crobato:diablo:
The link of original website is shown too. Looking there, still 11 October 2004. 😮
Get with it. You have been embarrassed enough. ACIG is located in the US. That date is 11/10/04. You are illiterate or something? Perhaps the mound of evidence against you is just overwhelming for your pride to bear. The pictures are linked to AFM and the CMF, both are following the US date format.
This is the date of the header of my post:
crobato
Correspondent
Joined: 26 Aug 2003
Posts: 328
Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 9:59 pm Post subject:
——————————————————————————–
This J-11 might have the WS-10A engines.
crobatoInteresting to note that all three pics quoted are from 11 Oct. 2004
Are there pics with WS-10A running or a single one of WS-10A in flight? 🙂
October 11, 2004? It is 11/10/2004 (in American format). That’s todays date. I posted some of these pictures back in ACIG in May 2004.
http://www.acig.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1475&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=165
Check the date of the post.
On the second question, leaked pics are difficult to find as you can get arrested or such. Explain to me how you can identify an engine nozzle from the AIR when the picture you took only has a small image of a plane in a large sky. Once again, you don’t make “sens”.
crobatoIt is a subscription article. Also what you (Sens) ask, to scan a copyrighted article, is illegal.
The article can still be found in the old Pictures, Speculations thread. Go look for it.
In the meantime, can you explain me how AGAT can profit giving away its technology to the Chinese. Isn’t the Russians/Belarussians guarded about such technology? If you are in business with a customer, your financial interest lies only in selling the finished product to the customer, not the technology which can provide the future means so your customer to be self sufficient and not buy from you. Apparently you don’t know how to make sense.
crobatoPoor photoshop? Are you just sour graping or what? There is at least three pictures of this plane, all of them posted in this forum at different angles.
Click this.
As to why the engine has a larger diameter, it is easier to obtain higher thrust with a larger diameter engine, plus the fact that it also goes to explain why the engine is also heavier. Note both GE F110 and PW F100 have larger diameters than the AL-31F.
The WS-10 basic design started long before China ever saw an AL-31F. That was back in the eighties. The larger diameter tells you at least that the engine is not a clone.
crobato1000 R-77s is reasonable, if a large R-77 order may have been made in the year 2000, when China assumed it may be getting a lot of MKKs, upgraded Su-27s, J-10s and J-8IIs with Russian radar, when SD-10 future is much more in doubt. A lot of the situation may be changing, and so China may also exercise the option of cancelling future deliveries of R-77s as well.
There is no N001M. That is another article error. The radar is N001V for the Russian version, N001VEP for the Chinese export version.
crobatoPlain sour grapes. In my opinion, you’re just clueless. When I meant rough specs, I meant maximum thrust and weight. Check the document posted.
Real data? You have a real plane flying the engines. That’s real data to you. Better than empty numbers.
Actual specs are still classified. Who told you that they’re not, eh? It’s a military engine powering projects that are still highly classified by a communist government, so at the moment only general data is provided.
crobatoChina has a good number of R-77s. According to KANWA, China has a pending 1000 unit order, with some batches already delivered, 100 at least in 2000-2001.
The seeker head of R-77 is AGAT, which is a Belarus company. They don’t need Russian approval to do this or that. Suspicion that AGAT is furnishing this knowledge is perhaps because AGAT has other lucrative contracts in China.
Any active radar seeker head looks similar to each other, just like fighter plane radars. You have an orange disk held by small servos connected to a series of small black boxes. That’s how radar seekers all look alike. a bunch of block boxes connected to a small focal plane antenna. Does not mean they’re all copying each other. I’m sure all rockets resemble the V-2 once. Don’t all autofocusing cameras have the same basic layout too? The press can be complete idiots sometimes.
crobatoSen is just ****ed that his loving Russian engines will be replaced soon.
Here is a scan of a chinese article. note that AL-31F is only 80kg lighter but produces less power.
crobatoAs I recall, the FT-2000 is quite dissimilar to the S-300PMU-1, principally a Chinese design, intended for attacking radiation-emitting planes such as AWAC’s, though its range is only estimated to be 100-120km, which makes you wonder how they intend to deploy it (modern AWAC’s can loiter up to 600km away).
the information posted in sinodefence.com is off. They posted the information for the FT-2000A for the FT-2000. Go to globalsecurity.org for the Chinese missiles page to find the real source of the article.
