J-10C powered by WS-10B

WS-10 powered J-10C and comparison with AL-31FN powered J-10B

Any details on this YJ-83K AShM? Or on the J-16?

YJ-83K is the air-launched version of the YJ-83 anti-ship missile. Not sure about the specifications but It has an export version named C-802A – Link-1 , Link-2

J-16 with 2x YJ-83K anti-ship missiles –

Pylons are way behind the CG rendering them probably useless for heavy bomb loads and draggy (trim drag). 

The speculation is that these pylons are for PL-10 and PL-15.

Although, a year or 2 back, there were images of a J-20 prototype carrying drop tanks – Image-1, Video-1

J-20,

A single F125IN (max afterburner)  can produce up to  9080 lbf – https://aerospace.honeywell.com/en/learn/products/engines/f125

But a single F404 is rated between  17,700 and 19,000 lbf   https://www.geaviation.com/sites/default/files/datasheet-F404-Family.pdf

That is double the F125IN.

Hi Quantum. Yes the single F-414 powered Naval LCA Mk2 design with the stabilators has been abandoned. the Indian Navy finally made it official to ADA that it would not acquire single engine carrier fighters and that left ADA with no option but to begin the process for the design of a new twin engine TEDBF design, powered by 2 F-414 engines.

As of now, what we know is that target MTOW is 24 tonnes, which is in the same range as the MiG-29K and Rafale M, but the thrust is significantly more than the M-88 on the Rafale M. 2 X 98 kN F-414 engines will give it nearly 196 kN of total thrust, to allow for STOBAR ops off of IN’s 2 STOBAR carriers with lower payload limitations in hot and humid conditions. It is targeted as a replacement for the IN’s MiG-29K fleet.

Rafale M is great for CATOBAR ops, but for STOBAR ops, it will have payload limitations, especially in the hot and humid Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal environs.

Cool! Thanks for the reply. A twin-engined version does make sense for a naval fighter.