crobatoThanks for answering my questions, (i belive Goldendragon, Crobato and Flogger were the ones…)
But The J-10 in service is based on assumptions that if there are certain numbers of engines delivered since 2002, it means there must be similar or near similar nubmers of aircrafts in service. Frankly it sounds bit too whisfull thinking…i mean this “if it’s this, it can also be this” type of logic is always quite fraqile…And the seccond Proof, that there is several J-10 spotted in regimental colours dosen’t actully tell how much planes are in service, does it? It prooves that the plane is far more ahead than lets say LCA, but again it’s kind of farfetched to make assuptions only based for that…
Yes it does, providing the right planes are spotted along with the right unit numbers. You have to understand how the PLAAF unit numbers work, and once you do, you can determine what division, regimental and serial unit it is.
First, you have to understand that a PLAAF regiment is around 20 to 40 aircraft. If you spot a plane with regimental colors and unit numbers, yes, its a reliable assumption that it is part of an operational unit and that unit may have numbers up to 40 aircraft. Not all regiments reach 40 though, but we have indeed seen a J-10 with no. 22 for its bort number, which means it is the 22nd serial for its unit. Thus J-10 41252 is going to mean this is the 22nd serial plane of the 44th Division, 131st Regiment located in Kunming.
So far three regiments have been identified,
The first is the 1st Trials Regiment of the Flight Test and Training Center in Cangzhou air base, in Heibei province, under the Beijing Military Region command.
http://www.china-military.org/units/cangzhou.htm
The second is the 131st Regiment of the 44th Division
http://www.china-military.org/units/chengdu/44div/44div.htm
It is not clear if there is one or two regiments of the same division that have J-10s. If either the 130st or 132nd Regiment is converted, that would be three regiments total.
Lately we are able to spot a new unit number with the J-10. Even though the unit numbers are not completely clear in this picture, the first and fourth digits are sufficiently clear enough (1XX4X) to confirm this plane now belongs to the 3rd Division, indicating the formation of a new J-10 regiment.
http://mil.jschina.com.cn/huitong/gallery/J-10_62.jpg
http://mil.jschina.com.cn/huitong/gallery.htm
Incidentally, this is the very plane claimed to be the 100th J-10.
Recently there are reports that a new J-10 regiment in Guanxi has formed under the 2nd Division. That would put the base to be in Luizhou, under the 5th Regiment (15X3X). We are awaiting pictures for that one, though rumors of the 44th Division deployment occured months before the actual pictures surfaced.
So all in all, the call card is 3 confirmed regiments, 2 possibles. In addition to all that, there is about 12 prototypes.
The fact that 54 engines finished recieving back in January 2004 would have meant these engines are all used up. This in addition to an unknown but large batch of engines delivered prior to 2001. By mid 2004, reports of the 44th Division deployment has begun to surface, so the timeline is consistent with the engine deliveries. The 3rd Division J-10s discovered in February 2006 must be very new, consistent with the engine deliveries starting in October 2005.
crobatoAnd what makes you think china has any hope of replicating the success of Taiwan, Singapore, Korea or Japan? You keep crowing on about this all the time, hoping that if repeated enough times, it will be taken as the gospel truth.
Face it bub, Singapore, Korea and Japan had firm fundamentals, both in terms of economy, population and political stability. And more importantly, they were Uncle’s ALLIES.
China has NONE of these traits. In fact, it is quite the opposite of everything those east asian nations had: no rule of law, rampant theft of IP, a broken banking system, a broken and greedy political system, a looming social crisis and a potential enemy of the US.
I think you are the one who has to face it. Right now, China is the US no. 1 trading partner. Over Japan, over Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea. The sheer numbers speak volumes. An over 9+% growth rate officially (unofficially 12-13%), double digit industrial growth a foreign reserve of nearly 900 billion by the middle of this year, with US treasuries at over 600 billion. China has already displaced products that used to be mainly manufactured in Taiwan, Korea and Japan with its own, such as in PC and consumer electronics. China is literally in the same position in the same markets these other countries had before, and now have lost this share to China.
