What Su-35 deal?

… and the same with “What engine issue with the Su-30MKK’s engines” !

Like I already said that tread was started only for one reason: To troll around and as soon as arguments were given that don’t fit the own opinion … 😡

Deino

Could You please explain what engines issues China has with its Su-30MKK ?? As far as I know there is no issue with the Russian AL-31F they use and additionally most (nearly all in fact) of the last batches delivered were using the own WS-10 anyway. So what ?

… and regarding Your last sentence: what other than trolling is that ?

Deino

One more thing sir. Please keep in mind that with all the planes mentioned above. They demonstrated great post stall handling in the same phase the J-,20 is in now. Even the early block F-35 with most systems not installed can demonstrate 100 degrees AOA.

Yes, but again simply the fact that we haven’t seen the J-20 in full action does not mean that it can barely fly like a brick !

http://en.yibada.com/articles/40605/20150624/russia-final-contract-su-35-fighters-china.htm

?

Sorry … and what happened so far !? Nothing … since years they are reporting that “soon, very soon …” and not even at MAKS a contract was signed. Therefore, honestly even if I won’t exclude that the PLAAF will purchase a few then the reason is 100% for sure not that the J-20 falls short of its expectations but more due to another reason be it a political one or simply to get access to the 117S engine (maybe for the J-20 !) ? … but time will tell.

Agree…. Adding to J-20 is most likely significantly more draggy than T-50…

Agreed ! … but what makes You think the J-20 is more draggy ?

Deino there is no chest thumping, but we have some evidence.

1. Its the consensus of the arm chair community the the J-20 is the largest and likely the heaviest of the fighters above.

2. We know the engine its using and we know the wet and dry thrust.

3. We have seen the Others in a post stall regime. If the J-20 could do it the Chinese would not hesitate to show us.

4.The AL-31F puts out less thrust than the F-35 dry, but the plane is twice the size.

This is not nationalism, or trolling, but the hard facts point to a plane this size being underpowered. Will it still do its job? Yes. Do I expect even F-16 level of manuvering, and acceleration? No.

The problem is that there a few so called “facts” floating around the community that are simply still wrong and even more they simply compare a fully operational F-22 with an interim version of the J-20:

1. it is not … based on several images in comparison to Flankers it has roughly the same size of about 20m (YES, a bit longer that a T50 and F-22 but not really that much) … and with a Flanker in comparison no-one would call them a sitting duck in the air.

2. YES … and we also know that the aircraft flying right now are prototypes and demonstrators … the final engines is not ready !

3. NO. simply since there is no need to do so. … and simply since they don’t do it does not mean it cannot especially by a prototype with interim engines over a populated area like Chengdu. I agree with You it would be interesting to know or to see it flying at the FTTC and CFTE right now ….

4. Ohh yes, but therefore it uses two of them similar to the Flanker and so again back to no. 1.

I completely agree with You that TODAY with its interim engines it is most likely inferior in manoeuvrability to a F-22 or T-50 … but to Flanker I don’t know and everything else is pure speculation.

Deino

Maybe a good read – especially in mind of the background and Mr. Song’s famous paper that describes the requirements behind the J-20 – can be found here:

http://www.mediafire.com/view/ddqp4y66planvvf/Striker_or_interceptor_Assessing_J-20s_role.pdf

Slowly ….

PICTURES: Comac confident of year-end roll-out for C919

Comac says C919 suppliers are due to deliver all systems of the first aircraft by October, allowing the aircraft to be rolled out by the end of 2015.
Speaking to Flightglobal at Comac’s final assembly centre near Shanghai’s Pudong International airport, chief engineer Jiang Liping says assembly of the airframe is largely complete, and that installations of harnesses, cables and pipes has started.
The Chinese airframer has also taken delivery of its first CFM International Leap-1C engine, as well as the Liebherr landing gear. The aircraft’s second powerplant is due to in September.
After roll-out, aircraft 101 needs to undergo a series of pre-flight preparations, including engine tests, lightning tests and taxi tests before it can make its first flight.
Under the best circumstances, pre-flight preparation could be completed within four months following roll-out, says Jiang. This means that the C919 could make its first flight around April or May of 2016.

When Flightglobal visited the manufacturer’s sub-assembly hangar, aircraft 101 was resting on struts with its wing-to-body join completed. Comac had removed the aircraft’s tail cone, as well as its vertical and horizontal stabilisers as it had to strengthen the composite aft-fuselage, says Jiang. The aircraft’s windows have also been replaced with smaller standard-size ones, after the manufacturer discovered that its original larger windows affect the strength of the fuselage.
The aircraft’s radome as well as the winglets have not been attached. Jiang says the airframe will move to the final assembly hangar next month, where its engines will be attached and systems installed.
Next month, Comac will also start final assembly of aircraft 102 as well as a static strength test aircraft. The mid-fuselage of aircraft 102 has already been delivered, with other sections of the fuselage due to arrive by the end of the month.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-comac-confident-of-year-end-roll-out-for-c919-416000/

Comac engages backup suppliers to prevent C919 delays

By: Mavis Toh Shanghai 03:12 25 Aug 2015

Comac is using a dual supplier system to manufacture critical and potentially challenging parts of the C919 airframe, to ensure quality control and to prevent any major delays to the programme.

These include the aircraft’s aft fuselage as well as its vertical and horizontal stabilisers, all of which are made of composites, Comac’s chief engineer Jiang Liping tells Flightglobal in an interview in Shanghai.

She explains that Chinese suppliers are unfamiliar with the use of composites and that the airframer’s concern is that the quality and strength of the parts produced by one supplier may not match the required standards.

An example is how the first aft fuselage delivered by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation had to be strengthened.

Comac also engaged two suppliers to build the C919’s centre wingbox and mid fuselage due to anticipated complexities in the wing-to-body join of the aircraft.

“We do this so that we have a backup… the costs will go up but this is for quality control and also to ensure that the the programme’s timeline is under control,” says Jiang.

She adds, however, that Comac has stuck to the main suppliers thus far, since the manufactured parts have generally met standards.

Comac has largely completed the final assembly of the first flight test aircraft for the C919 programme, and is working towards a year-end roll-out followed by first flight in 2016.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/comac-engages-backup-suppliers-to-prevent-c919-delays-416002/

Any news on the MiG MFI 1.44 ???

Deino