Following Your guess ! :diablo:

Others might have a different opinion and in mind of the J-10 prototype’s – J-10-serials few (actually very few !) differences I expect only similar minor changes. (But I admit this is my guess !)

Deino 😉

O.T.

J-10B’s nose and avionics (with its AESA radar) is flying on an Y-8 electronics test bed in China Engineering Flight Test Center livery. some one posted the picture on chinese internet couple of days ago.

I think they are modding another Il-76 for J-20’s nose.

To me, the nose gear on the naval Typhoon artist’s impression looks horribly flimsy for a naval aircraft. Sure, thrust vectoring’s supposed to allow smoother landings… but really ? In bad weather, on a moving deck, possibly with battle damage ? Sounds a bit too optimistic. I remember when a Rafale M did an uncontrolled exit from runway and plowed through an earth bank with no damage to the gear (the pilot had ejected though). The nosegear on a Rafale M is massive in comparison to that picture.
Edit : and while I have the Rafale M at the forefront of my memory, I’m pretty sure Hornets and co have similarly sturdy landing gears.

I mean gear attachement point to the main load bearing structure.

ah hem…

Just read the magazine interview over there in top81.cn with some 2nd in charge chief engineer for some awacs program. radar expert.

The magazine is “weapon’s knowlege”.

some high lights I can gather.
* He thinks J-20 will have an AESA radar in service. on par in cardinal performance with F-22’s AGP-77 circa 2005.
* only 3rd gen (Su-27/J-10) there is no chance in hell going up against 4th Gen.
* working with AWACS (KJ-2000?) a mix of 4th + 3rd gen fighters can achieve good results against a force of 4th gen.
* in a BVR scenario against opfor’s 4th gen. datalink in AWACS gives target info for LRAAM at ranges around 150KM. own 4th gen launchs missile and midcourse updates with datalink via info from AWACs, at <60Km, AWACS directs 4th Gen to turn on its own radar for final targeting.
* He thinks J20 as advantage over F-35 in BVR. regardless of AWACs.

my thoughts:
* their simulation thinks AWACs is key in 4th on 4th BVR slug.
* they have pretty high confidence in their AWACS.
* bar the chance that this is a fake interview. this is some good stuff. but not the final word. it is only someone’s opinion, but some one with insight and knowledge from first hand experience with their program.

p.s. someone can re-post the scanning. I am too lazy to do it.

why is China relevent in this discussion? :rolleyes:
this is pretty reflexive isn’t it?

and talk about patronising… isn;t it you guys who told me to shut it or else?

So what´s the need for advanced jet trainers?

save hours( $$$) on your fighters.

Its called the Indian Sub Continent and not the South Asian sub-continent. Raise eye brows all you want on the instability, but India is preparing itself for a potential two-front war in which IAF will have a big role to play.
😉

sematics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Asia

yeah… and when people who are influencial in IAF make these comments and routinely make these amatureish assessements, I worry about their ability to make the right decision at the right time… mis-calculations etc, could very much push india into needless conflicts.

also, who are they fighting in this two front war? fighting over what? china and pakistan? does india seriously think it can win some sort of aggressive war over china? and why is it preparing for war? who exactly is threatening it? don’t tell me it is pakistan because clearly a internally unstable pakistan is in no position to launch a aggressive conventional war.
china? over what? over borders where china repeatly wants India to sit down and negotiate but india repeatly refuses over the past 20 years?
Mr. Singh is clearly not an aggressive man.
thus I am worried. there are clearly aggressive elements in India’s national security complex that wants a war that India can neither afford or win nor is necessary. and those aggressive elements demonstrates repeately with these amaturish comments that they are not too capable of solid analytical thinking either.

now that you have raised (both ?) your eye-brows and ‘re-assessed’, what are you going to do about it, my exalted overlord ? 😀

just like any one here can do. nothing really.

Oh God when would people ever learn.

PLAAF and PLAN paid for and specificed those MKKs with specific operational requirements in mind. as far as I can tell they filled those requirements.

hopefully so did IAF with those MKI.

but IAF’s requirements and PLAAF and PLAN’s requirements were different.

DIFFERENT.

the USAF analogue would be F-15E vs an operational F-15 STOL/MTD.

how in the ******* can you compare them two?!

what worries me is the consistent way which key people both inside IAF and outside make amatureish assessments of their forces’s supposed overall qualitative and quantative superiority, based on some very specific technical platform matchups. coupled with the grossly inappropriate Indian chief’s ACM comment aimed obviously at J-20 and china.

this calls into the question of miscalculation on part of some of the key people inside of world’s 4th largest airforce… with nukes to boot.