crobatoThe J-8II ATX was shown and flown in public. They did mention it had a digital FBW. And as I said before, the FBW system itself was displayed in public. The JH-7/FBC-1 had a triplex digital system in pitch only, while the JH-7A had a quadruplex digital system that works in all three axis and with terrain following.
Triplex Digital with Analog is not more common than quadruplex, which is found in every airliner. It is actually more complex, because of the need to implement decision rules in hard wire rather than software code. That’s like having two FBW designs working in concert, whereas in quadruplex, you have four systems that are mirror copies of each other in hardware.
Its not the idea of hardware redundancy that is needed here, but of decisioning redundancy. In a four way system, the decisions of each of the four modules are compared, and the majority wins. It defeats the purpose of redundancy if all four modules have the same processor, software written by the same compiler and the same programmers. If a bug happens in one module, it is replicated on the other three. Each module must therefore be different from each other to avoid mistake replication. The software of each module must be implemented in a “clean room”—four sets of programmers that have no contact with each other, which can even go as far as having come from different schools, or even based in different cities. You can even go further by using different processor architectures (one module has an Intel processor, another from Motorola, the third from MIPS, and the last from ARM) or even different programming languages (one module done in C++, another in ADA, another in Pascal, etc,.)
The ultimate case of going different is to go a totally different direction like an analog system. Using a D/A converter, you can compare the decisioning results of the analog system versus the other three digital systems. The analog system also provides a backup if all three digital systems go down—if something caused three digital systems to go down, it is very likely to cause the fourth digital system to go down as well.
crobato“Take another example the Digital Quadruplex FBW, the only one at present -others are 3 channel digital with Analog backup. The Chinese claim the J-10 has it, but without open source, most of their stuff is questionable.”
You’re really off. While the J-10 is not open source, the three axis digital quadruplex FBW known as “Iron Bird” or Type 634 has been shown in public and in airshows. It has been demonstrated publicly with the J-8II ATX, a J-8II modified with movable canards which no doubt was used to test the system. This is not to mention that a delta with active canards tends be basically very unstable in pitch, that it is a must that the plane must have FBW.
As whether you think the LCA is very unique in having a quad FBW, let me tell you that every F-16C out there has one. Better yet, almost every jetliner made in the last ten years or so has them at well. Some planes have a digital triplex but they have a fourth redundant analog channel. Digital Triplex plus fourth Analog channel actually provides a level of safety that surpasses even digital quadruplex—what can take down the digital systems won’t affect the analog. The Japanese F-2 chose this system over the F-16C’s quadruplex digital for this reason.
crobatoNice drawings but the guy needs to update his drawing. Besides taking out the wing fences, he also needs to smooth out the leading edge extension and remove the dogtooth. The canopy in the actual FC-1 extends further to the back as well.
crobato1.) The target production rate was probably 35 to 40. I believe the intended goal was to finish all 200 planes by 2006—10 years after the contract was signed. They started slowly due to problems in the early years 1997-1999, fixed the problems, started regular production in 2000, and started to ramp up since then. So there was a bit of catching up to do. Otherwise I think the production rate was supposed to be 20 aircraft per year for the next 10 years after 1996. After 2006, there are good signs they may sign up for another contract.
3.a. Started with the baseline N001, but later jets may have the VE (J-11A?). I suspect given the way the VE is designed, they may have a modded N001 capable of firing the R-77, two target engagement and 10 target track while scan, but without the TV based ground attack system. In other words, much like the MKK system without the TV based weapons like Kh-29T. The N001VEP is designed in such a way you can select or deselect options in the final configuration.
3.b. The N001 may be a deep license. The company involved however, appears intent to replace it with their own design (with slotted or phase array) since even by Chinese standards, the N001 is obsolete. This may be the J-11B. This would give it SD-10 capability. But if it is a deep license, the company could also component modify the N001 to support the SD-10 even eithout removing the twist cassegrain antenna and other components.
3.c. The Gardenia is not the same as the Sorbitsya. I think it is the same one found internally with domestic only MiG-29s but are removed on export versions. They are also getting the Omul for the MKK, which is better than the Sorbitsya. I guess they’re getting the Gardenia because its cheaper, or there may be internal component tech in the Sorbitsya the Russians do not want to share with the Chinese. Given Chinese development patterns, the Chinese would have probably improved on the Gardenias they made on their own.
