Russian aviation journalist says J-10 better than both Mig-29 and Flanker.

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

18 years 11 months

Posts: 9,683

Vladimir Karnozov, a Moscow-based aerospace journalist:

"ZHUHAI -- There is an old anecdote. The optimists around the world learn English. The pessimists, Chinese. But down-to-earth study the Kalashnikov assault rifle.

I think it is time for the down-to-earth crowd to study their rifles using Chinese manuals!

Two years ago every important source told me, let's wait two years and see what comes of China's new J-10 fighter.

Now everyone I trust says the Chinese pulled it off, and the J-10 has proven a tremendously successful program.

I watched how the J-10 flew over Zhuhai, in 30 degree Celsius temperatures and high humidity.

The pilot did none of the show tricks like post-stall or tail slide or pitch-back, but turns were very tight, initial rate of turn very high. It was clear there is a lot of potential in this airplane to achieve the same maneuvers more quickly.

The pilot rarely used afterburner and the degrees of canard deflection were small. Still, the airplane flew very well. I reckon it will beat F-16C or MiG-29/SMT easily.

Chinese have already completed over 100 J-10s and they have bought more Russian engines for next series.

I do not think they would buy more Flankers since the J-10 is as good as the Flanker, to say the least.

Chinese military said "no" to local engine makers and "no" to local makers of some key systems, instead buying these critical items directly from Russia.

As for AWACS support, it is present with 4 A-50 equipped with KJ-2000 radars and it seems the Chinese have bought a special version of the Ka-31, although very much different from the Indian navy version. Apparently with a new radar.

If proper tactics are used, the PLAAF can beat Taiwanese opponents in conventional air war. Unless the US makes it into a full scale world-for-world battle, the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party does have a chance."

Original post

Member for

16 years 9 months

Posts: 573

The title is very misleading.

No where in the article does it say it is better than Flanker.

Typical jounalists.....or did you choose the title yourself Sferrin?

Member for

16 years 6 months

Posts: 105

And where is the link to the source?

Member for

15 years 8 months

Posts: 87

I reckon it will beat F-16C or MiG-29/SMT easily.

He is not biased you see, as he clearly left F-16 in the title:diablo:

Member for

19 years 5 months

Posts: 919

He is not biased you see, as he clearly left F-16 in the title:diablo:

So it really suggest as the title and it just someone poor reading... :diablo:

But why sounds so surprise? If in terms of dogfight ,J-10 with a 4.5 generation aerodynamic vs a 4th generation aerodynamic(F-16/Mig-29) definitely has the edge!

Member for

16 years 6 months

Posts: 105

So it really suggest as the title and it just someone poor reading... :diablo:

But why sounds so surprise? If in terms of dogfight ,J-10 with a 4.5 generation aerodynamic vs a 4th generation aerodynamic(F-16/Mig-29) definitely has the edge!

What makes J-10's aerodynamics 4.5? Canards? Hardly enough, dont you think? :)

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,082

The title is very misleading.

No where in the article does it say it is better than Flanker.

Typical jounalists.....or did you choose the title yourself Sferrin?

Here's the link!

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/

... and here Your missing statement:

...
I do not think they would buy more Flankers since the J-10 is as good as the Flanker, to say the least.
...

Deino :D

Member for

20 years 6 months

Posts: 4,441

Seriously though why are people suprised ? or why would it be a controversy after so many years of reverse engineering and evolutionary modifications to old airframes they were bound to come onto a good aircraft sooner or later! Also if it is a LAVI pedigree it should be a less of a suprise!

Member for

19 years 5 months

Posts: 919

What makes J-10's aerodynamics 4.5? Canards? Hardly enough, dont you think? :)

YES... Canard!! Not to mention specially design area to reduce radar cross section. 4th generation fighter where have this kind of features?

U don't believe ask, Dassault or BAE.. :diablo:

Member for

18 years 6 months

Posts: 3,718

He rates the performance of the aircraft by its performance on an airshow. He haven't compared transonic acceleration, supersonic sustained turn rates or handling qualities in touchy situations.
Further on, he doesn't know about the weapons system, about man machine interface or how ECM-resistent the radar works.

The Suchoi 27 the Chinese use is the legacy version, basically late 80ies stuff.

As for AWACS support, it is present with 4 A-50 equipped with KJ-2000 radars and it seems the Chinese have bought a special version of the Ka-31, although very much different from the Indian navy version. Apparently with a new radar.

If proper tactics are used, the PLAAF can beat Taiwanese opponents in conventional air war. Unless the US makes it into a full scale world-for-world battle, the central committee of the Chinese Communist Party does have a chance.

I guess this statement is true but doesn't really depent on the performance of the J-10. That the Chinese have the ablitly to gain air dominance or the Taiwan straits is pretty much granted, given the numbers. If it suffices for an invasion is a different question.

Member for

18 years 6 months

Posts: 3,718

What makes J-10's aerodynamics 4.5? Canards? Hardly enough, dont you think? :)

I think 4.5th generation aerodynamics are highly pitch-unstable (in subsonic) aircrafts which are also 100% control configured vehicles (means: also yaw and roll are integrated). They are "care free".
The F-16 is only "relaxed stability" and only partly CCV (you can stall & spin an F-16). Same applies for the Suchoi 27 or J-11, both only relaxed stability in pitch and lots of natural stability in roll and yaw. The MiG-29A isn't even relaxed stability.

