crobatoIt is only Russian upgrade SM. Nothing to do with 90s. Payload is correct. Range and speed is also more. It seems lighter avionics have done the work.
For a guy who likes to mouth about science, you certainly do not know something about it. Ligher avionics would not simply do this.
To do this, you would need to significantly replace key components to the SK standard. In fact among these components is the landing gear which as to be significantly strengthened (this is one of the main mods of the SK over the S). To reach to the 9000kg, the gear is changed even further, as you can see with the MKK.
crobatoWrong. The GDR MiG-21F-13 did last from 1962-1985 or 23 years.
The MiG-21U from 1965-1990. Terminated by the end of the GDR.
The MiG-17/19 alias J-6/7 examples are not serious and you know that!
The Russian examples were built in the 50s from the materials available than.
When were the last Chinese examples built?! Like building cars, the quality rises from year to year, every new batch receives improvements.
The Chinese probably never had better materials than the Russians who were simply the gurus of titanium metallurgy and who were the ones who passed on these formulas. Pakistan J-6s were received starting in 1965 and guess what decade were they retired and how many decades was that? JJ-5s were long supplemented by JJ-6s but JJ-5s (MiG-17 based) which probably never built past the 70s, are still in service in flight academies even today.
I like your excellent knowledge, but I am surprised by your behavior, when it comes to China. None attacks China. Like every other country I try to differ between propaganda claims and reality. Nothing more and nothing less.
Under such considerations even the claims of “MiG-23MLD” are usefull, because he forces us to a different view and by that to verify our estimates from time to time. None is always right or wrong in every case, related to limited informations.
The problem of “MiG-23MLD” is the guy never really checks the veracity of his sources. It seems like everything you take from the internet is true or bible, without actually checking them out. This is especially when Russian media is concerned, which tends to be optimistic and has a bad track record when matching the facts. (Typical media drill trying to fill in article space and minimum word requirement without spending the time and effort for fact checking, a very common journalistic flaw).
Do you think that I came to the conclusion that the J-11B was completely indigenous overnight? Check the history of all my postings about the Chinese Su-27s and J-11s from the time of the time I came to this forum in 2002. It is not the same, it has evolved as I uncovered more information. Flogger here actually is even reflecting some of my opinions and speculations I had years ago, including mentioning things like the J-11B may still use AL-31F. I started on this forum never thinking that the Chinese would even conceive of pulling a redesigned Flanker based on their own specs and technologies and this was the farthest of my extrapolations how Flankers in PLAAF service would evolve back before 2003. I even advocated then how pursuing the SM course would be a logical path for the PLAAF then, because of how it logistically complements the MKK/MK2, and the better course for China was to license the MKK and SKM.
But there is one thing that I do that you don’t do, and that is actually research deeply into Chinese material. I don’t read Chinese very good but that does not stop me from using translators or asking someone who can actually read these stuff to translate. Based on so much evidence from Chinese material, while continuing to research on Russian documentation, and general knowledge how aircraft are designed, the apparent becomes obvious. Sukhoi obviously knew about the project—unlike the J-10, the PLAAF never made it secret, it even published it on its own journals. But Sukhoi is OUTSIDE of the project, looking in, which means all the behavior the Russians have exhibited so far, has been that of an observer, not a participant. And frankly Sukhoi has its own roadmap on Flanker evolution trends, and it is in its desire (government owned too) that this road map keeps vital Flanker components as Russian as possible to support its industry, especially the engine, the majority of the airframe, the radar, avionics and weapons used. You take the most Westernized modded of all Flankers, either the MKI or MKM, and it still is using a Russian radar, a Russian engine and still firing Russian missiles.
That simply isn’t true with the J-11B.
Given there is enough detailed knowledge has been released—we know even the BRAKES are indigenous—the plane is thoroughly indigenous in its construction and parts herewith. The only thing it has in common with the Su-27 is in its form and basic structure. But underneath, the plane has much more in common with the J-10 than the MKK.
“MIG-23MLD” pulls out nonsense like comparing it with the Japanese F-2 project. The problem is, the F-2 project is from the **USA**, which blows all that logic altogether. There is no evidence that the Russians had a similar partnership with anyone that allows a modification of such an extent to the F-2. Nor it has been shown that the Russians have any INTEREST at all to have similar projects with anyone, simply because it is not in their SELF INTEREST. The F-2 had a Japanese radar and Japanese missiles, two of the areas which the Russians would never relinquish on. Worst yet, the typical Russian distrust to China means it is not in their interest to have China flying with Flankers much superior to their own (the F-2 was supposedly by intent, at least in paper, to be greatly superior to a standard F-16).
