FedaykinOh come on MadRAt! Twenty years! :rolleyes:
Going on the development time from first flight to in-service of more recent types in the PLAAF/PLANAF its more like five to ten years.
It depends how much mature (for China) technology they are levering into the design. If they are using an RD-93 variant as many are suggesting general flight testing can proceed at a pace. Presumably a significant proportion of the avionics like the FBW are evolutions of systems already developed for other types. There is no reason why it can’t be using many of the sub systems developed for the J-11B, J-15 or J-10B. If this is the rumoured type destined for export and rival to the J-10B then I would think that under the skin SAC are being reasonably conservative with the details.
FedaykinThe duel wheel is probably for CATOBAR operations.
Eventually PLAN is going for a catapult carrier.Take a good look at the large high res picture.
I see the tail hook where the stinger is.
It’s semi recessed into the tail stinger.BTW the JT-9 trainer does not do CATOBAR hence no need for dual nose wheel.
Come on guys! Waaaaaaaay too many assumptions are being made on the basis of a small number of pictures!
Twin nose wheel gear and a possible tail hook does not make it into a carrier fighter! Many land only fighters have tail hooks and twin nose wheel configuration, for that matter there are many carrier fighters that only had a single nose wheel!
To my eyes the front undercarriage lacks the heavy bracing back into the airframe to take the catapult loads or a nose bar. I can’t particularly make out the details of any tail hook. If it is intended for STOBAR operations we will find out in the future. I am inclined to think this is a stealthy land based twin engine fighter in the same class as the J-10 rather then an alternative to the J-20. Considering there have been multiple reports that the CAC J-10B has a SAC rival that is entirely in keeping with what we are seeing.
Until we see more of it in operation it is way too early to make such sweeping statements with such certainty! As it is the PLANAF will have its hands full with the J-15 to even consider qualifying such an experimental design.
FedaykinThe fighter doesnt has side weapon bay, and it is powered by WS-13 at the moment, and in the future the 9500-kgf power WS-XX.
However, neither WS-13 nor the future WS-XX has a low by-pass ratio, therefore, the fighter’s supercruise performance will be limited, if has any at all.
Well the RD-93 the WS-13 is apparently similar to hasn’t exactly got a great by-pass ratio. It is more of a turbojet with a bypass section, nevertheless this does represent an interesting development. As it doesn’t have the export restrictions associated with Western jets it might represent an attractive solution for a number of airforces.
FedaykinCertainly no photoshop, if it is export oriented and the price is right it could stir up the international fighter market.
It looks smaller then J-20, I wonder if it is powered by the WS-13.
FedaykinThey are not being built for USAF. The last USAF F-15E was delivered in 2001 and the last USAF F-16C was delivered in 2005.
Only the US Navy continues to buy a 30 year old tactical jet design (F/A-18). But USN is known for “200 years of tradition, unimpeded by progress”. 😮
But they are still in production for other countries as I have already pointed out.
Also the USN isn’t buying a 30 year old tactical jet (that is just a myth pedalled by the anti Super Hornet brigade), the Super Hornet was developed in the 90’s as a new design albeit using some sub systems and structures from the legacy Hornet.
FedaykinThe plan was when the Gannet AEW.3 retired the RAF would eventually take over the GIUK gap AEW mission with the in development Nimrod AEW.3. In theory as the Royal navy was reducing in size and focusing on a North Atlantic cold war ASW mission where land based Nimrod AEW.3 and USN E2C Hawkeye would provide the cover.
Gannet AEW.3 had no way to operate off Invincible and the equipment to operate off Hermes was long removed, finally the Gannets had been gutted of their AN/APS-20 radar to be installed in the Shackleton AEW.2 that were acting as an interim solution until Nimrod AEW.3 entered service.
The Falklands scenario of long range expeditionary warfare where the carriers would have to protect an amphibious assault group was an utter surprise! There was no way the Shackleton AEW.2 could of provided cover to the task force so a crash program instigated on getting Searchwater installed on the Sea King. Luckily design work had already happened as the conversion was proposed but rejected when the RN went to Through Deck cruisers and Sea Harrier. Also a number of ex Gannet AEW.3 personnel were able to assist in the development work.
