plawolfTechnology doesn’t have to be groundbreaking to be useful to everyone, because of specialization and different level of sophistication. I’ll repeat it again: There is no such as only sell everything or sell nothing. Stop this kind of useless simplification.
it is you who are the one with the simplistic view.
what, you think the chinese are ideots? if they want help, it would be in key areas that are critial to the success of the whole project. the point is not about russia giving a full set of blueprints or none at all as you seem to think, its about the fact that the chinese would only want help in the most important and difficult areas. if the russians provide help there, then that is in effect given away the whole set of blueprints as the chinese are prefectly able to do the rest themsevles. but if the russians put forward a ‘join venture’ proposal where they only provide superfical assistance in areas the chinese are perfectly able to do themsevles, they’ll just tell the russians to make a better deal or buzz off.
First lesson in Risk Management is that Risk has three basic components: Probability, consequence, and capability. When the consequence is severe, mitigation plan must be there. No one do “risk calculation” and then “hope for a miracle”, that’s not sound business practice. Companies with this kind of mindset do not survive for long. There are a lot problems in Russian defense industry, stupidity isn’t one of them.
so, when faced with a good possibility of going out of business and with no means to actively provent that from happening, a company should go out and make SURE that they go out of business instead? what business school taught you that? :rolleyes:
The fact R&D results are never 100% certain, doesn’t mean we could not predict a rough estimation of probability of success base on historical performance, current technology level, and resources available. As project progresses, things will be clearer. People will know what kind of problems they need to overcome and how feasible it is to solve them base on their abilities.
and just how exactly is the russians supposed to know such intemate details of some of china’s most secretive ongoing projects? :rolleyes:
your theory is based on the asumption that the russians would have perfect knowledge. they dont.
You keep repeating Russia’s denial of involvement. I’ll ask again: When did Russia say they aren’t involved in PL-12? How do you know it must be true?
are you unable to read? the story and link has already been published.
If anyone bothers to check Chinese researchers’ views, they will find Chinese is willing to take longer time to get it done themselves, but they also do not oppose to learning from whatever opportunities available.
the chinese researchers are only interested in things they cant do. go present them with a blueprint for a shopping trolly and see how receptive they are. :rolleyes:
china is no stranger to AAMs, they have a whole family of weapons.
the only thing they havent got in service yet is an ARHAAM/ the only major difference between an ARHAAM and a SRHAAM (that china has had in service for a very long time) is the seeker. and its only a very specific part of the seeker at that.
that is the only thing the russians can offer that would tempt the chinese, but making that offer would effectively garenteeing the success of the chinese weapon and so effectively deny the chinese market to russian ARHAAMs.
when faced with certain defeat and having to take a chance, most people would take the chance as they got nothing to loose. if you choose to take the path of certain defeat, more fool you.
plawolfYou keep ignoring the possibility that this could be part of the offset. In other words, Russia could have promised to provide additional technical transfer if China buys Russian products. Stop repeating the junk about how technology level must either be knowing nothing or already succeeded. By this kind of irrational thinking there wouldn’t be any technology transfers anywhere in the world. I get tired of saying it, but not every choice is a binary one. Business deals aren’t that simple, especially not defense industry ones.
There is no need for China to be “desperate”, when they do have past success in combination with enough resources. There is no sure thing, but Chinese researchers aren’t incompetent. Besides in a few years, this is not going to be a monopoly / seller’s market. Russia will not be the only arms dealer available, not to mention some are already quietly doing deals under the table (EU or otherwise). Russia has a large share of the Chinese market now, but the potential competition threat is high. The difference between all the different “some day…” is that the “some day…” for missile is a lot sooner. Strategic business planning isn’t only about today, both short term and long term consequences must be considered.
First, if Israel could downplay and deny technology transfer due to American concern, Russia could also do the same about any indirect involvement to avoid possible pressure from India. Second, there are no reports that said AGAT denied any involvement with PL-12. This is similar to Russia could publicly announce no direct Russian engine sales to Pakistan, but they could not stop China from using domestic engines possibly made with Russian technology transfer.