China may have approached Sukhoi once to have similar F-15J or F-2 style projects on their own. There was no doubt early in the MKK history, that they had an interest similar to Mitsubishi’s arrangement with the US, to have the APG-63 licensed and modified, then adapted to allow integration with Japanese wepons. For whatever reasons, political or technical it may be, this obviously never happened. Failing the F-15J style approach, so the next would be the F-2 style, but I guess that never happened either otherwise Sukhoi may have mouthed such a partnership in public, or it would not escape the snooping tabloid mentality Russian media. You simply cannot hide a partnership of this size.
But simply, based on current information, no such partnership ever existed. You can see the basic inherent problems of such a partnership, stemming from the Russians or the Chinese not willing to share certain techs with each other due to their mutual xenophobic paranoias; the Russian desire to keep the Flanker roadmap within their control and markets (logical); the Russian desire not to keep Chinese Flankers from being too superior to their own (understandable); and the Russian desire to keep the Chinese buying Russian munitions and missiles (thousands of R-77s is big bucks for example).
So the next step is to simply go completely indigenous and alone in this venture. The Russians knew about it because it was they who mouthed that it would take the Chinese at least 10 to 11 years to complete the development and integration. Quite a window to continue selling all the other stuff. Except that it only took the Chinese only five years (from 2001) to finish this, thanks to technologies developed for the J-10 and the rabid pace of how things are being done in China.
crobatoJust look at official board. It is 8000kg for Cy-27CM.(Su-27SM). just look at range, height and speed figures and Maximum takeoff figures.
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/visits2-pages/mos2005_day02.html
Its hard to say if the Su-27SM specs are based upgrading the SK airframe and not upgrade from the old -S. SM and SMK are often used interchangeably in marketing literature. The payload weight cannot be taken seriously because this is best case basis of marketing, using the SK as the upgrade basis.
that is old MIG-29M2 figures which is equal to MIG-29SMT.
Sez who? Fans again?
I am only referring to upgrading 20 year old airframe. Not some new built aircraft. and that is minor changes.
Again ur giving example of new built aircraft. Show me actual upgrade of 20 year old aircraft.
Show me actual factory documentation of the claims you mention.
China has many 20 plus year old airframes of MiG-21F design. Just how many East Block MiG-21Fs actually last that long? For that matter, how many Eastern Block MiG-17s and MiG-19s actually last for over 3 decades? PAF F-6s first received in the sixties and early seventies were only retired this decade. How many MiG-19s actually last that long? In China, many MiG-15 and MiG-17 based trainers are still operational and flying with flight academies. While well maintained, they are certainly not pampered being training aircraft they put a lot of flight hours per year far more than your collector warbirds.
crobatoYou pretty much said it.
They all go out to practice live bomb on an uninhabited island along the island chain, hopefully with minimal ecological effects (there appears to be no sea bird migration patterns in the area).
Concurrently as the exercise was going on, the USS Kitty Hawk dropped by on the island as part of its farewell tour. Don’t think the Kitty Hawk participated on the exercises as it appears to be on R&R.
Last JASDF exercise on the region (well the first actually ever, this was the second), the JASDF brought F-15Js.
crobatoMIG-29 was designed to carry 2 tons and Su-27 4 tons in 1980s. Now MIG-29SMT is 5500KG and Su-27SM is 8 tons for the same airframe. and incase of MIG-29 1700KG extra fuel capacity. I am not going into 1500kG and 2500 KG wet stations of Fulcrum and Flanker. that is massive increase in Load Carrying capacities for Ground Attack missions.
Can u double the payload and increasing the fuel capacity of 1980s built F-7 not mention doubling the life?
Su-27SK carries 8500kg. This was done per PLAAF specification. All the Su-27SKs were newly built planes. The marketing Su-27SKM is based on the Su-27SK airframe and not on the Russian Su-27S. You cannot transpose the payload capability of the Su-27SK to the upgraded Su-27S. The Su-27UBK also has the increased load which the standard Su-27UB does not, and the Su-30K is built on that.
Your figure for the MiG-29SMT is actually for the MiG-29M2. which is a new build plane.
Though the figures are never released, compared to the MiG-21F13, the J-7B doubled the number of hard points in the wing, and allowed the wing to carry fuel tanks. If you see a MiG-21F type body that carries three fuel tanks, its a J-7, as the Russian original only carries a belly tank. The J-7B wing is strong enough to carry the fuel tank on the outside pylon and is actually a double pointed pylon so it can also carry an AAM in that point.
