Talk:Chengdu J-10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	Aviation Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related WikiProjects and/or task forces: Aircraft WikiProject

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Related task forces (nations and regions): Chinese military history task force

Contents 1 Specifications 2 General 3 False Information 4 chief designer 5 Serious references wanted

[edit] Specifications

Captions from CCTV 7 are apparently revealing some stats on the J-10; I'm not sure if these are official or not.

roll rate: > 300 degrees

Instantaneous turn rate: > 31 degrees

highest speed at sea level: 1450 KM/h = mach 1.18

service ceiling: > 20000 m

G-limit: +9G/-3G

Can reach mach2.0 with 3 fuel tank + 4 AAMs

Can reach a maximum speed of mach 2.34 with nothing loaded

In comparison: F-16 can barely touch mach 2.0 with nothing loaded and su-27 can only reach mach 1.72 with full load of missiles.

range:

for long range air superiority mission with 3 external tanks + 2 Pl-8/2 PL-12 - in hi profile, combat radius is 1110 kM

for interception mission with 1 external tank + 4 PL-12/2-PL-8, in hi profile, combat radius is 900 km.

Not including in-flight refueling

J-10's maximum subsonic unstable degree? 10 degrees (apparently this is higher than that of Typhoon).
Also the New designation used by CCTV and Chinese literature for the twin-seater is no longer J-10B but instead J-10S
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dsong2006 (talk • contribs).

"apparently this is higher than that of Typhoon", There you said it. These figures are highly doubtful. En51cm 03:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General

I have heard some reports that the J-10 entered service in late 2004. Can anyone confirm this?--Todd Kloos 23:33, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As of today, I believe that 3 regiments of J-10 are in service in the Nanjing Military Region.

The article leads the reader to believe that Israel give china the technology for the Chengdu, this is pure speculation and should not be presented as solid fact. I have deleted the passages which do this.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg 01:11, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the article should not state that as a fact, however, the J-10 is strikingly similar to the Israeli Lavi, and the J-10 is also radically different than all other Chinese designs so it seems probable that there was some foreign influence. I think the article should at least mention that there is some belief that the J-10 may have been built with some Israeli assistance. Edrigu 14:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

The statement "J-10 is also radically different than all other Chinese designs" is not true. J-10 is quite similar to the canceled J-9 which was also developed by Chengdu Lizhuoru 16:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm changing a few words in this paragraph to make it more NPOV. However, I think we should leave it in, since it's valid speculation. --205.250.250.154 19:37, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

The similarity is completley superficial, one might as well state that the Israelis gave the technology to the Swedes when they developed the Saab Gripen as it looks just as similar. The reason that all these aircraft look similar has to do with similar roles and aerodynamics.

Note: Gripen did recieve technologicial assisantance from BAE Systems which designs Eurofighter Typhoon. En51cm 06:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

^Ludicrous. It's widely believed (and JANEs even mentions this) that it was based on the Israeli Lavi. It's worth mentioning in the article, and moreover, the Gripen has twin side intakes, while the Lavi and J-10 have one at the bottom. Sorrowek 10:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I have added the role that the J-10 plays in C & C Zero Hour reborn as I have used this plane in multiplayer games (trust me, it rules the skies ;). I cannot, however, find any external links: perhaps someone else can.) --The1exile 21:13, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Someone else has added references to the model of the MiG being the Mig 1.44 or MFI. I cannot find any references to either of these models on wikipedia or on any other source. can someone please explain what these models are, or I will revert. At least clear up the redlink. --The1exile 21:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

On a different note, what is all the chinese text at the top of this talk page? I cannot see all the characters for the first and last phrases but the second one says, if my chinese is not completely wrong, "The secret is not easy to reveal". --The1exile 21:10, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

It says "We have something even more exciting! It's not easy to reveal the secret! Come to China and see!" Typical childish stuff, please disregard that. --Ledrug 04:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

This article has too much speculations. Some of it look like very good educated guesses based on original research, but it should be made clear to readers that these are not commonly accepted hard facts.

Btw, who wrote the J-10 engine is built by Pakistan, its ridiculous. The engine originated from Russia and the Russian would never license a copy of their engine to Pakistan.

[edit] False Information

Not that anybody seems to care, but another comment by me. According to Global Security, which is listed as a source, the J-10 can do Mach 1.85, and yet the article claims that the plane can do M2+. If there are no objections, I will change this. --The1exile 17:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Global Security is wrong. They just took the Lavi top speed and assumed that it would be the same for the J-10. However, the some of the design features of the J-10 such as the variable geometry inlet indicate that it should have a much higher top speed than the Lavi. The dimentions that they give for the aircraft are also based on the lavi, so they are probably a bit off as well.--Todd Kloos 19:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok then, thats enough to knock Global Security of the external links page; providing misinformation is not what Wikipedia is about. --The1exile 20:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] chief designer

According to the Chinese presse, the chief designer is Song, Wencong (宋文骢), not Yang, Wei. ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 19:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Serious references wanted

Such sentences in the first paragraph without serious references seem to be a personal conjecture, and could be considered to delete, Wikipedia should not be ragout of all kinds of rumors:

A series of press reports in February 2007 indicated that the aviation community now strongly suspects that the J-10 was built in part with secret Israeli assistance, specifically obtained from Israel Aerospace Industries, using design knowledge gained on the now-canceled IAI Lavi fighter[citation needed], as well as by illegal copying design elements from a U.S.-made F-16 Falcon fighter secretly (and illegally) donated by Pakistan[citation needed]. As a quid pro quo, Pakistan is now the only non-Chinese user of the J-10.

——Nussknacker^.^tell me... 17:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Pakistan Air force is not a user of J-10

I also do not think PAF should be listed as a current user of J-10. Even if the order is true, there is no official confirmation from Chinese source, and PAF has not begin to operated it. BTW, I will try to update the J-10 wiki entry with some referrences in the coming weeks. I might also restructure the entire thing. Hopefully some people could help me proof-read and edit the thing when I update. Ch2000 10:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)