Firm fundamentals? China has a very stable business environment. As for these:
no rule of law, rampant theft of IP, a broken banking system, a broken and greedy political system, a looming social crisis and a potential enemy of the US
I tell you what, some of these things also exist in Japan, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea, except for the potential enemy of the US thing. Ironically there is less anti Americanism in China in the street than in places like Korea and Japan (I think people tend to hate Americans more when the US have military bases in their country). Broken and greedy political system is common in all, not to mention the influence of organized crime and influence peddling in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. But then US companies are used to broken and greedy political systems back home. Singapore appears to be the least in this category. How Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese companies are able to adapt to the corrupt political systems in China, is because these companies are able to adapt to the corrupt political systems they have at home.
While there is a rule of law in countries like Japan, those laws are meant to favor local companies and deliberately designed to disadvantage foreign ones. You can ask IBM and other US companies how often they sued Japanese, Taiwanese and Korean companies over matters of IP for the last twenty to thirty years or so.
Where China differs from all these is one thing—it is a much more open market than Japan, Korea and Taiwan (Singapore is also an open market and differs from the others in that). China does not shut out the foreign firm presence and encourages investment, while countries like Japan and Korea throws obstacles.
crobatoThe first one is a horrible prank. His pic feels immediately artificial and ps.
For the second one, give the guy some credit. He took a serious approach in designing this plane, an artist conception based on the two leaked pictures on the two airplane models with canards, strakes and twin rudders. But as that research paper suggests, I am very curious on what is the effect of strake vortices interacting with canard vortices. Why would someone experiment with that idea?
crobatoWhat is the main source of this supposed 100+ J-10 in service? I’ve heard lots of rumours about it and asked many times, but still nothing covincing hasen’t shown out…
The fact that Russians have delivered at least three batches of engines, the first probably over 20+ ending in 2001, the second around 54 engines ending in January 2004, and the third for 100 engines starting October 2005 and ending in July 2006. That is your external source.
Can someone really proof this? I mean really give some hard data that J-10 is other than just in pre-production? I’m not asking this to bash chinese side, just to make it clear so that statements like the above could be really proved to thrut…
The fact that the J-10s are in official PLAAF colors, have unit regimental numbers, and is reported in bases that have nothing to do with development. The fact that J-10s have been observed in areas that are involved with wargames. As for the 100 planes, it would be consistent with the engine batch deliveries, as well as the number of regiments.
http://www.china-military.org/units/cangzhou.htm
http://www.china-military.org/units/chengdu/44div/44div.htm
http://mil.jschina.com.cn/huitong/gallery.htm
Of the number of regiments, at least three are confirmed, one in the FTTC, one in the 44th Division (131st) and one in the 3rd Division. Each regiment should have around 22 to 24 aircraft at least. Two more regiments are rumored and likely, 130th in the 44th Division, as well as reports and sightings on a 2nd Division regimental unit in Luizhou, Guanxi. Add to all that, there are over 12 prototypes built. KANWA has reported that J-10B has entered serial production.
crobatoNice try at making me look like the hi’nmighty type Mr. Crobato, but calling into question a clearly inhuman act on the part of any govt. does not make me mr. self righteous. Or will you have the audacity to ask the whole world of their misbegotten moral superiority for questioning Hitler/stalin/mao and the like?
We indeed question all of them, and yet we do we even bother going to bed with them? Why ally with Stalin against Hitler? Or with Mao against the Soviet Union? Or with Saddam Hussein against the Ayatollah Khomeini.
for all of china’s “progress”, unfortunately it still severly lags behind when it comes to human rights. And in my book that is the first proof of a govt’s character, obviously calling “a spade a spade” is something that is not too palatable for you. So you and your cronies would rather the world just gloss over all of these violations and only look at how china has made progress economically and militarily over the past few years. nice try, but that brings me back to the original point: the world has a slightly different value system – try to to understand it, some call it democracy.
