# China's new fighter



## comiso90 (Jan 3, 2007)

Impressive looking. how good could the avionics be?

China's Fighters - Chengdu J-10


----------



## Glider (Jan 3, 2007)

Who knows. It depends to a large degree on what the Russians are willing to sell to China who it should be remembered are a potential threat. Are they willing to sell the top line equipment or an export version.

In both cases they would be behind the latest western aircraft and if the 'export' version is sold then the gap could be significant.

The J10 is a considerable improvement on the Mig21 designs and it will be cheap to buy so I can see it selling well to smaller countries replacing say F5's and Mig 21 aircraft.

I would as a potential purchaser be worried about reliability, spares and general support. China's track record is not impressive in this area. I would also be worried about the weight of the aircraft which seems heavy compared to its power.


----------



## Aggie08 (Feb 9, 2007)

I saw this just the other day and was pretty impressed. If I had to guess I'd say it definitely took some design cues from the new Eurofighter, but seeing as China has most of it's experience license-building MiGs, I wouldn't imagine it has the latest and greatest technologies aboard.


----------



## Glider (Feb 9, 2007)

As a blatent guess I would suggest that Isreal gave some support in the design. Isreal has helped China a number of times with military equipment and it does remind me of the Lavi which was an Isreali prototype that never made it to production. 
The similarities are striking and would put it in the F16 category re capability.

Isreal spent a lot of money developing the Lavi and I don't doubt that China would be prepared to pay a heavy price to make such a leap from Mig 21 to F16 technology.


----------



## Aggie08 (Feb 10, 2007)

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/lavi/lavi_07.jpg

Good call Glider, I'd be inclined to agree with you.


----------



## pbfoot (Feb 10, 2007)

I think you american guys would be upset that the Israelis recieved $1.3 billion of US funding for the Lavi and now toss the beast to a possible foe
ISN Security Watch - Israeli fighter allegedly reborn in China


----------



## Glider (Feb 10, 2007)

Looks like my guess was closer than I thought. The ramifications could be huge.
If Israel also gave the Chinese the electronics to go with the design, then you are looking at a capable aircraft equal I would guess to the F16C which is a pretty effective aircraft.

Taking it a step further, would the USA trust Israel with the F22, I wouldn't. 

That in turn puts Israel at risk. If the Arab states buy the Typhoon which Saudi is close to ordering, then for the first time Israel faces the Arab countries who have aircraft better than their own.

I agree this is a future scenario but one that is by no means impossible.


----------



## mkloby (Feb 10, 2007)

Glider said:


> Looks like my guess was closer than I thought. The ramifications could be huge.
> If Israel also gave the Chinese the electronics to go with the design, then you are looking at a capable aircraft equal I would guess to the F16C which is a pretty effective aircraft.
> 
> Taking it a step further, would the USA trust Israel with the F22, I wouldn't.
> ...



Good point - but even if outclassed by equipment, training and tactics will make the difference. Typhoons can be dispatched, just as any other A/C can be.


----------



## Glider (Feb 10, 2007)

True certainly, but the IAF has basically faced the EAF and the SAF when they were flying under Russian methodology, plus better equipment.
These days the failings of the Russian approach are well known and the EAF has trained with the USA a number of times, as have the Saudi Air Force.

I am not saying that they are the equal of the IAF, but any reduction in the advantage of the IAF over its possible opponents has got to be bad news for Israel.

I would certainly think long and hard before selling Isreal such a sensitive piece of equipment as an F22, even a watered down version.


----------



## mkloby (Feb 10, 2007)

Glider said:


> True certainly, but the IAF has basically faced the EAF and the SAF when they were flying under Russian methodology, plus better equipment.
> These days the failings of the Russian approach are well known and the EAF has trained with the USA a number of times, as have the Saudi Air Force.
> 
> I am not saying that they are the equal of the IAF, but any reduction in the advantage of the IAF over its possible opponents has got to be bad news for Israel.
> ...



I agree.


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 11, 2007)

I do too, I wouldn't trust the Israeli's with such an important piece of equipment. On the J-10, I also agree with Glider which would make it about the same as the F-16C (perhaps a bit better/worse). In this case the USA (and other NATO countries) still have better aircraft from after the F-16 era such as the F-22, the Eurofighter, updated F-16's and perhaps also the F-15 and F/A-18.


