crobatoOriginally posted by kya bidu
crobatoWhy call me names and conduct personal attacks when I have not said anything that can be taken as a personal attack on you?
Do my questions and comments frustrate you so much that you have to resort to personal attacks because you don’t have the answers? To me the answer is obviously yes!
We have the answers. You just don’t have the brains, nor the experience or the capacity to research, nor the time to study. I don’t even think you have the INTENTION, much less the INTELLIGENCE. The fact is, you’re an obvious noob.
The facts remains those answers are NOT speculations. WS-10A specs HAVE BEEN published before by Chinese sources. TVC nozzles HAVE BEEN shown. Its first flight HAS BEEN announced. The data has been consistently posted over the course of over a year.
13,200kg is what a Chinese article posted. It is not a claim, nor is it mine. It is a published figure. Copy of which is in the CDF. Find it yourself. Don’t give me the BS about having to know the number of blades, compressor stages, etc,. As far as you go, you have no understanding of the matter even if the data is presented to you. Are you capable of computing thrust based on the number of blades and compressors stages?
Manufacturers are not obligated to provide technical data, and you know that. And this true with every manufacturer around the world. Especially if it’s military applications, a lot of stuff are simply classified.
So don’t give me that sh*t you noob.
crobato“It’t not rocket science- it has *one* AL-31F pushing how much weight again?”
If the J-10 is close to the 7000kg empty (which is the weight of the Lavi, and this is also the number given by Jane’s on the J-10) on the AL-31FN, yes it might probably supercruise on clean configuration. Even with a full load of internal fuel, that would easily mean TWRs as high as 1.2. The TWR will only go higher with the WS-10A.
And Kya the idiot, yes, the WS-10A will have more power than the AL-31FN at 13,200kg vs 12,500kg, and will have TVC among later models (Chinese developed TVC nozzles has been demonstrated in airshows). They have also shown a new compressor stage that is claimed to push the engine as high as 32,000lbs and more (somewhere in the 14,000kg region). But of course, Salyut can match such developments in future variants of the AL-31F, but no matter what, once the WS-10A is completed, this will be the engine for the J-10, and they will also put this on the J-11s (SU-27). The power figures are not speculative; the Chinese themselves have published them.
crobatoOriginally posted by kya bidu
The only thing I have questioned or raised issue with is the legitimacy of the speculations. The rest of the nonsense you accuse me of is irelevant since I have not raised issues other than the this.If I have please point it out.
Since plawolf has admitted that he is speculating, I have no further interest in this thread. So peace and onwards with your speculations. I have nothing else to prove.
You’re right.
You got nothing else to prove, not even the existance of your BRAINS.
The existance of your grey matter is purely speculative. It’s obvious I see no evidence of such.
crobatoOriginally posted by Vortex
oh no…we’re doomed :rolleyes:
What you think this is a f**cking joke? Grow up and see the world for kriss sakes. The problem of continued deficits is a serious problem. You don’t grow money in trees and the worst consequence would be if OPEC decides to use the Eurodollar as its standard for petrodollars, and the shift to the Eurodollar as the world standard trade currency.
crobatoOriginally posted by Vajra
China – purchasing power parity – $5.989 trillion (2002 est.)US – purchasing power parity – $10.45 trillion (2002 est.)
How important are these figures? I am no economist, so i dont have much of an idea.
But i DO know that the US is the world’s largest consumer BY FAR. No one even comes close to the US.
Therefore, if the US economy goes down the drain, it will definitely drag all others down with it, especially the ones who depend on the US market heavily.
The US will definitely drag down everyone as long as it’s spending and consumption exceeds its real good production (not speculative income added to GDP such as stock trades).
Notice the fall of the US dollar and the rise of the Euro dollar? Some big players, most probably China, is dumping dollars and buying Euros. Note that gold prices are at an all time high, implying someone big is also buying it. I bet it’s China as well.
All I know is that the cycle of US spending more than it can earn and its debt being in the hands (and mercy) of foreign hands is in fact unsustainable.
crobatoMOSCOW. Jan 6 (Interfax-AVN) – The Moscow-based Salyut Engineering Production Enterprise will have completed deliveries of AL-31FN aircraft engines to China by late January, a source in the Russian defense industry told Interfax-Military News Agency on Tuesday. “Under the contract, Salyut is to deliver a batch of 54 AL- 31FN engines to be fitted on the SU-27 Flanker fighters to China over a period of two years. Chinese experts visited Moscow in December to accept the last batch of aircraft power plants. All engines are expected to be delivered to China by late January,” the source said. According to him, China does not intend to procure the AL- 31FN production license. “China has bought the license to overhaul AL-31F engines, mounted on SU-27SK Flanker and SU-30MKK Flanker aircraft, but overhaul of all AL-31FN engines is to be carried out in Russia,” the source said. According to unofficial sources, the AL-31FN aircraft engine, featuring a low unit layout, is designed to be mounted on Chinese single-engine aircraft. The contract envisions aircraft engine after-sales services and maintenance and is to be in force until 2005, with the possibility of extending the contract provided for. The AL-31FN boasts the same maximum afterburner thrust as the baseline AL-31F, which totals 12,500 kg. Its specific fuel consumption is 0.685 kg/kgf.h. The engine’s dry weight equals 1,547 kg, while its guaranteed service life is 500 hours, and the specified service life is 1,500 hours.
