Why SAC using Sukhoi airframe is something between SAC & Sukhoi and if both sides selected don’t reveal their common consent on SAC how to use Sukhoi’s Flanker aerodynamic design, we won’t know, because, both of us are not seating in either Sukhoi or SAC’s supervision board. Your practice is if you don’t see the agreement between SAC & Sukhoi then you think SAC using the Flanker airframe is deemed to be illegal if without the 200 limitation, while I through in another more pratical way by observing the visible facts and other Russian firms’ behavior , Those Russian firms which got a better position to know the real situation than both of us.are not behaving according to what you predicted, that is: fighting back Chinese economically or even militarily.

Then I will challenge you again, could you produce anything solid saying SAC is banned to use Flanker airframe if over the magic 200 limit? Maybe sukhoi already gave SAC the exclusive right to use Su27 airframe in another separated deal which does not come into light?

Well, Hyper, “The Ordnance Technology” is the magazine credited for revealing some data of SD-10 & PL-9 AAM in its interview report of SB-10/PL-9’s depute chief designer. Those data now are widely quoted when mentioning of Chinese AAMs.

Actually here I just post the last page of the core engine report on Chinese next generation TWR 10 grade big Thrust turbofan powerplant. In its report, “The Ordnance Technology”confirmed the No 624 institute aka China Gas Turbine Establishment has successfully developed/finalized the Core engine for China’s next generation, TWR 10 grade, big thrust turbofan engine under the CJ2000 scheme. Actually a lot of information of this core engine is already posted before in my WS-10A thread, check here,

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=49067&page=8&highlight=WS-10A

Pay attention to Maya’s introduction on the CJ2000 core engine. Maya is quite a reliable source on Chinese aviation engine development, he is the 1st one who openly gave the summarized specification on WS-10A, now is widely quoted as well.

The images you can find in the below page show 1st, the core engine undergoing high altitude test, the other one, the core engine undergoing ground test (Translated from the caption). The report said the 1st CJ2000 core engine even was undergone high altitude test in the core engine stage is unusual & risky, but such test can reveal more problems at a earlier stage and lucky, such tests all passed and now the core engine design is finalized.

The next stage will be model development around this core engine especially for fighter jet. No surprise, the model now is most likely to be called WS-15. After the core engine, low pressure parts will be much easier & smoother, my expectation is after 5 years, that is roughly 2011/2012, the WS-15 should be ready to undergo final certification & extensive test stage, till when, the J-XX prototype will be powered by this WS-15 prototype like J11B prototype was powered by WS-10A prototype.

Another interesting thing reported is the AVEN TVC nozzle also developed by China Gas Turbine Establishment. The report also confirmed the AVEN TVC nozzle is ready. My bet is the upcoming J-10 upgrading prototype in 2008 will use AVEN TVC nozzle. But that’s my own thinking, the original report never says that.

The reason of that crobato is up to 2006 they were assembling kits and as all the especulators of chinese aviation you have created from a self verified fantasy that the China is building J-11s without Sukhoi`s permmit.

China has not built any Sukhoi Su-27 that is not covered from the 200 airframes contract

[/URL]

And you will see soon, the slow pace of SAC manufacturing J11 is rather SAC internally linked than got anything to do with that magic 200 unit number, as I said, that 200 units as contractual bonded is no longer valid, because SAC only imported 105 instead of 200. why you a reality denier that keep denying the happened fact?!

Because in 2002-2004, PLAAF’s evaluation units already got the J-10 to benchmark the Russian provided Su27SK and locally assembled J-11. the outcome is obviously embarrassing for SAC & Sokhoi’s product. That’s background of the sudden stop of Su27 kits import. Because the customer’s dissatisfaction! SAC had to modify the J11 in order to pass the customer’s requirement. The time lagging process and also the small production of WS-10A kept the J11B volume low. But based on SAC recent activities, the peak is going to come. As SAC is now developing various J11B variants and even purchased Su33K to assistant certain model design.

Nevertheless at no moment China can defeat Russia niether militarily or economically, militarilly would be a disaster for both nations and economically in 2007 both nations are growing so Russia is not weak.

…-

Opps, what irritated you so much that made you land a comment like the above? Because China denies an offer from Russia based on its own interests? And according to you, it means Russia will respond militarily? 😮 😀

Oh, that’s Huitong’s old website, I even didn’t open it…:D

BTW, I’m not against the reported how much money for 200 airframe sort of thing, but no such reports said anything about what will happen if Chinese manufactures more? You can’t read across from 2.7 billion USD for 200 units to you only can manufacture 200 units? To find out clues, then we have to examine the basic & visible facts. .

Ok, let’s back to track. It seems Pakistan will do the overall marketing for JF-17 worldwide or CAC still can push its FC-1 to other countries using exactly JF-17 model? For example, it can push to Egypt like the K-8E? Which means building production line there like that of K-8E and modified it if necessary to suit customer’s particular requirements? But of course that’s oly my wild thinking.

It should be 200 units and beyond. Otherwise, SAC won’t invest so much to indigenize flanker with Chinese powerplant/Avionics/Radar/weapon system and now it seems also shipborne version.

I heard Japan’s AAM-4 ‘s rocket motor is more identical to that of AIM-7? But PL-12 is powered by a dual pulse rocket motor.

Personally I don’t like J-8 series too much. That PLAAF & PLAN continue to equip a rather old design aircraft after 20 plus years is a sign highlights their high & urgent demand for BVR, Active radar guiding AAM launching platforms

By the way, JH-7A is said to be capable of firing PL-12 as well.

In regards to the J-10 doing that maneuver everyone is questioning in that video… it might have come from this video of a guy who made a J-10 radio-controlled model.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tNz09UdLCg

Obviously not, that video is from CFTE and Free flight model is different from fan’s model. At least, the free flight model has to be the dynamically scaled down version of the actual plane that it intends to simulate. Then every parameter of the free flight model has to be duly reflecting the actual one. However, a fan’s model no such limitations, one can build a J10 model looks similar to the real one but put a powerful engine giving the model 3 TWR. Then, it’s not surprising to see the model performing better than F-22.