The FT-2000A is not the same missile as the FT-2000, nor does it use the same radar controller or search radar. The FT-2000A is based on the old HQ-2 missile, and is basically an upgrade of such with passive seeker. It has a range of 100km, while the HQ-2 in its original form in the sixties, had a range of 60km. The design appears upgraded throughout the years with better propellants.
What is the real range of the FT-2000? Now that is the question. This missile is the one that appears to be based on the HQ-9. Chinese articles claim that the HQ-9/HQ-9A has a range of 200km (naval variant HHQ-9 up to 120km) and uses an active seeker.
crobatoThere is a serial number on the plane. It is blurred but it’s there. Check near the engine intake.
This picture appeared in the Internet mid 2003. Whether it’s towed or not, it does not matter. The plane is likely to be the same J-11 that appears in shots of the CFTE, which is the testing center, and has many JH-7A prototypes recently.
The engine does appear to be slightly heavier than AL-31F (1554kg) and is as heavy as the GE F110. In fact the specs are roughly similar to the GE F110-129. AL-31FM1 is not offered in the Su-27SM program but as a later upgrade. The current plane does not use it. The AL-31FM1 does not have a schedule of expected operation, by the way.
The Chinese are willing to go through this indigenous program, considered most vital, because there are numerous reports about AL-31F engine problems ahd shorter than expected service life. Even if the WS-10A engine is heavier, so long it can be more reliable the Chinese would be happy. For some reason the quality of the AL-31F is so bad, though the AL-31FN is surprisingly so much better that the Chinese are as not as pressed to replace the FN engines on the J-10 as they are on the Su-27s and J-11s.
crobatoA “J-11B” was reported taking its first flight in December (26?) 2003 by Chinese aerospace news.
However, pictures of a J-11 with two WS-10A engines appeared before that.
Also some general data about the WS-10A has been published in Chinese articles (too big to upload here). Generally stated, WS-10A is a 13,200kg thrust engine with a 7.5 to 1 TWR with an expected service period starting 2005 (oh that’s only next year). The Chinese has also displayed FADECS for the engine.
crobatoActually that Strategypage article was saying about 110 J-11s, of which 20 are J-11As. So they’re not that far off.
According to Hui Tong based on a Chinese report, J-11B took its first flight around December of 2003.
when asked by google, Pibu suggested this article
“
Below is the text from Kanwa, January 2004
===================
CHINA SMOOTHLY ASSEMBLE SU27
——————————————————————————–
Shengyan J11.Kanwa Exclusive Photo
Kanwa confirmed that up till this year, a total number of XX back-up engines and parts have been delivered to China. Which means China should have manufactured more then XX Su27SK so far.
Sources from China also confirm that after the Air Force No. 1 Division, some other combat units have also been equipped with SU27SK, most likely the No. 19 Division stationed in Zhengzhou. At present, Shenyang Aircraft Company is still producing the basic model SU27SK. Russia has been actively promoting to China SU27SKM technology, hoping China would upgrade Shenyang’s SU27SK to SU27SKM standard. However, no progress has been made in the negotiation concerning the deal. China seems to have other considerations concerning the upgrading of SU27SK.
The SU27SK has been positioned by the Chinese Air force as the “air-control fighter”. As a consequence, the direction for future upgrading may focus on its air to air fighting capability. Other functions like ground and sea attacking will be fulfilled by SU30MKK, MK2, MK3 or some of its J10 fighters. Under this circumstance, the Russian SU27SKM upgrading plan may not be in line with the actual needs of the Chinese Air Force. Eventually, Shenyang Aircraft Company’s SU27SK fighters may develop towards the target that R77 and SD10 can be used.”
Note the last two sentences. This is where the Russian news articles simply don’t get it.