Got this from the CDF.
Love this article. Now even Salyut is toeing the Chinese line and won’t even admit it’s for the J-10! Or won’t speak about the J-10 openly.
Note how carefully they worded the statements to say its for the SU-27SK when in fact, the AL-31FN isn’t made for it.
Based on the time of deliveries, this article appears to support taht the first of possibly 50-54 serial production J-10s began production in 2002—as first mentioned in Hui Tong’s website. The numbers of engines appear nicely to support 2 regiments (25 to 27 aircraft each) of J-10s. And that production of 54 planes may probably end later this year.
The orders are probably batch by batch instead of one lump sum. This suggests that WS-10A is not far away and the Chinese may not like to commit to too many WS-10As in contract if WS-10A is close. That means they will probably order AL-31FNs in batches until WS-10A is fully ready for the J-10.
crobatoOriginally posted by SOC
Where’d that come from? And what makes it more accurate than what he posted from http://www.sinodefence.com?
>>> GET OUT YOUR BLINDERS <<<
IT IS FROM SINODEFENCE.COM and it is in fact, the SAME PAGE.
Here let me spell it out for you, the complete TEXT of that page.
PROGRAMME
Type 091 is China’s first nuclear powered submarine (SSN). The nuclear powered submarine programme can trace its origin back to the late 1950s, but the first boat (pennant 401) was not completed until 1974. It then took its designers another ten years to make the boat fully operational due to technical problems with the nuclear reactors and the lack of suitable torpedo weapon system. It is believed that the development of the Type 091 later benefited from the assistance by the French. With these improvements the Type 091 SSN finally began to take part in active duties in the mid-1980s.
Boat 401, China’s very first nuclear powered submarine in shipyard
A total of five boats were built between 1967 and 1987, all of which are deployed in the North Sea Fleet based at Qingdao. The first two boats (401, 402) were refitted in the late 1980s, and back in service in the mid 1990s. 403 and 404 started mid-life refits in 1998 and were back in service in 2000. Some reports claimed that one boat may have been temporarily assigned to the South Sea Fleet.
Little is known about the detailed service status of the five Type 091 SSNs. The first two boats (401 and 402) may have been out of service since 2000, while the rest three boats are believed to remain in active service until the next generation Type 093 SSN becomes operational.
INVENTORY
Pennant Name Fleet Laid Down Launched Commissioned
401 Changzheng 1 North Sea Fleet 1967 12/1970 08/1974
402 Changzheng 2 North Sea Fleet 1974 1977 01/1980
403 Changzheng 3 North Sea Fleet 1980 1983 09/1984
404 Changzheng 4 North Sea Fleet 1984 1987 11/1988
405 Changzheng 5 North Sea Fleet 1987 04/1990 12/1990DESIGN FEATURES
The Type 091 SSN is generally regarded as outdated by today’s standard, while they provided the PLA Navy with invaluable experience in operating nuclear powered submarines. From 403 onwards the hull has been extended 8m aft the fin. Early modernisation refit included modifying the design of the nuclear reactor to reduce noise and increase reliability; adding a new French designed intercept sonar set; and replacing the obsolete Soviet ESM suite with a French design.
The latest Type 035G in service with the PLA Navy South Sea Fleet
In the 1990s the Type 091 SSNs received second modernisation refit, which may include carrying a new type of wire-guided torpedo and the capability to launch YJ-8 SSMs from 533mm torpedo tube. A new anechoic tile coating may have been applied to the hull.
COMMAND SYSTEM
The Type 091 may be fitted with a multi-purpose combat data and command system which provides information for submarine control and torpedo (and missile?) firing.
MISSILES
The Type 091 are reportedly capable of firing the submarine-launched variant of the YJ-8 (C-801) from its 533mm torpedo tubes. The missile uses active radar homing and is powered by a solid rocket engine (with a solid rocket booster). The anti-ship missile has a range of 42 km and approaches the target in sea skimming mode at a speed of 0.9 Mach. The 165 kg shaped charge warhead has time delayed impact proximity fuses.