4.5th generation like Eurofighter is a step forward. But actually I have doubts that a J-10 can compete with the Eurofighter in those terms, I expect the J-10 to be rather non-risk approach. We will hardly learn.
Only a highly pitch unstable aircraft can achieve the supersonic turn rates the Eurofighter can achieve and has a chance on becoming supercruisy.

Member for

17 years 9 months

Posts: 72

He rates the performance of the aircraft by its performance on an airshow.

The conclusions drawn in the article were based on a variety of sources in the Russian aerospace industry, which have been pointing in this direction for some time:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/11/dispatch-from-zhuhai-chinas-j1.html

Two years ago every important source told me, let's wait two years and see what comes of China's new J-10 fighter.

Now everyone I trust says the Chinese pulled it off, and the J-10 has proven a tremendously successful program.

The air show performance really had very little to do with the conclusions being reached by the article's author. To quote one of the responses from Stephen Trimble, the senior editor at Flight International who posted the article on behalf of his Russian correspondent:

This is what Vlad's sources are telling him, and, as my colleague the past five years, I've learned Vlad's sources are well worth listening too.

It doesn't come down to whether you are impressed by an air show performance. It comes down to whether or not you want to believe the Russian-based sources that the article is based upon.

Let me put it this way. When Lockheed Martin tells me that the F-16IN (the version that they are hawking to India) is the greatest thing since the invention of the wheel, I have a little bit of skepticism. When Russian sources praise the Su-35 as the super-fighter of the next century, I take it with a large grain of salt. But when Russian sources tell me that one of their arch-rivals for jet fighter sales has produced an airplane that "will beat F-16C or MiG-29/SMT easily," I have to take that recommendation very seriously.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,082

....

Let me put it this way. When Lockheed Martin tells me that the F-16IN (the version that they are hawking to India) is the greatest thing since the invention of the wheel, I have a little bit of skepticism. When Russian sources praise the Su-35 as the super-fighter of the next century, I take it with a large grain of salt. But when Russian sources tell me that one of their arch-rivals for jet fighter sales has produced an airplane that "will beat F-16C or MiG-29/SMT easily," I have to take that recommendation very seriously.

Thanks for that conclusion !

IT's not the point if the J-10 is better or equal (Sorry for my post above) ... or that he concludes everything only by these few fly-bys ...

Thanks, Deino

Member for

18 years 3 months

Posts: 5,267

Frankly I'm taking the report with a pinch of salt, a journo isn't the best judge of these matters. But I bet it sends Star49 into a foaming mouth fit...expect lots of random replies talking about the state of Russian and Chinese manufacturing.

On a serious note the J-10 is a major achievement for the Chinese aerospace defence sector but I do see it as a middle step in a bigger project. It still has a very conventional Aluminium structure with all the limitations that entails also the indiginous engine in development is not yet suitable for use in the jet.

China's own next generation fighter projects are very interesting for me personally, from what I can see China is taking a very pragmatic path towards J-XX with a low risk twin engine J-10 derivative and a high risk stealth type along the lines of F-22 and PaK-FA. China has also grasped the importance of avionics an area which is missed by many a fanboy. If you look whats been fitted to their latest fighter types you are seeing very modern cockpit avionics, the main area of issue is still the engine an area as we know is very difficult to get right. In that respect I think China is taking its time maturing the technology they have and I think within 5 years the orders for Russian engines will dry up. The days of massive defence procurement from Russia are over now from China, you will still see purchase of things that China doesn't do (for example the MI26) but China is certainly in a different place then was 10 years ago.

Member for

16 years 9 months

Posts: 1,403

Frankly I'm taking the report with a pinch of salt...

The days of massive defence procurement from Russia are over now from China, you will still see purchase of things that China doesn't do (for example the MI26) but China is certainly in a different place then was 10 years ago.

F-16C isn't blk60 & MiG-29SMT isn't MiG-29K/35 the latter underwent extensive and expensive redesign, so Karamzov's authoratative conclusions aren't dynamite.

China is likely to win major technological export concessions (for previously embargoed/dual-use systems) from the US & Europe in return for debt finance as the West goes cap-in-hand next week.

...having said that an indigenous Chinese S-400 or 5G engine anytime soon- I don't think so.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,202

Who can be surprised? J-10 came decades after F-16 and MiG-29 and they had some outside help. Engines and avionics and most likely in the desing of the plane itself, which reminds a little of a certain failed fighter project in the middle east.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,082

Finally !!! :cool:

Member for

18 years 11 months

Posts: 9,683

The title is very misleading.

No where in the article does it say it is better than Flanker.

Typical jounalists.....or did you choose the title yourself Sferrin?

"I do not think they would buy more Flankers since the J-10 is as good as the Flanker, to say the least."

Member for

18 years 11 months

Posts: 9,683

He rates the performance of the aircraft by its performance on an airshow.

I thought that's how everybody rated performance. ;)

Member for

17 years

Posts: 4,042

So in your language:

"as good as" means "better"

:D

Just to be accurate, it said "as good, to say the least...".