Chengdu J-10, History, Performance & Discussion

For Su-34, Su-24M2, Su-30SM, MiG-29K (9-41R) and Su-35S. My guess

On Su-34M ?

J-10 Firebird series (PLAAF & PLAN), Guizhou FTC-2000G, Hongdu L-15A & L-15B, JF-17A2 (JF-17 Block 2), JF-17C and J-16 mounted LS-6 ?

AV-8B Night Attack (USMC) and AV-8B+ (USMC & Italian Navy) already GBU-38 but lack GBU-32(V)2/B

I hope gajin rename GBU-38 JDAM from dev server to GBU-38(V)2/B on AV-8B Night Attack and AV-8B+

Now in dev server A-10C and F-16C Block 50 no GBU-31(V)1/B JDAM (gajin add later)

But for F-14B. rename F-14B → F-14B(U), change Sparrow HUD instead current HUD and add GBU-31(V)2/B

I looking forward JDAM 4 variants

  • GBU-31(V)1/B
  • GBU-32(V)1/B
  • GBU-32(V)2/B
  • GBU-38(V)1/B

Bro literally Mavericks are guided, LS6 is just a ‘more accurate’ CCRP, I could throw retarded S25 from 1km alt to 10 km out if I am willing to, so why is this all of a sudden so overwhelming? Like are you just standing there for 2 minutes and waiting for the bomb to hit you? It won’t be able to do anything in an urban environment anyways.

4 Likes

Strange how people like you never keep this same energy when you get your shiny toys that have zero equivalents or counterparts

4 Likes

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/e9gTIpUADREo

400 view, 342 signatory and still no modo to answer me… T-T

Ping a mod

mod confirmed gaijin’s source of adjusting J-10’s performance, but with clear mistake. the max speed here is structure damage speed not max speed.
and from datamine, the drag factors was increased by 11%

2 Likes

bros, my friends and I are working on a issue about J-10’s resistance in high speed, which is preliminarily proved(it takes J-10 about 3 times the time to get from Mach1.0 - 1.1 compared to F16)
But we meet some problem in material source as we are not experts in these.
Now, we need material about:

  1. pubilished books/papers about aerodynamic design , explaining that any part of these design(mid-range coupled canard wing+delta wing+supersonic rectangular inlet), have low supersonic zero up resistance
  2. Introduction of J-10, directly explaining its configuration it’s low resistance in supersonic.

Material‘s language is not problem, we’ve collected some, but not enough convincing. And thanks for any future help.

@crunchyBoy @MiG_23M @Miraz05 @pegabug @141_allen @阿依土鳖的罗初

5 Likes



QQ20240905-144101

2 Likes

2

4 Likes

My compatriots have also published a large amount of evidence and issues in different partitions, most of which have been rejected by TrickZZter for various reasons. You can view a wealth of evidence by examining the posts in each section
@NCC105

5 Likes

Name of the book?

P1/P2《兵器知识》Issue 4 2007
P3《青苹果》Issue 7, 2007

2 Likes

I have not reviewed any materials, have you considered that the F-16 may have better power to weight in this region of flight? At what altitude?

1 Like

600m, and it behaves very strangely, it’s like the drag increased suddenly after supersonic.

Gaijin officials cited interviews that were not originally qualified as evidence in the issue area, and as evidence, they “increased the overall air resistance of J10 by 11%” (unpacking message)

1 Like

Yeah so I flew her last night, and it was alright up to mach 1. However, anything past mach 1 felt extremely slow in terms of acceleration like the engine suddenly lost half it’s thrust the moment the sound barrier broke. Kind of felt like an F11F-1 trying to push past 1.01 lol! I’m certain it’s a bug because that just… Didn’t feel good, nor make any sense, with the rate of acceleration just dropping right at 1.00 mach.

1 Like

Gaijin increased its drag and reduced the top speed yesterday.

3 Likes

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/e9gTIpUADREo
I harass them, I pity them but now the report is sent for J10 😅 🎊🎉🎊🎉

4 Likes

Yippee

pl5EII

3 Likes