I am not going to argue about Pentagon report. If you think that because Pentagon report is not perfect or that it has political agenda therefore everything in the report must be false, I won’t stop you.
Not every source must be the same or copied from Jane’s. AWST did its own interviews with Russian defense sources. Others also have their own channels.
To sum up, it’s illogical to use your own binary thinking to evaluate defense industry and business world. There are no explicit denials from every Russian defense organization about PL-12, and there isn’t any assurance that public comments in a political sensitive environment must be entirely true. Stop using the contradicting double standard of American must lie and Russian must be speaking truth.
ha, please. :rolleyes:
so far i have given a throught process based on logic why it is illogical, unprofitable and counterproductive for russia to help out in the PL12/SD10 project.
the best you can do is point to a remote ‘possibility’ dispite the fact that there is ZERO evidence whatsoever to support that claim besides from some quietly pulled newslatter report and subsequent copy and paste follow on articles in other publications.
then of cource, there is the glaring russia DENAL of any involvement.
to beat that sort of statement, you need to do a hell of alot better then just pulling the ‘remote possibility’ card. :rolleyes:
also, trying to use unsubstantiated claimes of israeli tech transfers as an ‘example’ that russia might do it ‘as well’ is just clutching at straws. :rolleyes:
apart from the mythical and thus far completely baseless claim of israeli help with the design of the J10, what other ‘secret’ tech transfers are there? :rolleyes:
if you want to make even a remotely convinceing argument, you need to support that with sound reasoning and/or soild evidence.
so far the only piece of soild evidence on the claim are two explicit DENALs from the russian AND chinese side.
you want to trump that then you have to do a hell of alot better then pulling out random claims of super secret russian deals to help pakistan. :rolleyes:
in regard to business practices, please. :rolleyes:
dont go rattling on about things you clearly have no understanding in.
do you have any idea of what is involved in tech transfer? its always old tech that is transfered. typically some manufacturing, assemby and maybe a little repair technologies and equipment are provided.
the main breadmaking tech of a company is never ever sold unless the company is on its last legs (rover with its engine and car designs for example, only sold that when the company was about to go bust). for AGAT to give away seeker tech is to commite suicide. u said it yourself, russian R&D spenditure has plumitted sincet the end of the USSR, aside from the R77 what other projects have AGAT got that they can sell right not? ramjet R77 is still some way off and in need of alot of money. how do you think they planned on getting that money? by cutting of one the their biggest potential markets? :rolleyes:
alot in business is about taking calculated risks and weighing the odds.
nothing in R&D is ever for certain, and compatancy has little to do with it. just bad luck can result in the major delay and/or cancelation of a project.
its not about binary thinking, its about risk calculation. when someone is in a desperate position, often they would become more optermistic the normal people, that tendency is ampliphied in big companies. they will try and hold out as long as they can hoping for a mirical.
the only thing that will dispell that optimism is stone cold facts. not rumours, not hearsay, something solid.
your arguments are just hot air if the best you can do is to try and milk the secrecy of the chinese defence industry.
plawolfThe point isn’t the word “eventually” but the implication of likelihood in this case. If you want to dismiss China’s leverage in negotiation, I couldn’t help you. I did not say China is “desperate for missile success”, I believe missile is the area where the resources are concentrated, and where China does have a lot of success in the past. And it follows logically that where you have most strength and resources, you have most chips in negotiation. Missile is a special case for precisely this reason, it’s illogical to make a big jump and conclude this applies to everything and Russia would have to give up technology in every area.
what you are unable to explain is how chinese investment in missile tech ALONE could amount to any sort of leverage in getting russia to assist them with missiles.
how is your mind making the link exactly?
why would china be pouring money into its missile industry unless the industry is very important to them? u think the russians cant see that?