It is also probable that the Chinese may have replaced the cockpit instrumentation with their own (HUD, MFDs, etc,.).
crobato1.) It has ramped up.
2.) SKD, with much of the airframe now appears to be made in China. Perhaps around 60 to 70 percent.
3.) They are still being imported, as a lot of them appeared prebought or set into contract years ago. A lot of it is preset momentum. Domestic engine won’t be ready until the 2005-2006 time period at least. Some of the avionics may already be built in China—radar (direct licensed copy of the N001 as opposed to indigenous design they planned to put), ECM (direct licensed copy of Gardenia in a pod), and recently we have seen a Chinese copy of the OEPS system.
There is not a lot of exact information to say we can all be sure of this. The Flanker program is highly classified by the Chinese. They were pretty upset on the Russians that someone leaked they were buying 24 Su-30MK2 last year, which will make the Russians even the more likely they will stay tight lipped or become even more vague this year.
crobatoSounds like a paranoid Debka sourced rumor. I won’t take it seriously.
crobatoCabbageman,
Regardless to who the missile is passed over, the missile must always and ultimately set its illuminator on in the final terminal phase of flgiht. That would still warn the target no matter what. The use of the active homing stage with the missile lighting, and therefore, warning the target is INEVITABLE. There is no such thing as a completely datalink guided beginning to end attack for an ARH missile. It would defeat its purpose. TWS will only provide enough data to bring a missile to the acquisition basket. If you want to have complete command guidance all the way from a second platform, something would have to light up the target with enough signal strength to get enough resolution and data on the target to precisely guide the missile to it. There is a mighty big difference in the precision needed to bring a missile to the seeker range of the target, versus a missile to the proximity blast range of its target. If you bathed a target with enough radar to get precise tracking information, you would still have warned the target anyway no matter what, who or where is doing it. It’s the very nature of radar guided missiles. If you want stealthy, passive attacks, you use a passive missile, like a datalink with IR, or dual RF-IR passive.
crobatoBut dude, the Teja (LCA) costs the same price as a J-10 which is slightly probabily more expensive.
It is my speculation the the J-10 is mid end fighter bomber like the Mirage 2000. No offence but to me the J-10 doesn’t look like much of a dogfighter, its large and wings are low unlike the Lavi which is very agile. Seriously the Teja looks more agile. Fc-1 could be the inexpensive to fill in the job of the Fishbed. J-10 seems to have a strike role instead. It’s just my speculation.
What do you know about the location of the wings pertaining to maneuverability?
Well the A-4 Skyhawk has its wings low, and when it comes to instant turns and roll rates, the US teen fighters have a hard time matching it. Wonder why this plane is a favorite in the US aggressor schools and among Top Gun instructors.
The J-10’s wing is not actually low but rather center since it’s above the main intake tunnel. My guess is that it’s extremely agile since canards can pull your nose up faster in a turn than elevators or elevons can. The canards also generate vortices above the wing, which has the effect of leading edge extensions, very good for planes in high angles of attack. It also lower wing loading perhaps less than an F-16.
FC-1 role is that of an inexpensive fighter. Problem of J-10 is that even with Chinese low price living standards, all the high tech stuff on it makes it expensive for a single engined jet in relation to Chinese standards. The plane is probably anywhere from 20 to 25 million in cost. The Chinese bought Su-27s at 32 million from the Russians—made on their own as the J-11, the Su-27 would come lower than 30 million. They need to come down on the J-10 price a bit more. Local engine can help, but not as much since the AL-31FN is said to cost about 3 million, so you can only take about a mil or two off from that figure.
Problem with the FC-1 is that the plane is no longer as simple as it was when the concept originated. China can probably make a new J-7 for maybe one, two or four million—they used to cost well under a million back in the old days. The FC-1 is probably now around 10 to 15 million, and the price will go up if you try to enhance its capability. I think it’s more expensive than even a brand new twin engined J-8II now.
crobatoBut they already had air launched trials with F-15s before 1996. If you reach this stage, that’s already a pretty advanced stage near completion. Its not like at that time, all you see are conceptual mockups.
crobatoI don’t believe there are any AIM-120 in Japan as of yet, but they are integrating the XAAM-4 ARH AAM onto the F-15J as part of an MSIP. XAAM-4 development is slated to be completed in FY 2006.