Yeah the world does not have a slightly different value system. Get it in your head. Many countries are in practice authoritarian. Including many countries that the US calls allies—Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, among others. And yet we in the US is at odds at the same time with countries that indeed have democratically elected leaders, like Iran, Palestine, and Venenzuela. And indeed, let us not forget that Hitler was elected in the first place. The funny thing is, we don’t condemn all authoritarianism, and yet we don’t praise all democracy either. We cherry pick who are our friends and our enemies under sets of double standards. We would covertly interfere on countries whose elections against candidates are perceived to be “left”. We would sooner support or even instigate if one is not present, a right wing authoritarian dictatorship over a democratically elected left wing president Thus we don’t really have a true value system, and we make a mockery of a true value system. The only real value system is one that based on those with us or against us. Are we wrong in practicing this? Sometimes we are, and sometimes we are not. We dropped our support for the Shah of Iran and something worst took over his place. But all these does not make us ‘morally superior’, especially when sometimes we ourselves consider ‘morality’ an obstacle to policy which we often do in the war against terror.
Boy Mr. Crobato, you, plawolf, tinman and chinawhite are all cut from the same cloth aren’t you? So now you want to go so far as to justify chinese imperialism in tibet that too in the name of an education the Tibetans never wanted, roads they did not need, modern plumbing that was again unnecessary?
Those things were not originally necessary for the Native Americans and the original Hawaiians too. But I’m sure they are all enjoying the conveniences of those things right now.
They were fine just the way they were thanks very much and if they wanted these things they could have got them on thier own without being forced to have ’em. it is sad indeed that you guys don’t see that the chinese themselves fought against an imperialistic yoke just about 100 years ago irrespective of the fancy “civilization” that the latter had brought in.
Sorry but they were not fine the way they were. They were run by a totally backward theocracy where women and fiefs are not treated any better than animals. It was a medieval state existing in modern times, and one that has been a Chinese protectorate since those periods. In a geopolitical power struggle and cold war, that is what you call a power vaccum, especially when no country even recognized it as a sovereign country.
crobatoIf you want to see mockups, I could show you nice MFD full ones of several Indian Types (Mig-21 upg, Mig-27 upg, Jag upg, Su-30 MKI, LCA, CAT, IJT….)!! Show us something for real and we will appreciate it. No phtoshopped pics or mock-ups.
Why does PAF want different avionics and radar in the JF-17??
Those are not mockups. That is the cockpit used in the FC-1 simulator.
crobatoare those new MFDs Russian or domestic? they kind of remind me the ones you see in the new Russian aircraft upgrades (that most likely won’t be produced)
These are domestic. MFDs like these have been shown by Chinese manufacturers in their expos.
crobatoGoldendragon,
Let me ask you a question: while it is obvious that the chinese govt. has a clear edge in terms of riches made, where is their edge when it comes to humane values???? One wonders if all this new found wealth will prevent future episodes similar to Tsqre massacre, cultural revolution, or give some semblance of freedom to poor tibetans etc etc.
Pray tell, Mr. USS Novice, what gives you the moral superiority and right to judge the morals of another government? Are you really so high and mighty? Got no sins? I say check your own backyard and the skeletons in your closet before you do.
Maybe the Chinese government still sucks in some aspects of human rights, but they still have managed to do something no government in the 20th century has done, which is to lift the lives of over 1.3 billion people from destitute poverty to at least a livable scale, true hope and promise of a better future and now shows the growth of a burgeoning middile class. They got food to eat, a roof over their families, schools to send their children. While the rights are still lacking, but at least the current Chinese state managed to provide and secure all the basics needed for a decent living. You can go talk about human rights of the Tibetans but even now, the Tibetans got something they did not have before—education, roads, modern plumbing, electricity, modern transportation, merchant goods, decent order, telecommunications and even the internet.