their thinking is, ‘ since the chinese think missiles are important enough to throw money into it by the truckload, we can make alot of money with the missiles we have by selling it to them.’
they have very little to gain and everything to loose by giving away seeker tech.
there is nothing certain in the world except taxes and death. just because china is pouring money into missile R&D doesnt automatically mean that they will make a working example anytime soon. just look at all the effort with engines. yes china is likely to succeed some day at the current rate, but the russians can hope to sell a hell of alot of missiles before that ‘someday’ arrives.
helping china with its R&D does nothing except to speed up the arival of that ‘someday’ and will rob russia of possible contracts in the meantime (why would china buy missile today if the russians are helping them to make their own tommorrow? china is not at war, so there is no rush).
so investment alone means nothing. the only factor that would be important enough to force a re-think is actual real world success and progress, and major breakthroughs at that.
logic indicates that russia will not offer to assist china in ANY R&D effort to catch up with russia as its against russia’s best interests. russia would only offer to help when it looks like chinese success is inevitable and immonent. but by that time, russian assistance and participation would only have a complimentory effect in saving china some testing and maybe time. the key technologies would have already been developed by then.
Strictly speaking we are only discussing possibilities. I don’t need to “prove” anything when it’s impossible to do so. There is no “proof” available for either side since there aren’t enough public details. Any indirect evidence could easily be dismissed based on personal opinions.
china never releases any info that isnt seriously out of date, so relying on that secrecy to try to put some spin on this is just desperation.
look back at past projects, whenever there is russian participation, or even when the russians are offering to participate, the news is slapped all over the papers. that is the golden rule of russian participation, and if that rule is not met, it is because the russians are not part of the project.
then of course, there is also the fact of the explicit AGAT denal of any involvement that you have ‘conveniently’ forgot about.
all in all, the russian link has been shot dead on every level long ago. the only thing you have is a pentagon released politicised report that relies on outside hearsay to suggest a possible russian link.
need i remind you of the accuracy of the last major politicised report issed by the pentagon and CIA? :rolleyes:
On Pentagon report, I only need to point back to JH-7 again. Strategic analysis is the part where political bias would influence it the most, Pentagon gains nothing either way for mentioning PL-12 does or doesn’t have Russian assistance.
please, for the JH7 we had pictures and hints at the project by the CHINESE company involved months before.
the fact of the matter is that if something is not declassified government intel based, then its open source, and all the open source material passes through the various forums (in fact the vast majority originates FROM the forums, especially the chinese ones) at some stage and we would have seen it long before the pentagon report.
the russian seeker story passed through the forums and get shot to pieces. the pentagon is just using any material and source it can (regardless of accuracy) to drum up the chinese military ‘threat’ so they can ask for more money.
linking chinese projects to russia is just a political ploy to play on the public preception that the russians make cutting edge weapons, which is better at drumming up fear then just saying the chinese themselves are developing something.
Jane’s isn’t the primary or the only source on this issue, especially not the often cut-and-paste JDW. Even AWST had some reports.
please, if the jane’s story wasnt quitely dropped, you’d be waving it around as ‘proof’ already.
also how is any of the various reports different from the janes one? what new or aditional info did any of them bring up?
to sum up, russian assistance has no logical merit, and the only definitive answer from any of the companies allegidly involved is an explicit denal, you just have no case.
plawolfRussian usually holds back whenever possible. However missile is China’s top priority in R&D, therefore China also has more leverage in potential technology transfer. If we look at it from the angle of choosing eventual defeat or getting money first in a controlled manner, then it’s not a question for Russian at all.
that just doesnt make sense if you think it through. because missiles is china’s top priority russia should be getting desperate? how did you come up with that?
if china was so desperate for missile success, then it should be the russians who would have alot more leverage. the seller only ever looses power over the buyer when there is a choice.
to suggest that russia would help because china would eventually achieve the goal is just illogical.
by that argument, russia should just open all its secrets to china today, seeing how china is very likely to surpass them ‘eventually’.
th fact of the matter is that the russians will be trying to milk the chinese market for as long as possible. they are not going to kill off their biggest source of income just because there is a chance that china might come up with something later. if the russians are realsing more advanced tech, its not because they think china might have something similar, its because they KNOW china does.
