Seems they got one (wrong) memo regarding painting when they painted 31/51 and then got another (correct) one. IIRC it was already mentioned in comments to pics of 51 that the camo was wrong and they are supposed to be Navy Su-30SM style instead.

PS: Just checked, yup, and apparently 31/51 are supposed to be repainted. We will see about that. And painting quality of these new ones is still utter ****. Someone should fire those morons already.

Hey, I’m betting a can of beer that they will not repaint anything.. :very_drunk: Why saying such things that quality is terrible anyway, have you seen detailed pics or checked the paint by your self visually? Just bcs these two are different from a supposed Navy camo standard, they will throw a few million rubles to repaint it? Do they aslo want to repaint many Sukhois to unify the camo in the RuAF?

Thanks to both !

To admit – even if most in other Chinese forums don’t agree here with me – I actually don’t understand why the PLAAF refuses to order 48 at least ? … only 24 really do not make sense, other than if You only want the 117S ! However two regiments with the new type would make sense, they would be available much sooner than any J-11D-MLU and could open the window for the J-20 to use this engine too.
Deino

you are always selling new aircrafts with spare parts, aggregates, including spare engines, so with 24 frames another 20 engines will be purchased within the deal, depends on the desired availability ratio. Maybe that is enough for them, no reason to buy more Su-35 if you want the engine only.
Well, this picture says it all…..:D:D

WE DAMN WANT THESE TWO!!!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]233345[/ATTACH]

The T-50 airframe isn’t much lighter than the F-22 airframe but the dry and afterburning thrust from the 117 motor is not close to the PW F119 – the power/weight ratio of T-50 still isn’t there, for the moment. I think even the F-16E Block 60 has a better power/ weight ratio – the F110-GE-132 turbofan is certainly in the same thrust and technology class as 117.

it is notoriously known that latest F-16 blocks with higher thrust engines have even worser flight performances than early F-16 blocks, so why arguing with this? When is the aircraft underpowered, when having thrust/weight ratio 1,2 or 1,4?

PAZ-MK

http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/ru/node/530

Nope, injectors apparently.

Made a call to a friend in the airforce, told me about a non official offer by Russians once in the past, a number of potential engine modifications of existing Slovak Rd-33. One of them was to install a new smokeless combustion chamber together with a modified turbine both equipped with advanced thermal barrier coatings to ensure Rd-33 smokeless operation. Of course non of those modifications ever saw a day light due to many reasons me thinking the smokeless chamber exclusivelly available with new built Rd-33MK only. I must add that I was wrong about Poles, the WZL-4 is performing RD-33 overhauls almost 10 years now, anyway non-authorized according to Moscow-based Chernyshev plant and Klimov JSC in the meaning, they do not have official support and access to engine producer modifications and documentation, ….etc. Despite of that I find the story about installing new “smokeless” injectors into a regular Rd-33 to be a completely bogus.

So far, all the evidence proves me right, right?…:D
2014
[ATTACH=CONFIG]233297[/ATTACH]

Doesn’t need to be MK for it to be smokeless, the replacement could even be made on good old RD-33’s i believe.

no, you have to change the whole engine to get the smokeless chamber, but it doesnt matter, the point being here is that Chinese can t do better and have to rely on old Russian engines, what will last a decade or more. Jet engines are more difficult to copy than aircrafts…:very_drunk:

that`s another thing Chinese copyied from Russians :very_drunk:, no exposed flaperon actuators, or does the old Su-27 uses EHA as well?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]233286[/ATTACH]