Unfortunately for the taskforce the converted Sea King became available after the war finished.
FedaykinThey certainly do still produce the F-15 and F-16 but they haven’t stopped production of those types. The F-15 and F-16 have a supply chain still running for the key systems they use whilst F-22 production is frozen in time. To relaunch would require suppliers to recertify processes and hire new staff. Also some of the avionics are obsolete and will require replacement. Curiously some systems in the latest F-15 and F-16 are more modern then those fitted to the F-22.
FedaykinYou are right Jo that this merger would give EADS significant access to the North American market.
FedaykinThe other possibility is BAE Systems would be forced to spin off parts of the company that were regarded as vital to national security for example submarine design and construction.
Hmmmm? A spun off submarine business based in Barrow, what name could they give it ummmmm how about VSEL! 😀
FedaykinWell the government might just block it, they have said they are monitoring developments. BAE Systems maintains several sovereign capabilities which are regarded as vital to national security. Firewalls would have to be put around certain parts of the business and guarantees that they would be protected…for example the submarine part of the business. Rolls Royce had to do a similar thing when the procured Allison in America, certain parts of the business in respects of R&D are fire-walled from the UK side of operations.
There are plenty of positives around consolidation and it adds things like complex ship building to the EADS portfolio.
FedaykinI wouldn’t be surprised if PoW becomes Ark Royal. Remember the current Ark Royal was going to be Indomitable. They can’t rename QE as she is lead of class but the second ship being renamed would save some face.
FedaykinWhilst I am not usually one for conspiracy theories the issue of the RAF Typhoon cannon stunk to high heaven!
The canon deletion was offered up as a cost saving mainly on a through life basis. They could have offered to delete parts of the Defensive aids system like the towed decoy. Nevertheless the RAF said delete the cannon! Of course removing the cannon causes significant centre of gravity issues so concrete turned into the real thing but not to be used…finally when they had to push the ground attack capability so the cannon decision is reversed.
Considering the RAF Typhoon are the only ones with the full defensive aids package with the partner nations choosing to omit parts of the system it would been far cheaper and simpler to remove part of that then the cannon! Of course that would of meant the RAF wouldn’t of got the defensive aids they wanted…
Now they have it all and not a penny was saved!
Fedaykinit is from March. they only deny agreement not denying negotiation. it is possible Chinese aproached for Su-35 but Russia gave it high price and long delivery time line.
China has very poor high end engg. skills. it will for ever import heavy aviation stuff.
I know as I am wasting my breath here as you clearly think China is only a couple of steps away from the stone age when it comes to technology JSR. The suggestion that China has very poor high end engineering skills and will forever have to import heavy aviation stuff sic…is just plain bone headed!
China has multiple high end technology industries producing everything from aircraft to ships and finally rockets. Every week we get actual photos from the China blogosphere of new developments be it the new 052D anti air warfare destroyer this week or the latest Longmarch rocket last week. The fact that there has been no induction of new Russian fighter jets for a number of years now should tell you something. There has been procurement of certain niche aircraft like the Kamov AEW but even that is in back up to two different indigenous programs. China has multiple aviation programs aerospace programs in play be it civilian airliners, or heavy transport aircraft and of course fighters! The major barrier is engines and even that is rapidly diminishing now the WS-10 issues appear to be ironed out.
Frankly I find your constant statements on how backwards China is ever so slightly racist…maybe that is because I have a Chinese girlfriend but lets say can you give it a rest!:mad:
FedaykinJ-17? New one on me!
Fact is China doesn’t seem to be interested in Russian fighter jets anymore, now they appear to have the WS-10 ironed out plus a follow on order of AL31 CAC and SAC appear to be able to meet domestic needs for now.
The J-7 is now retired and the J-8 is being wound down in service. The JH7, J-10 and J-11B are being inducted at a steady rate and the follow types are in flight testing. For that matter China is retiring its imported Su-27 and early J-11A built from CKD. Albeit part of the reasons for doing that is to get the engines and husband the remaining Russian munitions and parts.
The thing with the Russian sourced jets is they are not allowed to integrate domestic munitions and pods. Now domestic Chinese munitions are up to the task a further procurement of a Russian type that doesn’t allow their integration seems foolish.
Sign In