The assumption of no Russian assistance on PL-12 is also only a possibility. Without knowing the actual discussion/negotiation between Russia and China and without knowing the actual current status of PL-12 and radars, there is no “supporting evidence” for asserting no Russian involvement either.
im sorry, but that is just desperate.
the chinese are natoriously secretive and tight liped about what they tell you, so if you are going to wait for offical comfermation of a project, you’d be a good many years behind the curve.
russian assistance on the PL12/SD10 is improbable because there is just zero evidence from the russian set to support that idea – a complete contrast to projects where russian participation is included.
the fact of the matter is that the PL12/SD10 is a chinese missile, and it is up to you to prove a foriegn link, not the other way round.
Of course there are uncertainties when Pentagon use the word “reportedly”. Pentagon report is not perfect, but it does serve as a good filter. The 2003 Pentagon report said “China reportedly is developing an improved version of the FB-7”, so should we just believe that JH-7A must be a groundless fiction? If you got a problem with my previous use of “settle”, fine. But don’t call it a “dramatic effect” and treat it as automatically false.
do you have blinders on or something?
because the pentagon report (which, btw is for political and public consumption and not a detailed report for the military) used words like ‘reportedly’, then that means the pentagon (ie the american intellegence aparatus) is not the source of the claim. so where else could that have come from? do the maths.
the russian link had been doing the rounds on the net and found its way to influentual publications like Janes, only to be pulled later when the russian firm allegidly involved in the missile denied involvement.
what we are seeing now is just delayed reaction.
also, if you have paid any attention at all to that report, you would know the political influences behind it. because it is a political document first and foremost, there will be terms and lines dropped in for political reasons as opposed to overwhelming evidence in support of those claims.
you are just trying too hard to find a link that simply isnt there.
plawolfCan’t find a good place for this. Here is my original comment, which I could not post from the now locked WS-10 thread:
After technological base is established, it is very possible to expand. China has chosen missiles as one of the area of concentration. Although priority of AAM wasn’t as high as Ballistic missiles, it will change as advanced aircraft platforms mature. There is no doubt China will able to make its own BVR missile eventually, simply because of the resources invested and the technology spillovers.
Once again we see the binary mentality here. There is no reason to separate missile project into only two stages of knowing nothing and success assured. Engineering projects are much more than feasibility studies and certifications for mass production, there are multiple increments of requirement specification, architectural analysis, prototypes, model / simulation, design review, etc. There could be components that China would be able to make only at lower quality, higher cost, or longer schedule – it could easily benefit from Russian assistance for different reasons.
alot of fairly good points, but unfortunately none of them addresses the key stumbling block of the russian assistance claim – why would the russians want to help?
how does it serve their interests to help china develop a missile that will not only rob it of future missile sales in china, but also will inevitably compete with russian missiles and fighters on the international market.
russia might be short on cash, but that doesnt make them dumb.
do the maths, how much would china need to offer them to off-set:
a) the potentially huge chinese domestic market, and
b) the world missile AND fighter market – since these days fighters often come with missiles in a package as opposed to just the fighter or missile.
Missile / radar is also another complicated issue. It is possible Russian agreed to the interface for a high price, and China refused. Or China could use PL-12 with Russian radar but simply choose not to do so because Russian missiles are superior. Or if China is determined to replace the radar/missiles on some platform anyway, release source code easily would only mean less missile sale for MKK / MK2. There are a lot of possibilities, the Russian radar / PL-12 situation doesn’t prove PL-12 absolutely had no Russian assistance.
that is just a lot of possibilities, but none have anything even resembing supporting evidence.