----------



## Aggie08 (Feb 11, 2007)

I don't think that the U.S. will sell the f-22 for a number of years. I wouldn't be too keen on giving up an aircraft that achieved a 104-0 kill ratio against other American aircraft (F-18s I think) during air exercises in Alaska. The technology is too valuable. 

The Israelis have a strong air force and I don't think they will be put in too much trouble if Arab nations aquire the new Typhoon. Any disadvantage in hardware would be significantly lessened by the quality of the IDF pilots.


----------



## Matt308 (Feb 11, 2007)

The emphasis nowadays is not on airframe capability, but rather on weapons, radar and systems management integration. Isreal can feasibly keep up in this arena without upgrading to stealth airframes like the F-22.

And that is what should worry the US.


----------



## comiso90 (Feb 12, 2007)

For years we've heard that one of the most tangible and useful benefits of our (American) space program has been that the R&D has fueled and accelerated technology in other sectors, both military and civilian. It will be interesting to see how The Chinese Space program influences their advancements in technology.
Better manufacturing techniques? More advanced avionics? Quality control with very high tolerances? Metallurgy? Technology feeds technology and China is making strides away from their agrarian and manufacturing persona.
What Teflon and Velcro will they produce?


----------



## Bullo Loris (Feb 13, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> Impressive looking. how good could the avionics be?
> 
> China's Fighters - Chengdu J-10



What is a China version of Eurofighter Typhoon  

Bullo Loris


----------



## 102first_hussars (Feb 13, 2007)

This all kinda reminds me of that Iranian fighter, which name i cannot remember


----------



## Aggie08 (Feb 14, 2007)

I'd bet quite a bit of money that the J-10 is more capable than Iran's 32-letter-word fighter.


----------



## Glider (Feb 14, 2007)

Aggie08 said:


> I'd bet quite a bit of money that the J-10 is more capable than Iran's 32-letter-word fighter.



Totally agree.


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 14, 2007)

Yep, the Iranian fighter being based on the F-5 and the Chinese one being based on the F-16/Lavi concept. The F-16 is a lot better than the F-5 (which could probably still be better than the Iranian fighter) and in consequence you would suspect the J-10 is better too.


----------



## ronlonge (Jun 23, 2007)

Gnomey said:


> Yep, the Iranian fighter being based on the F-5 and the Chinese one being based on the F-16/Lavi concept. The F-16 is a lot better than the F-5 (which could probably still be better than the Iranian fighter) and in consequence you would suspect the J-10 is better too.




bit later, still agree with u


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jun 23, 2007)

The Chinese military projects i tend to take a little more seriously then the Iraniuns

i do recall there being a thread on this exact plane already


----------



## mikemike (Jun 30, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> I think you american guys would be upset that the Israelis recieved $1.3 billion of US funding for the Lavi and now toss the beast to a possible foe



The Lavi story is a bit more complicated: The plane was conceived by the Israeli airforce, tailored to their requirements. The development was partly financed by the US government, as part of the military aid to Israel. But when the Lavi was ready to go into series production, the USA cut all the funding to force the Israelis to buy F-16s. (No propaganda: it was officially stated at the time that it was not in the interest of the US Government to finance competition to the US aerospace industry!) No wonder that made a lot of bad blood with the Israelis who had sunk enormous R&D effort into a potentially super plane, far better than the F-16, just to be forced to buy that ageing design the USA was selling to all and sundry in the Middle East at the time. 
It was probably not the wisest move to give the design to China, but you can understand the motivation. 

As a Canadian, you may remember that a similar switch was pulled on the RCAF. It might have got the CF-105, but was left with some tired F-101s. But at least it was your own government that shot you in the back in that case.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jun 30, 2007)

> As a Canadian, you may remember that a similar switch was pulled on the RCAF. It might have got the CF-105, but was left with some tired F-101s. But at least it was your own government that shot you in the back in that case.



yeah thats a bit sensitive subject among some Canadians till this day


I hate Deifenbaker, he gave Conscervatives a bad name


----------