The J-7E adds 40% more internal fuel with a new double delta wing that is compartmented and sealed for wet storage purposes. The plane improves the superior agility and cockpit visibility of the MiG-21F over its later counterparts, but has as much fuel as the last spined variants—but without incurring the CG shift resulting from the fuel being consumed from the spinal tank. And it manages to do all this while still being much lighter than the MF and -bis variants.
crobatoThe F-4 Phantom uses a different approach to lessen span wise bleed of the airflow and to induce vortices to keep the airflow laminated over and under the wing. Basically it uses a saw tooth in the wing design and it works.
Other aircraft that uses a saw tooth is the MiG-23MLD and the Chinese JH-7 attacker, which also uses a compound geometry sweep wing where the front edge of the wing looks like a double delta. Some planes create a sawtooth by extending a moving slat forward and ahead enough of the fixed forward edge of the wing. You see this with various delta winged aircraft, among which, Mirage 2000, J-10, and JAS Gripen.
crobatoI don’t build models so I don’t really know.
Only that I can tell the PLAAF has sometimes changes their standard color trim. Previously for example, a lot of aircraft come with this white color, but now the standard color is something like a grey. You can almost tell the vintage of the picture by the plane’s color, the color of the numbers, the format of the unit numbers and where there are painted so on.
In our above examples, J-7 30168 and 30163 are actually in the same unit. How do we really know which is J-7C and which is J-7D, at least made from the start? Its possible some J-7Ds may also have been updated J-7Cs. The light grey camo on plane 30168 appears to have superceded the camo layout used in 30163.
Actually there are two regiments of J-7C/D, as you can see from plane 30062, all on the same division. This same division—the 29th, located under the Beijing MR command—had been equipped with a regiment of Su-30MKKs, so the two J-7C/D regiments are probably serving backup.
crobatoWhat’s your point?
Nothing. Just stating an observation. A lot of USAF F-16s are not upgraded to the same standard yet, as the process is ongoing. I have not seen a lot of GE powered F-16s with AIFF.
crobatoThe Kanwa article says the J-11B uses Al-31s but has new avionics weapons and radar.
KANWA is stating an opinion, not a fact. KANWA also changes its opinions many many times.
Man it is not impossible to turn an aircraft like you are saying, the MiG-29SMT shows quit easily you can turn an aircraft into another, the MiG-23MLD also has different aerodynamics and structure than a MiG-23ML and the Russians modified several hundreds, the first Su-27IB was a converted Su-27UB and the first Su-27UB was a converted Su-27B single seat, with modern materials and lighter avionics you can reduce weight
The MiG-29SMT is not an aircraft with 5X airframe life than the original without an intervening overhaul.
.
In fact for example the AL-31 weights 1530kg and the R-29 used by the MiG-27 weights 1782kg. so a MiG-27 has a reduction of 250 kgs when it is powered by a AL-31, the J-11B will have a difference of 500kgs if it powered by other engine, you can get a differece in radars the same for example the Zhuk family has a difference of almost 120kgs from Zhuks fitted to Mig-29s, MiG-23, J-8II or Su-27, this proves you it is not as hard to reduce weight just by changing engines and you will have more if you use composites
AL-31F actually weighs 1574kg, the AL-31FN for the J-10 weighs 1534kg.
The N001E appears to weigh nearly 300kg, the KLJ-4 which looks like it uses less than half of the volume, may weigh less than 150kg, probably even lighter than the KLJ-3 on the J-10.
crobatoHave to check, but physically the J-7C and J-7D looks identical, and the only difference being avionics corrections and updates. Its likely even the J-7Cs have been avionically corrected to the J-7D long time ago. We basically use the finish to distinguish the two planes in their original form.
crobatoAllow me to put more question here:
what’s advantage and disadvatage of double delta wing? except SAAB 35 and MIG-7G, are there any others was designed fitting double delta wing? Why I didn’t remember any Russia or US combat aircraft that had been in service used double delta wng?
Of course, what I mean double delta wing not includes LERX.