However I noticed the 2005 Pentagon report on China military power said,
“Russia and China reportedly are cooperating on the seeker, rudder control actuation system design, and inertial navigation system for the PL-12 air-to-air missile, which continued testing in 2004.”This should settle the question for the Russian role in PL-12.
notice the highlighted part.
its just a copy and paste job to suit politics. you dont use ‘get out’ words like ‘reportedly’, ‘allegedly’, rumoured’ etc if you have soild evidence or data one way or the other. its just something they wanted to put in for dramatic effect, but cant actually find the soild evidence to present it as a fact. so, they use ‘reportedly’, if it turns out to be pure BS, they can say ‘we werent the source of that, we were fooled like the rest of you!’. its really an old trick thats been used to death.
the reason they do that is because most people are unaware of the exact abilities of the chinese military industry, so it doesnt easily scare them when they hear that the chinese are developing something. however, most still hold the general impression that the russians are very good at making weapons and that their tech is cutting edge. thus, by linking chinese projects with russia whenever possible, the politions can find it easier to sell their ‘chinese military threat’ idea more easily.
its really just a marketing tool to play on general public perceptions.
plawolfIt’s not contradictory. If China is determined to develop its own AAM, Russia faces two choices: Russia could provide no help at all and do not accelerate Chinese development. Alternatively, providing technology assistance allows Russia to gain access to the project, and Russia controls the level of technology released. Offering assistance doesn’t equal unlimited access.
For reverse engineering, it’s very difficult to do without an actual sample, but I am not suggesting PL-12 relying on reverse engineering of R-77. Direct technical assistance doesn’t require sample of another missile.
im afraid that just doesnt add up. the above all has to be based on the assumption that china will succeed in their own BVR AAM development with or without russian help.
because why would the russians help out if it seemed likely that china would not be able to make their own BVR AAM, and so would be forced to buy russian R77s sooner or later?
at the start of the PL12/SD10 project, it would have been all but impossible for an outsider to know if the project was to succeed or not, so the chances of the russians offering help right from the start is close to zero.
but by the point where PL12/SD10 success seemed immemant, russian help would not have been necessary. so the whole argument of russians helping out because they had not choice just doesnt work out.
however, china holds a significant number of russian made ac with russian radars that would be incompatable with a chinese missile.
that is where the russians would be facing the dilema (after PL12/SD10 success is all but assured).
if they dont supply R77 tech or help to make the chinese missile compatable with the russian radars, then chances are china would simply replace the radars at the first possible opportunity with chinese ones (ala, J11B). to make the chinese missiles compatable with the russian radars would also effectively rule out any future sales of the missiles, so the best and perhaps only option would be to sell R77 seekers and allow the chinese to mate that with a chinese missile.
this way the russians at least get to sell something, and the chinese save money by using a chinese missile body and also by not having to replace the brand new radars so soon.
plawolfo here comes the troll,
You need learn and express yourself so that you can come up with proper replies instead of childish insults.
somehow you know the radar’s frequency plz entertian us to what it is or it more of your jibberish you guys spit out and claim its fact. Nice that you wasted your time with that pointless excuse of a post anyway not gonna waste my time arguing with you since its pointless, its no factual and doesnt concern you.
http://www.afcea.org/signal/articles/anmviewer.asp?a=992&z=38
“…Their undesignated Chinese radar is different from the Aegis or Sky Watch phased array radars. This radar is C-band instead of L- or F-band, and it has convex curved arrays instead of flat panels. ..”
it might be an idea to actually have read what has already been pointed out before rushing to post. :rolleyes:
Besides how did you know what he meant unless you are him (multiple user ids?), fact that he choose not to correct himself in the reply to my post in his first reply is more than proof thats what he meant.
er, um because i can read and understand english? :rolleyes:
go and read what was posted, if you still cant understand it, find someone you trust and have them read it and tell you what he meant. :rolleyes:
plawolffirst of all kvant is ukranian not russian and second saying russians dont have radar like that is moot argument because they dont have any funding. But russians do have very capable state of the art radar system there is tombstone radar, Podberezovik radar, 3D positiv etc.