Pibu cited another Russian article where the Chinese did not want this upgrade. There are also two posted articles archived in the CDF that also related to the Chinese not wanting this.
crobatoI never cited the Russian Press. Pibu (okay, could be considered Russian press if you like) got his information directly from Knnapo, he said that.
And he said that the 105 kits were delivered and he said that LAST YEAR.
The latest Sukoi official also stated 105 kits. Those are the two sources I referenced. There was the Sukoi rep at MAKS2003 who put out a bunch of stuff that many wanted to buy lock stock and barrel. I called the guy nothing more than a car salesman. If needed, I can go find those exchanges. My problem is your analysis is presented like you have been reading the contract. You have no idea weather the initial contract had any infomation about the 95/105 kits and phases.
And you—the press, and the rest of the world—has no idea what it was either.
What is this that 8 years after the signing, this 105/95 piece of detail popped up?
What did you have to say about these? You were quick to jump on the 100 J-11s already built that was in the same article. If you recall, you and I went round and round over that. Obviously I didn’t buy the Russian press – You did.
And yes, it was foolish—given the fact that it was based on respectable sources. It was actually even much better worded—by a Jane’s SENIOR EDITOR to boot—than these impromptu articles. And now you choose to buy the Russian press? It looks to me you only buy it when it suits you.
100 J-11s by the way, is still consistent to the 104/105 kits that was mentioned. Just remember, there is no exact data here as to when the kits were last sent, or for that matter, when they were used up.
If you remember that Strategypage article posted early this year, which stated about 11 PLAAF formations that have Flankers, also stated over 100 J-11s were built.
Also remember this, and I hope you don’t have a short memory, that the Russians have been trying publicly to sell the Su-27SM configuration to China before and since MAKS2003. In fact the negotations over it with the Chinese Defense Minister began last 2003. The talks ended with a failure on this issue, though the Chinese bought a lot of other things. And remember, Putin was also marketing for the Russian arms industry.
So the situation with the kits would most probably have ended since 2003 given that the Defense Minister had to personally have high level talks with Russian officers in Russian soil.
This stuff happening right now is more than a year of making. Fact remains, last year, the Chinese did not buy it, despite the urgency over the Taiwan situation. This year, the Russians are holding the carrot again, and they have switched places this time—this time, its the Russian officials coming to Chinese soil to market, sell and negotiate.
So what does this look like? It looks like to me, a last ditch desperate attempt on the part of Sukhoi, who may be sensing they are about to lose the Chinese market.
I don’t think there is any hypocritical about my using the Chinese forums. I just don’t buy everything they say. Photos tell you what units have what planes. Nothing special there. The Chinese forums have something I do want, the Chinese press information they bring. You have to be able to discern posting of published information from opinion. I don’t always get it right but I have a background that helps me tremendously. I don’t get into aircraft avionics much at all so the forums are not that risky to me. I go to the forums for photos that give me aircraft info and for people who post what they personally see. Valuable information. I spent many years in the intel community. I KNOW where the stuff is, I just need an open source to be able to say it…….
And so that allows you to buy what the Russians say? Get a grip Rick. The new articles being mentioned is just as well based as all the others—a few facts, the rest are speculation. The Russians, including, the Russian press, better get over the idea that the Chinese will be sourcing J-11s entirely on their own.
You should know that the Chinese are doing, and let me remind you, where do you think these following examples are going to fit in with the rest of the 95 so called contract kits?
crobatoIt could be for the J-10, or it could be a 14,100kg/32,000lb thrust version, which has much more power over the WS-10A (13,200kg/29,000lb thrust), or it could be both. The specs are based on the display of a turbine compressor stage back in Zhuhai 2002.
However, I don’t think they would test it on a J-10 because it lacks the second engine safety net of the J-11.
crobatoOn the JL-10G, that thing was probably meant for the J-7 due to its size. I bet you it was meant for the J-7G, or at least, competiting with the KLJ-6E from a rival company over this contract.
One issue where Chinese internet forumers go head to head against Sukhoi is this. The forums claim at least one Su-30 was lost to engine failure. Sukhoi has denied this. Now who would you believe?
Sign In