You mean Chinese J-7G and SAAB J-35 Draken. Besides that, there is also the Russian Su-15 Flagon.
crobatoThe two squadrons of F-16s from Cannon AFB appear to be the big mouthed type (Block 30/40/50) with the GE engines and has the AIFF bird slicers, which means these planes have all been avionically upgraded, as the Block 30/40/50 never had them in their original form.
crobatoThe J-11B uses according to KANWA AL-31s and even there are reports well based that it is intended to use WS-10s and probably in the future they will use it, according to NOVOSTY the russian news outlet based upon a KANWA report the J-10 still uses AL-31s, in fact they claim 40 J-10As have been built
You have to rephrase properly what KANWA is saying because J-11 and J-11B are too different things. Its not likely J-11B is using AL-31F. And KANWA is often republishing old reports later as free reports, so you need to validate the original date of the non free version of the report.
they also say China has intentions to sell the J-10 to North Korea and the
This is incorrect. China has refused to sell the J-10 to NK (more likely NK asked them for free). NK is said to have gotten some J-7s instead.
claim the MiG-29 might have to compete with the J-10 in some african and asian countries among then Suda, Angola, Nigeria and Iran.
Nigeria has already bought some J-7s.
E)If indeed China is building Su-27s from chinese kits non deliveried by Russia, Russian sources will reported sooner or later, Sukhoi will report it, Novosty, TASS, Rosoboronexport, INTERFAX etc etc because the Russian sources also read foreign reports such as those of Kanwa so this can not be kept secret by Sukhoi to the Russian media and Russian people so sooner or later they will report it. but so far me and i mean me, i personally i have been not been able to find one saying China has its own production line of J-11Bs
No. Sukhoi appears to be keeping many things about their business with the PLAAF even up to now. For example, the true extent of the localized modifications on the Chinese Su-27s, and the true wording of the contract.
It is impossible for the Su-27 kit to use WS-10A. It is impossible for the Su-27 kit to be turned into an airframe that is 700kg lighter and has 10,000 flight hour life from 2000 hours. It is impossible for the warranty and support conditions for the kits to allow for any modification beyond its intended design and use. F-2 analogy fails here because LM actually shipped parts to Japan that is specifically made for the F-2 and these are not GENERIC F-16 parts. You cannot turn generic Su-27 into the J-11B as spec’ed.
C)China still buys AL-31s
China is only receiving AL-31Fs made from a previous order circa 2005. This is already 2007. It has not made any new orders since. Recieving and buying are two different things.
crobatoIn fact i have read in russian reports that claim the J-10 had some structural troubles throughtout its design development history, when they modified the original LAVI airframe and made it a J-10 fitting a new inlet and a new engine, they claim that the J-10 has a compromised inlet far from the perfect airframe structure.
You read amateur websites like Venik recopying some KANWA nonsense. The Lavi and the J-10 airframe have very distinctively different lines, and claiming the J-10 is made out of the original lavi airframe is like claiming a Maserati is made out of a Ferrari frame. How can a variable inlet be a “compromised” inlet?
See that the Chinese bought 150 AL-31 for Su-27s in 2005 here is the news by ROSOBORONEXPORT so you can not say it is not official
Московское машиностроительное производственное предприятие “Салют” поставит в Китай 150 авиационных двигателей АЛ-31Ф на сумму более $550 млн.”
“Will supply” means it s not BOUGHT as in past tense. Your argumentation has no proper relationship with tenses. You take articles that use the words “will”, “interest”, “offer” and assume them to be a past tense accomplished FACT, which is completely misleading because “will supply”, “interest”, and “offer” do not indicate a signed agreement at the time of the wording of the article. For example, there are many articles about the 100 AL-31FNs in 2004, but the agreement was only signed in July 2005.
crobatoCrobato
The KANWA article was the article posted by Pinko that claimed the J-11B uses AL-31s, the fact is China bought 280 AL-31Fs and AL-31FNs in several contracts signed by both parties, the first one in 2005 when they bought 150 Al-31s and 100 al-31FNs, and by 2006 and 2007 180 AL-31s were going to be delivered , in 2006 they reported the delivery of 180 AL-31s to China were going to start in 2006 and continue in 2007.
BS.
KANWA article is stating an opinion about the J-11B. However, it is wrong based on the state media CCTV evidence.
There was no 150 AL-31Fs delivered in 2005. You are an outright LIAR.
Why? Because you are confusing the 150 “order” and the 180 actual order as two orders, when in fact, its really one order. The 150 engines were in the negotiation phase, which was later changed to 180.
You are making another speculation, Russian reports also report about the
Me, making a speculation when you are actively distorting information in front of everyone.
There is good reason why you are banned in some forums.