Anyway PLAN’s radar capability are very minimal if they could come with something like that why they do use good A band WW-II radars for 052c’s search function, i mean whatever capability 052c’s phased radar has goes right down the drain because of those. China is capable of devoloping state of art 5th generation phased array radars but cant devolop a simple search radar right dont get me started on whole ithose VHF antennas are stealth detection radar argument plz. As i said from the begining i doubt those phased array radar are very capable.
so, 052C doesnt use a russian radar, so the radar must be crap, otherwise why wouldnt they buy a russian one?
even thou i am not the one saying its ukrainian i think its some decent chinese phased array knock off. You cant say that its not soviet based simply because they didnt have such system installed on destroyer as i said before a lot of soviet systems were R&D and were never implemented due to lack of funding.
ok, now its a ‘decent knock off’ of a russian radar. seeing how russia has nothing in service or in development that we know off that even resembles the APR on the 052C, they must have based it on some super secret soviet R&D radar.
you are calling me dumb considering how you can read english properly, were did i say that its russian or ukrainian i am not even arguing that it is. I am saying you cant say its not soviet simply because it wasnt deployed on a vessel unless you first off show us proof that is chinese or its not ukrainian. Before you spout out more off you idiotic arguments plz try to read and understand english first. As i said before russia had plenty of naval advanced radar systems that werent mass deployed on vessel i already listed a few off those above..
so, its a radar on a chinese warship, with no russian or ukranian or martian firm coming forward to claim credit for the radar (as they always do when they have sold something); no russian or ukranian or martial firm has anything like it in their sales brochers to offer for sale to anyone else, its still russian or ukrianian or martial until proven otherwise?
loving the ‘logic’ so far.
you are calling me dumb considering how you can read english properly, were did i say that its russian or ukrainian i am not even arguing that it is.
strange, as that seem to conflict with your earlier comment that:
“even thou i am not the one saying its ukrainian i think its some decent chinese phased array knock off.”
I am saying you cant say its not soviet simply because it wasnt deployed on a vessel unless you first off show us proof that is chinese or its not ukrainian.
ah, silly me, and i thought the mere fact that there is nothing even remotely like it in russia or ukrian would mean that their involvement is ruled out until a link can be established via concrete proof and not just wild guesses involving supersecret half-finished soviet relics.
Before you spout out more off you idiotic arguments plz try to read and understand english first.
well you are not really making it easy for the rest of us in all fairness.
As i said before russia had plenty of naval advanced radar systems that werent mass deployed on vessel i already listed a few off those above..
did anyone say russia has no good naval radars? the fact is russia has nothing like that delpoyed on the 052C.
if it was some collaberation to finish soviet left overs, why isnt the russians or ukranians trying to sell more of the radars to places like india?
russia needs the money and the indians would be willing to pay top $ for stuff like that. so why no sale? its not like the russians have ever been exclusive about who they sell to.
lmao right repeating yourself because you cant read and respond to responses isnt that meaning of a dumb response. You idotically said russia hasnt devoloped a advanced radar like that for destroyers and i provided proof of some very capable radars that were devoloped by russia for the russian navy and export so i rest may case.
and none of which looks remotely like the 052C’s APRs. they dont even work on the same frequency.
Bad english? That arguments makes anyone believe you are basically saying that russia has no radar system anywere near as capable as it is on 052C.
ah, and here comes the real reason, giving in to a little thing called ‘pride’ are we?
lead to the dark side, that path does.
in case you still havent realised, the original quote was:
“Not only that, the Kvant has only been on carrier sized ships. There is absolutely NO Russian destroyer with a system anywhere near the 052C’s.”
which is saying there is nothing remotely like it in delpoyment. unless there is some supersecret russian destroyer with four APRs that you would care to declassify, that is a FACT.
