has close to 120 degree of angular engagement capability. the Python V has the same 120 degree angular engagement.
60 degrees is basicly a +30 and -30 degree cone little bit more than the R-60MK cued with a HMS.
The R-73 has a 90 degrees of engagement capabilities or +45 -45 of angular capability
This is pl-9 btw, pl-8 and 9 use similar level of seeker.
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/weapon/pl9.asp
“The PL-9 features an all-aspects cryogenic liquid nitrogen gas-cooled seeker infrared-homing seeker head unit utilising proportional navigation guidance techniques. The missile seeker ’s off-boresight capability is said to be better than that of the AIM-9L/M Sidewinder missile, and comparable to the Russian R-73 (AA-11 Archer). 607 Institute has improved upon the PL-9 by marrying it to the Chinese indigenous helmet-mounted sight (HMS), which is similar to the Arsenel helmet sight from the Russian R-73. A Chinese brochure credits the helmet sight with a 60 degrees off-boresight capability, or a 120 degrees field of fire. At the November 1996 Zhuhai Air Show, a Chengdu (CAC) engineer confirmed that the PL-9 HMS will be fitted onto the F-7MG fighter.
“
I should have said 120 degree OBV, I meant +/-60 degrees.
tphuangTPhuang
Up to what i know missiles also are sorted by generation, currently there are only few Fifth generation missiles available, the Python 3 built in China is not as good as the Python IV or Python V, the Python 3 is more less the class of the R-60MK.
I didn’t say it’s as good as python 4 or python 5 either. But rather that it’s a highly upgraded python 3. And to dismiss because it’s rooted in python 3 is quite unfair. And at its current setup, it has most of the things you would want in a modern SRAAM. It uses a digital processor, has a multi-band seeker, compatible with HMS and has 60 degree OBV. The only thing that sticks out as a major flaw is the fact it’s not using an IIR seeker.
Also you can not artificially compare the J-10 with the Typhoon, at full take off load the Typhoon has more power, AAMs are quit light some are quit but quit light so basicly an aircraft carries fuel, the J-10 at the most can boast a thrust to weight ratio as an F-16.
watch the video of the IRIS-T being launched
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8wnb27z3vc&search=IRIS-T
The J-10 with thrust vectoring won`t beat a Python V cued by a HMS, same is aplicable to the MiG-29OVT or Su-30MKI and with some few updates you can keep the F-16 capable of dealing with the J-10
I didn’t artificially compare J-10 to typhoon. Other people did. Read what I wrote again. Did I state anywhere that I personally think J-10 is as good as typhoon?
Yes, typhoon has higher thrust, but it’s also has a larger airframe.
J-10 can at most boast the T/W ratio of F-16? Why can’t iit do better? It’s lighter than F-16C and it’s engine has more thrust than F-16C with the exception of F110-GE-129 (about equal in that case).
The main thing is many think because the J-10 has canards and delta wing will surpass any thing, but as we can see the MiG-29OVT has not canards and is one of the most agile aircraft.
From my humble opinion i consider the AAM an aircraft carries coupled with stealth and supercruise makes the best fighter and the F-35 is a good example, the F-22 added up thrust vectoring but good Python Vs AAMs will basicly make redundant Thrust vectoring.
In 1988 thrust vectoring was super becasue in that time the AIM-9L or the R-60 were relatively primitive missiles but after Python Vs, IRIS-Ts, ASRAAMs and AIM-9X i can tell you that the US navy has taken the right path with the Super Hornet meanwhile there are no stealthy fighters flying outside the US.
Increased maneuverability is useful in many different areas. Evading missile is not the only one.
As for F-35, nobody is foolish enough to think that J-10 is better than or close to F-35 in terms of overall performance. And nobody has stated that. You are getting way too defensive.
tphuangSorry, I just need to address a few issues I have with your post.
From my humble point of view the J-10 is comparable to the Gripen but not to the Rafale or Eurofighter, reasons:
agreed
The Eurofighter has a better thrust to weight ratio, Meteor, ASRAAM and AMRAAM outclassing any thing possesed by the J-10 at this moment in Air to Air weaponry, the J-10 has not supercruise because is a single engine and is far from the twin engined Eurofighter combine thrust to weight ratio same will be with the Rafale.
Twin engine is not an issue, since J-10 is lighter than the other two. The thrust w/ afterburner of J-10 is 13.2 tonne and the normal liftoff weight of J-10 is most likely less than that (people have speculated 11 to 12 tonne). That’s actually pretty good, because you get a T/W ratio of over 1. I think generally, people compare J-10 to the eurocanards because it also has canards and that it has large delta wings.
The F-18F and F-16E are armed with IRIST or Sidewinder AIM-9X that makes them literaly as good as a Su-30MKI armed with R-73, the J-10 only carries third generation Python 3 AAMs in the class of the AA-8 Aphid, probably they aso can carry the AA-11 but i have not seen a picture of it.
J-10 uses PL-8B, which is really upgraded from python 3. It has all of the good features of R-73 like OBV and HMS compatible. Its IR seeker is also a multiband seeker. China believes it is superior in performance to the imported R-73.
So if am flying a F-18F i would not be scare of the J-10 if my F-18F is armed with AIM-9X and can cue it with a HMS besides the fact the Super Hornet carries lots of AMRAAMs or if i am in a F-16I armed with Python V
armament combination of PL-12/PL-8B isn’t that bad really. I would take it over R-77/R-73.
tphuangmaking the L-15 supersonic like they did or putting an afterburner on it is just dumb the flight time of these trainers is to low to begin with, putting more fuel eating features in is downright pointless unless you want to stay up in the air for 45 minutes at a time.
China is obviously not using L-15 just as a trainer. It has plans making it into a ground attack plane and possibly putting it on a future carrier.
tphuangAgree, at present stage it won’t be far better than Block 30.. Although with Russian assistance the thing has got some potential (AESA, TVC)
There is no Russian assistance on AESA. The Russians don’t even have their own AESA radar. I’m not sure that the Russians are willing to sell to China their most advanced radar. Once J-10 get its AESA radar, it will be indigenous. As for TVC, I’m thinking that only the last batch of the current 100 are to the FM1 standard. Although, that’s just a guess based on what Saturn said.
As for what the Russians said about the “super-10” in terms improved radar and such, it seems that what was mentionned on JDW was just a proposal that they forwarded to CAC (according to an interview on kanwa).
tphuangso, which version of su-30 is Venezuela getting?
Never mind, I just saw the su-30s without canards.
tphuangThis is all Pakistan is getting for 5 billion US$?
I’m thinking the used plane will probably be paid for by the Americans. So, Pakistan would only need to pay for the new planes.
tphuangGood for Canada, but something is terribly wrong with these prices. How could this cost $10 billion?
$3 billion for 4 aircraft plus another $4.6 billion for some heavy lift aircraft?
Then $1.1 billion for trucks…
I’m just wondering how the helicopters can be that expensive.
Sign In