Democracy has a problem when the so called democratic state fails to provide the basics of a decent human life, the first being to provide stability and order to secure and protect the lives of its citizens. The result led to endless military coups in Latin America and Africa. One miserly example is the Philippines which had a US style government set up after the Second World War and led to an authoritarian dictatorship 20 years later. Today, with its elected democratic government in chaos, it still mired in poverty. Other Asian countries have decided to bypass the democratic stage and used authoritarianism to bolster the development—Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Singapore. Even today, Japan and South Korea, while practicing the trappings of democracy, are all run by a massive bureaucracy that does not change regardless who is the elected government. This bureaucracy is the real goverment.
Frankly I don’t like to live in China myself, too much of a free thinker, but there is no denying where that goverment has its priorities on, and one of them is putting food on the mouths of its 1.3 billion people with limited natural resources and that is a gigantuan social burden. I have a difficult time to see how a democracy, with all its conflicts and infighting, can do this. You just need to kick some butt, break some eggs, in order to get things done, even at times, it may seem extreme. Once however, the basics of the people are provided, I do believe that people’s aspirations will further expand, and the authoritarian government itself will open up to a looser more liberal form of goverment, and eventually evolved to a democracy. And that is happening is China now, as each generation of leaders becomes more liberal.
crobatoIf you have’t seen it yet, I would suggest that you take a look at the LCA and the MKI’s cockpits. You may like them more.
These are the new FC-1 cockpits. 3 8″x12″ colored MFDs with 20 buttons each. Maybe you can refresh my mind about the LCA and MKI cockpits.
crobatoI was the project team lead engineer at Garrett (now Honeywell) for the growth engine. Two TFE1042 IPEs would have provided a combined thrust in excess of 24,000 pounts. This was achieved by more than just a tweak to the engine.
The growth engine never went beyond the proposal stage. ROCAF lost interest once they got permission to buy F-16s. There have been component improvements implemented on the 1042 over the years, but the engine performance is essentially the same. Nothing quite so dramatic as a >25% increase in thrust that the IPE would have provided.
Mark
Given your background on the project, these are really cool new pieces of information as per historical hindsight.
While I don’t expect them to run up to 24,000lbs without the major tweaks and mods described, I wonder if at least all these component upgrades could at least do some small increments of performance, like maybe 20,000lbs.
crobatoThe IDF basically does two kinds of antisurface work. First is antiship, and the second, assuming TC-2A is in operational status, SEAD. It may also be used as a cruise missile launcher for the HF-2E.
The F-16 Block 20 does the work that all AGM-65s does, as well the antiship duties with the Harpoons. However, since the sale of AGM-88s have been blocked, the F-16s cannot do SEAD missions, leaving it to the IDF with the TC-2A.
The Mirage 2000-5 does all the A2A work and none of the A2G work. So all it does is cover the other two planes. This gives you a basic idea how the planes work in their respective roles.
crobatoThe performance restrictions were intended to limit the IDF capability to something comparable to the F-20, that aircraft having already been approved for sale to Taiwan. Incorporation of the IPE engines would have given the aircraft performance equal to the F-16A. However, the same month that the engine proposal was sent to ROCAF, the US government allowed sales of the F-16 to Taiwan, and the upgrade program was not pursured.
Mark
The F-20 approved for Taiwan? That should be news for history students, as it is understood that the F-20 wasn’t approved, causing the IDF project to initiate in the first place. And led to the demise of the F-20 program as a whole.
From what I understand, the two engines can be tweaked to a combined thrust of over 20,000lbs. It’s been proposed before though I wonder if it is ever implemented, admittedly or not.
crobatoMach 1.2 limit for the F-CK-1 probably has some altitude as a reference, and my bet is that it is a low altitude. The F-15 only does Mach 1.2 at sea level.
crobatoOn paper, the two Garrets produce a max thrust combined around 8900kg. That’s output already better than the Gripen and the FC-1 while weighing in the same region and you are nudging a TWR of 0.9 in combat load. What I don’t know is how fast the engines spool though or how it operates under dry thrust, but the IDF is said to be ble to still outaccelerate a Starfighter. But that could be just the Taiwanese press boasting.
crobatoSo how does the IDF compare to an agility contest with the ROCAF’s own F-16 Block 20s and the Mirage 2000-5?
Sign In