Finally some news on that missile. I can’t believe it’s taking them about a decade.
crobatohehe banana, interesting…”you have never been THERE”…interesting, that gives your credibility away Crobato… :rolleyes:
like i said “it is very hard for most to get out of that mortal racism”
I guess I can only say I pity you, for being so innocent and naive. Maybe one time you will grow old enough, and see that the world ain’t a boy scout world.
crobatoPerhaps the J-10 is fighter never meant to be inducted. Just like the Type 90 tanks or Su-47 maybe it was a tech demonstrator for things to come. I believe its a big leap from a J-8 to J-10 and such a jet would require lots of research. If the J-10 is ready a built which I believe they already have done why not share the jet with Pakistan which really needs a fighter aircraft. Why spend money on Fc-1? J-10 would do far better in the market if it already ready. It has a potential to be the next Soviet missile carring M2K5. The Fc-1 is like a early F-16 and by the time a nation can upgrade it…new stealth fighters would be very common like JSF, Pak-Fa or J-12.
J-10 is not buildable by Pakistan. Lots of composites and things that Pakistan can’t make. FC-1 is. Maybe Pakistan’s industry will develop enough so they can make a J-10 in the future.
PLA does not really like FC-1, and as far as it goes, the FC-1 is considered a private project. That’s why the FC-1 is allowed to advertized freely in the first place, and why the J-10 has been kept so secret for too long.
China did not spend much money either on the FC-1. Pakistan paid 75 million and China invested another 75 million. But the FC-1 is already inheriting techs that were already developed for the J-10 which may have costed 2 to 3 billion to develop. So if China can sell FC-1, they can recuperate part of the cost developing the J-10.
crobatoMy recollection:
About a year and a half or two years ago, there were rumors
flying all over the net that the Chinese are working on, or was doing upgrades
to their existing Kilo’s or of the Chinese carbon copies of this sub.At the time, rumors of the exitence of a Yuan Class was
already circulating wildly on web along with the speculations that
two 093 too has already been launched with one fully commissioned
to the PLAN and the other on sea trial along with one 094.
Yes there were rumors. But I was thinking more of a Kilo copy. Sort of disappeared once the Song became successful.
Hence, it was speculated, was the reason
for the EP-3 to be where it was and thus resulting in the collision
between the J-8 and the EP-3 in early 2000.The EP-3, it was speculated, was on a mission
to try and keep a tab on the progress of these supposedly
super quiet and highly classified Chinese subs.
I didn’t think it waw a new sub, but all because the existing noisy subs—the Han and the Xia class—have all become too quiet. That kind of event is pretty unnerving. Something you know makes a loud clatter and seems reassuringly so—suddenly changed its noise signature. The subs had anecholic tiling, and had a lot of changes and upgrades (maybe new drainage hole patterns, new screw, sound proofing, etc,.).
For example, the Xia class disappeared for a while, and after some years, just suddenly popped up again, in a different black color. The sub came out again in 2001, about the same time as the time of the accident. Just around shortly before that period, the Hans also began sporting their new upgrade.
crobatoThe PLAAF newspaper never says things in specific language. “New fighter” (in Babelfish) or the may mean J-11 or Su-27 or Su-30MKK while “new type of domestic fighter” can literally mean anything from J-7Gs to J-8Fs to J-10s. For all you know the 44th may only be getting J-7Gs. You know it may be a closed door display—for what reason I don’t know. The J-10 may have been flown in or the Su-30 flown somewhere else.
But it is a good clue. 3rd Division has been the first of everything, the J-7s, Su-27s and Su-30MKKs.
crobatoSure, there’s something about being yellow and something about being white, and other colors…it is very hard for most to get out of that mortal racism, but why do you speak as if you’re the only person that interacts with “others”? “Seeing”? You should add “Hearing”, “Feeling”, and other senses. If you are American, what do you think of this kind of “conspiracies”? If you’re not, why should i care what you think? Because, this “see this with your own eyes” has this treacherous excitement attitude than the real facts.
You don’t know the real facts when it hits you because you have never been THERE. You don’t know how people in these parts really think. Since you’re obviously a banana now, and live in some white ivory tower, don’t let the reality what truly is in Asia bite you. Ever seen Japanese expats in Shanghai get “arranged” with hookers? Let’s say its one of the company “benefits” and this behavior is very typical.
In Japanese business, there is something called omote (furonto) and there is something called honto. That’s basically how business in Asia is run..
Sign In