TORPEDOES
The Type 091 has six 533mm torpedo tubes, and carries a total of 20 torpedoes including Yu-3 (SET-65E)(active/passive homing to 15 km at 40 kt; warhead 205 kg) and Yu-1 (Type 53-51)(unguided to 9.2 km at 39 kt or 3.7 km at 51 kt; warhead 400 kg). Alternatively the submarine can carry 36 mines in its tubes.
The latest Type 035G in service with the PLA Navy South Sea Fleet
RADAR
The Type 091 has an I-band surface search radar (NATO code-name: Snoop Tray).
SONARS
The Type 091 is fitted with Trout Cheek bow-mounted, medium-frequency sonar for active/passive search and attack; and a DUUX-5 low frequency sonar for passive ranging and intercept.
COUNTERMEASURES
Countermeasures include a Type 921-A radar warning receiver and direction-finder.
PROPULSION
The Type 091 is powered by a nuclear, turbo-electric arrangement, consisting of one pressurised water reactor (PWR) rated at 90MW, with 1 shaft.
Here is something else.
“adding a new French designed intercept sonar set; and replacing the obsolete Soviet ESM suite with a French design. “
This is where the French came in. Adding a new sonar set.
crobatoMy guess is that SAC would sooner or later align itself with another Russian aeronautical firm that is interested in breaking into the Chinese CIVILIAN market.
The reason for this is that the regional civilian market in China offers even far more potential than the military market. The Russians themselves are moving beyond military sales and is also trying to break into the Chinese civilian markets.
On the Chinese ship industry, I would assume there is the same attitude, the shipyards would probably prefer to make and sell ships at a higher profit for the export market than make ships for the Chinese Navy.
One thing to consider is that Chinese shipyards now have a 4 year backlog on orders alone. To make on ship for the Navy is one less ship for an export customer.
This can explain why despite ships like the Song subs and the new Chinese destroyers, the PLA still have to source ships from Russia. One reason, other than to continually refresh their technology standards, is due to the shortfall of Chinese shipbuilding capacity.
Now the great irony being is that Russian shipyards may actually be more happy making and exporting ships for the Chinese government than the Chinese shipyards themselves.
crobatoThe new engines are expected to be in the 12,000kg range. It is not clear if the WS-9 is an all new design within the dimensions of the Spey or a modified Spey. My take is that the Spey itself had quite a room for improvement and it won’t take too long to figure out how to tweak it.
On JDAMs and JSOW, China will have to put in a precise satellite navigation system before they could implement those, or they would have to rely on existing and foreign satelllite services. But my guess is that the PLA would put satellite guidance on short to midrange SSMs and MLRS first, if they had not already done so before putting it on bombs.
Despite the use of precision guided missiles on the MKK, the main Chinese air to surface weapon are saturation bombs and unguided rockets, which is also seen even on the MKK. In other words they would choose to saturate a given area, rather than attempt to minimize collateral casualties.
crobatoOriginally posted by Vympel
Doesn’t say anything about 1967. [/B]
Why don’t you open your EYES before you give a coy response?
Read the NEXT paragraphs—
“A total of five boats were built between 1967 and 1987, all of which are deployed in the North Sea Fleet based at Qingdao. The first two boats (401, 402) were refitted in the late 1980s, and back in service in the mid 1990s. 403 and 404 started mid-life refits in 1998 and were back in service in 2000. Some reports claimed that one boat may have been temporarily assigned to the South Sea Fleet.
Little is known about the detailed service status of the five Type 091 SSNs. The first two boats (401 and 402) may have been out of service since 2000, while the rest three boats are believed to remain in active service until the next generation Type 093 SSN becomes operational.
INVENTORY
Pennant Name Fleet Laid Down Launched Commissioned
401 Changzheng 1 North Sea Fleet 1967 12/1970 08/1974
402 Changzheng 2 North Sea Fleet 1974 1977 01/1980
403 Changzheng 3 North Sea Fleet 1980 1983 09/1984
404 Changzheng 4 North Sea Fleet 1984 1987 11/1988
405 Changzheng 5 North Sea Fleet 1987 04/1990 12/1990″
crobatoOriginally posted by SOC
I wouldn’t say that the XIA was developed without any assistance-they had one or two GOLF-class SSBs for trials work for their SSBN program. However the submarine itself is most likely an original product, with the GOLF being used to gain knowledge and data on SLBM launch techniques. The GOLF is still in use testing the JL-2 I believe.And this from sinodefence.com: “It is believed that the development of the Type 091 later benefited from the assistance by the French.”
There is quite a big difference with the modified Golf class, which shoots the missile on top of the conning tower and which is NOT a nuclear submarine to the Xia class. You’re really stretching the connection there to absurd proportions. The Golf class is only used to test missiles. It certainly did not play any part in the evolution of Chinese subs and their design.