If you didnt mean that why didnt correct yourself 6 posts back instead of typing more pathetic name callings By knockoff i mean copyoff of some land based radar ofcourse which is what most say that radar is. You need learn and express yourself so that you can come up with proper replies instead of childish insults.
it is you who mis-read what was posted in the first place, and then went off on some ‘crusade’ to ‘prove’ that russia has better radars then the chinese using undisclosable supersecret soviet stuff as the ONLY argument for your suggestion that the radars on the 052C are either super crap or based on some unknowable russian/ukrianian stuff.
plawolfIt is almost certain that the WS10A is not based on the AL31, but is rather a combination of indigenous technologys, and what has been aquired from elsewhere over the years. (largely the US desighn they aquired in th 80s). It is also very likely that in recent years AL31 tech has been introduced to the WS10A.
An interesting point is that, the AL31 (If I remember correctly) had to be specially modified in order to fit in the J10, this suggests that the J10 was thus not desighned for the AL31, but rather an existing indigenous desighn-WS10A?
Also remember that when J10 development began china and the soviet union were not exactly good friends, thus the chances of china recieving thier latest engine technology during that era are slim to say the least.
Knowone deighns a plane without an engine.
SD10/PL12 is supposedly a modified indiginised russian seeker head on a fully indigenous airframe and motor-range is believed to be supeior to Russian equivilants but manouvrebility characteristics are at this stage impossible to confirm.
I would not be surprised if we did see the kind of production rates crobato has suggested, china already has the largest naval building programme of any nation since the end of the cold war, and the PLAAF is considered to be the weakest of the 3 services.
if the PL12’s seeker was off russian origin, why cant it be intergrated with the russian radars of the russian built flankers?
also, why would the russians sell the seeker when they were desperate to sell the missile?
plawolfNope. They are hoping to build 100 J-10s in the next two years. The next 100 engines ordered after that end up as spares if the J-10 shifted to the WS-10A by then. I would agree that is awfully ambitious. And they still have to build another 100 FC-1s on top of that in the same amount of time, since it’s the same company and they have also ordered 100 engines for that too. Literally, that’s about 100 planes per year combined of the two types.
I only wonder how they are going to manage all this.
they could outsource much of the work to the other chinese aviation companies desperate for contracts and only keep the key parts and finial assembly at chengdu.
plawolfer, are you saying they plan to build 80 J-10s in the next two years (lets assume 20 engines for spare) ? thats a *huge* rate of production for any fighter (?)
if a second production line is to be opened soon as suspected, then the rate of production could reach 50 per year, so 80 for two years is not all that astronomical.
plawolfPRC has already received 54 AL-31 engines for J-10 between 2002-04. recently it ordered 100 more, and Salyut says they expect a follow-on order of equal size. It seems inspite of appearing to be in flight tests inside Su27 it is quite some years away from being declared ready for active duty and PLAAF not wanting to delay the entire J-10 any longer went for AL-31.
I guess the reason is reverse engineering or copying a AL-31 type engine isnt a walk in the park and from some point one has to figure things out themselves..Salyut is unlikely to help because nobody in the engine world shares their priceless design skills and test data.
> To the Chinese, the AL-31F is not a proven design. For them, given its
> numerous problems in service, it is pure crap and they would not have any
> of itwell they have already signed up for 150+ on J-10. I dont see why PRC would
be running 200 flankers and now all its J-10s on a “crap engine”. 😀
other flanker users dont think its crap, though its mtbf isnt of the GE std.
the WS10 is SAC’s baby, and as such, their J11B gets first bit of the cherry.
also, its better to have a new engine on a twin engine plane then a single engined plane.
seeing how the WS10 is tested on a J11, and the fact that the AL31s for the J11 and J10 are wired differently, it well be a while after the WS10 is in service with J11s before it will be physically ready for the J10.
