J-10

The 30+d/s rate he is claiming is also quite possible, since delta designs like the M2000, the Gripen, and the Rafale also has claims to these regions.

Based on a delta design, one can make some general assumptions. Deltas tend to have their peak maneuverability regimes at high speeds, the faster they go, the better. This also supports his claim for better supersonic maneuverability. However, they tend to suffer likewise more at lower speeds, so indeed maneuvering lower at mach 0.5, the delta bleeds more speed rapidly than a sweep wing design.

So I think what he says is quite possible and consistent on basics on how we expect deltas to perform.

The accelerating from 22d/s suggests a strong power to weight ratio.

Based on his claims, I computed the J-10’s empty weight might be around under 9,000kg (assuming that its internal fuel load is 4500kg according to some alleged specs). The 9750kg empty weight/4500kg internal fuel spec seen in some websites does not go together, one or the other has to be wrong. The missile weights are 180kg for SD-10, 120kg for PL-8. WS-10A is 13,200kg thrust according to Chinese magazine articles.

To be honest with you, there is nothing new here if one can make careful calculations and assumptions based on the J-10’s design and assumed specs.

i do not doubt the 30deg/sec it could be possible, but what i can not undestand for how many seconds a J-10`s pilot can sustain 10 Gs without blackout and how fast the J-10 will eventually get it`s 22 deg/sec sustained turn rate up to what i have read i feel the J-10 is comparable to a MiG-29A and as the americans have said to the F-16

The follow up of that discussion (coppied from PDF),PLA its from the same guy who claimed to work on the J-10, isnt it :rolleyes:

if that is the J-10 sustained turn rate is basicly as a MiG-29A`s 22 deg/sec and the instantaneous at 10Gs how the pilot can sustain that G load how the pilot can fly that, sounds to me like rubish unless the chinese have a new system to allow humans to fly at 10Gs without blackouts? a Mig-29 has an instateneous turn of 28 deg/sec but can keep a 23 deg/sec in the best variants such as the MiG-29M

The Russians would not help the Chinese on engine techs because it is against the Russian commercial interests which is to sell the engines to the Chinese.

That much is obvious.

Crobato i said Ukraine helped in the WS-10 and ukraine as Belarus are in many ocassions willing to sell russian technology even when Russia does not aprove that

Nope.

WS-10A development was geared as a replacement for the J-11 engines, not for the J-10. That means you are wrong saying that the WS-10A has the gearbox on the bottom, when in fact, it has it on the top like the usual AL-31F would. The priority for the WS-10A is for the J-11’s first, then when that is satisfied, to the J-10. There is two reasons for this. First the J-11 has a high political emphasis as the high end fighter. Second, for a new engine it is safer using it on a dual engine design than a single one.

WS-10 matches the performance table of the PW F100, which implies it is trying to mimic it. The original WS-10 has thrust ratings similar to the F-100-220, which is at over 24,000lbs thrust. WS-10A and with the -A suffix, is meant to match the F-100-229, which is at 29,000lbs. The third WS-10 variant is meant to match the GE F110-232 at 32,000lbs. Looking at this, you can see it’s using Western engines as a performance mark. Already it appears that testing for the third WS-10 (WS-10B?) is underway.

I heard once the WS-10 was based on the AL-31 not on western engines and Ukraine helped in it`s design, sounds more likely that they used both designs of western and Russian engines as models but only Ukraine had would given direct technical assistance.
it is logic since the J-10 and J-11 use the AL-31 and the Chinese failed to copy the US engines, could be also logic to think the assistance would have been limited as the Chinese now are capable of designing jet engines by thier own but there is nothing bad saying they consulted the Ukrainians and even Russians to fit the WS-10 into the Su-27/J-11.

But do you have a good webpage that has it history well explain chronologically?

Well, as far as they’re concerned, exporting it and profiting from it to the maximum degree possible IS using it wisely.

That makes one of us.

And Israel often doesn’t act in the interests of a US-Israeli alliance itself.

Does that include Israel? Or consider this instead: How about, since we’re the land of equality and all, we level the playing field and sell some STINGER-POST and ATACMS to the Palestinians.

You’re right, it is profitable. Why should we not profit? You aren’t complaining that we sell weapons to Formosa or to both India and Pakistan, or that Russia sells FLANKERs to India and China. What makes Israel so special?

SOC the US can do any thing they deem is good for the US interests as Israel can do, if we think that Israel sold US technology to China and wanted to sell the AWACS technology built for the Phalcon, Israel is another nation surrounded by enemies with the desire to exterminate it, after WWII when the jewish people was almost wiped out the palestine question became another matter of survival for Israel, The US considers Israel an ally but some times the US follows it`s interests as Israel does.
Israel has great technology but as allies both nations have their own interests that sometimes are in opposition to each other.
The J-10 to me seems to be a great mistake that Israel made and in one way was prompted by the US greediness because Israel and the US spent lot of money in the design of the Lavi just to be wasted in favor of the US Lockheed F-16.
China was the only nation true profiting from it as in lesser way is Russia.
it will be a great irony to see Israeli F-16s fighting Pakistani, Iranian or Syrian J-10s