The Xia class is a true nuclear submarine which launches 16 missiles from its back underwater.
And which nuclear sub China made first? It was the Han class. Tell me how the hell the Han class could have been developed with the help of the French in 1967—-at the peak of the Communist phobia?
crobato“How will the PLA locate it in the first place? They don’t have adequate satellite surveillance capability, and they don’t have the maritime recce capability. “
China has been one of the most prolific satellite launchers in the last few years. You think all of them are really weather and TV satellites? As a matter of fact, three of those satellites are also the beginnings of an indigenous satellite based navigation and positional system.
There is still a module flying out there from SZ-4, which took the first Taikonaut to space. This module is capable of changing orbit several times, and everyone knows it has a surveillance equipment. This is just -one- example.
crobatoThe FC-1 is CAC’s poster child because the Chinese government still refused to release the full wraps of the J-10, and this has been very frustrating for the CAC people. By refusing to open the wraps, this has also sealed away any possibilities of CAC being able to export the J-10, which I’m sure CAC surely wants.
Is this also due to being a political concession to Shenyang? Possible.
Given the politics behind these issues, it is probably better off for the FC-1 NOT to be bought by the PLAAF, despite previous assertions that the FC-1 will not survive if it is not bought by the PLAAF. The reason for this is that the FC-1 will therefore not be subjected to the same kind of political wringing, requirements and constant respecification the J-11 and the J-10 was subjected.
In other words, CAC can design the FC-1 anyway they want within the constraints of the market niche they wish to target the plane in. As you can see with Guizhou and Hongdu, they’re starting to design their aircraft in the light of export markets first (the L-15 and the FTC-2000), and it would be up for the PLAAF to decide if they want it or not.
To sell to the PLA means low margins, ergo, back to the Communist system which these firms are trying to evolve away from.
I’m not surprised taht Shenyang is not happy about the J-11 deal. It also provides part of an explanation why SAC don’t seem to be hot in pursuing an MKK license deal. On the future of the licensing deal, SAC wants more flexibility. The Fisher report that China is trying to work with a follow on license is probably from the Chinese government rather than what SAC wants. If this deal did not go through, probably no big loss for SAC who probably have their share of potentially lucrative civilian aviation proposals often with foreign companies who want to get into the Chinese market.
crobatoOriginally posted by plawolf
well that makes alot of sence, but it still leaves some questions unanswered. for example, if it is true that the PLAAF can only absorb one regiment per year, it still doesnt stop them buying two reg’s worth this year and not bothering the next.
i beleive it is the lack of training resource that is limiting the number of flankers the PLA can absorb, not lack of worthy pilots. the MKKs are twin seaters after all, for training they can just train more pilots at the same time to push up absorbtion rate. with the MKKs taking over some of the more advanced courses in the sylibous and freeing up the UBs to train more pilots on the basics.
and there is also the possibility of the PLA asking the russians to deliver the birds over a longer period. unusually prices tend to go up if u want sth built ASAP, but it might cost so much if u wanted them produced in economic batches.
It’s not the buying per se, but the rate of deliveries.
Even if PLAAF makes a 40 plane order, 20 of the planes are delivered in a year, and the 40 planes completed after two years.
The 40 planes are probably to account for production efficiencies.
Integration is quite an issue. For example, Taiwan itself had problems absorbing the deluge of modern craft it received in less than a decade.
Matt:
“I am not getting confused in anything, If you think you can build a AC of todays standards by going it alone you are blinded by nationalist fervour. You would need to consult.”
And what makes you think the Chinese have not done so, eh? And don’t give that patroniznig long paragraph—what do you regard the Chinese, stupid? As the third largest ship builder in the world, I think they fully understand this. As a country now learning to build bullet trains, some of the most massive skyscrapers in the world, and sending people to space I think they have a full grasp of all engineering issues. They also have a very long history of mistakes from previous naval ship designs which you can build a strong base of experience on. And they sent their first satellite in space, blew their first H-bomb and built their first nuclear sub in isolation without consulting anybody.
The fact that they have the blueprints of at least four carriers (including the scrapped Melbourne) what makes you think they have not done their share of “consulting”.
crobatoMuch of the Chinese aviation industry are shifting to civilian production.
CAC — Chengdu AC. The one making the J-7, J-10 and now FC-1. Few people know this company also makes sections of B737s for Boeing.
XAC — Xian AC. This company made the H-6 and currently the JH-7. It’s big project now is the AJR-21 regional liner with lots of Western based partnerships including GE for the engines.
HAC — Harbin AC. Made the H-5 before. Currently makes the Z-9 helos and has a partnership with Embraer to create a small regional jet based the EMB-145.
Others like Hongdu and Zhuizhou are trying to make other civilian aicraft including helicopters as well as exportable trainers such as the K-8.
Sign In