WS-10, they know China wants to power the J-10 and J-11 with WS-10s that is not a mystery for the Russians however you use you typical tactic of bashing opponents and links as the only way to support your speculations,
you knowledge about the China-Russia aircraft relations is quit poor, currently Lyulka and Liming are building gas turbines togather that technically are not much different from the AL-31 and Liming has been trained by Lyulka to serve the AL-31s of course you will say China builds J-11Bs like pancakes and can be produced at will by China, however no Russian sources claims that.
WRONG. Liming has an agreement not with Lyulka but with GE. That’s why the agreement is called GE-Liming.
China even has bought Su-33s, this shows Sukhoi is pleased by the Chinese
More lies from you. China has not bought Su-33s.
side, that is the reality, in 2007 there are no Chinese engines that can compete with the AL-31MF-1 niether with the AL-41, the Russians are upgrading their Flankers with that new engine, the AL-31MF-1, for the Chinese also is important to upgrade their aircraft, Lyulka has offered the AL-31MF-1 and they reported very likely China has interest in those aircraft engines
Your credibility goes down even further when you cannot spell AL-31FM-1 even correctly.
Your credibility goes down even more when you say Lyulka offered the engine with the wrong spelling when in fact, it was SALUT, and Salut is not Lyulka (Saturn-Lyulka). You cannot even tell the two companies apart. Saturn is offering Project 117 or something like that as a counter against the FM1. They have in fact became competitors.
You have no idea that OFFERED does not mean its BOUGHT. When a company OFFERS something to a customer, it means that the company is the one that is trying to make the marketing initiative to the customer, and not the customer making the primary request. That is an indication of a relationship in trouble because if the customer has an actual need, they would have approached the supplier first, and so the customer initiates the transaction, and not from the supplier side.
Sukhoi has previously claimed that China was “interested” on the Su-27SM, the Su-30MK3, and the Kh-59MK, all of which they never bought and then “interested” on the Su-30MK2, which they later dropped after one order. Previous Chinese “interest” are things like the Zhuks and the A-50, none of which happened. “Interest” therefore is something on record that has not proven to have any factual weight. People claim “interest” in order to make their company sound good.
.
You are making a grail of fantasy claiming the WS-10 will solve all the problems China has, in fact some Russian reports claim their experts know for China it will take a few years more to really make operational the J-11B with WS-10, showing a prototype fitted with a WS-10 is not a proof you have operational aircraft, even more if you still buy 280 AL-31s among them 100 AL-31FN for the J-10 and 180 AL-31Fs for Su-27s
No. What is proof is that the WS-10A has gone into CCTV state media, the designer has been given technical award, and the umbrella company announcing its production. Not to mention having constructed a brand new engine plant starting in August 2005.
Another thing that is wrong about you is that the kit based J-11s have engines included with the kits. The 20 engines so far delivered could not have been used in the last 17 J-11s made since the number don’t match (the kits would have required 34 engines at least not including spares). 20 engines delivered does not also mean 20 engines accepted. Some engines will be rejected like the 15 RD-93s where 5 was rejected.
http://www.pwgs.org/news/news_03_11_06.htm
This article talks about the collaboration between Salyut and Liming has been broadened in fact they say With the aid of the “Salyut” , Liming has mastered the realization of the complete overhaul of the engines of Russian manufacture for the PLAAF aircraft Su-27 . “Salyut” supplies engines for these heavy fighters, and also for the Chinese aircraft “J-10”.
Irrelevant. That piece of news is OLD.
See that the Chinese bought 150 AL-31 for Su-27s in 2005 here is the news by ROSOBORONEXPORT so you can not say it is not official
Московское машиностроительное производственное предприятие “Салют” поставит в Китай 150 авиационных двигателей АЛ-31Ф на сумму более $550 млн.
Moscow machine-building production enterprise “Salyut” will supply to China 150 aircraft engines AL -31F for the sum of more than $550 million. ” last week it was signed the supply agreement for delibery to China of aircraft engines AL-31F, of MMPP” Saluyt manufacture “. In accordance with the data by the contract China will be purchase 150 engines AL-31F for the sum more than $550 mln. “, reported” Interfax-AVN “on Sunday source in the defense- industrial complex. It noted that these engines were intended for the installation to located in arsenal VVS of China destroyers Su-27SK and Su-30MKK. According to the estimations of experts, for 6 years the volume of the purchases by China of aircraft engines AL -31F can compose $1,2-1,4 billion.
Sorry but that article is the same negotiation that led to the 180 engine buy. The 150 number was the previous estimate adjusted to 180 later. It does not mean that there are two seperate orders one 150 and the other 180.
Sign In