thats why the 100 engines over TWO years. enough to keep J10 production going for now, but not commiting to it in the long run so the engine can be discontinued whenever the WS10 is ready to take over.
plawolfbut if the PLAAF was indeed just waiting for the plane to have all its problems sorted before buying it, what of the planes already in deployment?
if the PLAAF was forced to buy it, there is no reason why it would be such a small number. if the programme is indeed behind schedual or not finished, why are there units in operation at all? if there is a delay, why isnt there an increase in J10 activity at FTTC to make up for lost time?
also, if there is a problem with the J10, how can CAC progress so quickly with the FC1?
seeing how many key members of the FC1 team are also important members of the J10 team, their continued presence on the FC1 project could only be explained, in parellal with a problem with the J10, by the theory that CAC has effectively given up on the J10.
surely that is too big a development to not get noticed or hinted at.
also, what of the 1000 engine order?
i’m not trying to be awkward or to make any point, yet. 😉 im just trying to get a glimps of the thought process behind your theory that the J10 programme is in trouble.
ps, here is an old pic of a two ship J10 flight. i dont think its PSed.
plawolfI don’t pretend to know everything, that is others in this forum. I don’t talk about the radars, engines, or other aspects of the plane that others say like they just got off the phone with the Chengdu factory. Just like the production rate of 2 per month. That was speculation that makes its way into this forum like fact.
I don’t know what the problems are but I’m knowledgable enough about the PLAAF to recognize when something is out of the norm. I called problems with the J-10 a year and a half ago based on some simple analysis. There was talk about engine deliveries, engine development, production lines, etc etc to show why I was wrong. The bottom line is simple. The plane was sent to the worst unit in the PLAAF over a year ago and has not been seen since. Even those assigned to the Flight Test and Training Center aren’t based any longer at the Cangzhou but relegated to the backup airfield. You can play the secrecy card if you want, I choose to play the problem card. There are too many plane spotters in China for information about the J-10’s activities not to make the net. Chengdu had serious problems with the J-7 and the project was almost cancelled. Why do we not consider the same scenerio is a possibility with this project. Chengdu has not produced anything outside of the basic J-7 design to prove itself capable. Would you buy a new car made by Yugo now without thinking maybe it would be a lemon as well?
What makes you think its so secret, anyway? Because we don’t hear much about it. Maybe that’s because its not worth talking about. The Chief of Staff of the Beijing Military Region mentioned the J-10 by name, to includee where they are based, but not the Su-27s/Su-30s (he simply referred to them as “you know”). He also readily admits it is used for air defense. Not much secrecy there.
but if the J10 programme is having troubles but is in active service as an ‘air defence’ fighter. seeing how its operating area is well documented, and with so many planespotters in china. shouldnt there be an increase in the number of J10 pictures instead on having nothing at all show up for so long? :confused:
its surely too late to try to sweep the programme under the rug and pretend it never existed to ‘save face’, and it doesn’t fit the trend if we look back at past projects like the JH7 and Type98 MBT. both were considered flawed and only had limited production runs, but both had tons of publicity regardless. and also, both were volentarily exposed ‘out of the blue’ without all the added pressure of leaked pictures that traced much of their development (meaning if they were swept under the rug, few people would have been the wiser about it. certainly far fewer when compared to the J10).
not wanting to expose problems in understandable and believable, but not having any new pictures at all or any offical declassification doesn’t quite seem to fit the bill of a out of favour and flawed project. in that case, CAC and the chinese government might not want to say too much, but the ordinary planespotter would still be very keen on getting a shot of the J10. and if it was just dumped to some backwater unit for the sake of having it, security would have been relaxed which would have allowed more pictures to be taken.
no disrespect meant, but it just doesn’t seem to quite add up. :confused:
plawolfA v interesting picture
the markings are russian, not chinese. and the model looks awfully like the S37.
Sign In
