and MAW
I don’t think it is gameplay difference
a fox 2 coming from behind with and without MAW you will see the difference
3 Likes
This is just funny at this point.
They want a clear source for the J-11B radar, but putting Su-35 pylons and TGPs on the Su-30 is perfectly fine.
sometimes I think Eagle Dynamics and Gaijin are related
6 Likes
Tbf though wasn’t the chinese move to build their own engines was to make sure they don’t rely on foreign engines? Allegedly WS-10 also improves upon service life (or was it the later iterations?)
not really, it’s just they prefer F-110’s structure, which provides better high altitude performance.
it’s hard to say, current development in engines is making them more and more heavier, caused by adding more peripheral accessories, F-119 and F-135’s T/W ratio is even lower than old types, but you can’t say they are worse.
I don’t have an issue with the plane, I made it clear that this months long conjecture about them being lighter than the Russian counterparts is nothing more than false conjecture
May I see what sources there are for the J-11B (production) all being built with additional composites? Is it not lighter than the J-11A in-game?
I have simply been saying that unless you can show changes to airframe structure (which you have in case of J-11D), there will be no weight reduction to less than the basic Su-27 airframe from which it was derived.
It is not a threat, simply an observation based on current and prior decision making from the devs. Quick to nerf, slow to fix.
They are the only nuclear power who had an inability to manufacture and produce high performance fighter jet engines. This technology is more complex even than nuclear bombs. They are beginning to resolve these issues, but being dependant on an entirely different countries industry in that way is no good for reasons that need not be expanded upon further.
In some of the latest iterations, sure. It is still heavier than most other engines in its’ size and power class currently.
Can you tell me what about it provides better high altitude performance?
The actual weight and performance of these is highly classified, assumptions of size and weight are educated guesses at best. The F-119 is not very complex whereas the F-135 is very complex. These are poor examples imo. WS-10 is equivalent of the F110 and they are behind… this isn’t a jab it is just proof they are rapidly improving as just a few years later and on their second major turbofan project they have built an F119 equivalent for the J-20.
My sources are from the usual secondary source suspects, but I list them in bug report here: Community Bug Reporting System
CCTV mentioning the reduced weight was mentioned in this report: Community Bug Reporting System
Of note was this: 独家解析！属于中国人自己的重型歼击机——战鹰歼11B_军事频道_央视网(cctv.com), where we see inside the J-11B production line (? they say development sight, but we see a completed J-11B along with one under construction, so that would line up more with a production line rather than R&D).
The J-11B in the test server was actually lighter than the J-11 by ~200kg. It is entirely possible that is correct or it may be incorrect. I won’t know until I finish editing their model to cut away sections of airfoil that have composites and the surface area differences. Just by looking at it, I’m guesstimating it’ll be around 700kg in airfoil weight reduction, but we have to factor in the increase in engine weight as well (hence my last line in the comment before). Supposedly some of the structural components were changed to composites, but that is a lot harder to calculate even if I did have images of the internals.
Why do you say the weight won’t be below the basic Su-27? Is a base aircraft is constructed of aluminum and then had it’s airfoil replaced with composites, it would have a lower weight than the original. In the J-11B’s case, it may end up being ~100kg lighter or heavier than the basic Su-27 in-game (if my guesstimate is correct).
2 Likes
i thought both used similar tech, and F-135 was incremental improvement with more advanced control system. unless you mean the F-35B version in which case your completely right
there is enough information. for example, F-135 weights about 6500lb, and its full afterburner thrust is about 43000lb. T/W ratio is only about 6.7. This is caused by many attachments that installed in plane before, they added the engine’s weight but reduced the whole plane’s weight.
the only direct source is the paper’s curve which been posted here numerous times here
and other non-direct source about WS-10’s development suggests it chose F-110’s structure to get better high altitude performance
The original Su-27 was much lighter, and incorporates far less additional materials for radar absorbing than the newer composite airframes. Much of the frontal composites you see and redesigns are to reduce RCS but add weight. There is a reason no newer Sukhois have managed to actually lose weight over their earlier models.
The F-119 is static bypass ratio, F-135 has a variable bypass. They are quite different even though the F-135 used the F119 for inspiration.
This information appears to be intentionally falsified or is simply incorrect, but it is ballpark as I said.
So there is nothing to suggest it has better performance than an upgrade AL-31 variant. You compare the WS-10 to the early AL-31 before the Russian counterparts has FADEC… of course it will look better.
1 Like
FADEC just helps in extending service life and saving fuels by more accurately controling, won’t help much in thrust
these are official information, can’t be more real.
first image is USAF’s engine shipping manual, how is it not real
4 Likes
For the same reason “official” documentation on AMRAAM weight and other stuff is erroneously listed. Even in the M1 Abrams tank manual there is erroneous data that differs from what is actually shown on the irl systems for example.
… not off topic, directly related to the logic of the conversation
～6500lb is shown in multiple sources, it’s the realest number now
1 Like
None of the more than 500 Chinese Flankers that China has produced since 2009 to date are powered by Russian engines. All are powered by domestic engines.（Excluding J-15, which struggled to cope with salt damage.）
The J-10C, J-16 and J-20 currently in mass production are also all powered by domestic engines. No other fighter aircraft currently in mass production is powered by Russian engines other than the J-15.
In the first place, if the performance and reliability of the engines had been lower than that of the Russian engines, the J-11B engines from Batch 1, which were produced in AL-31, and even the single-engined J-10AS, would not have been replaced by domestic engines
2 Likes
Even J-15T has switched recently to WS-10s, if the engine truly was unreliable then you would imagine there would be a huge logistical problem and operational delays, which so far cannot be seen.
5 Likes
Someone who was extremely angry reported my statement, hahahaha, it’s really funny. You can’t even argue with me, like I said, is the truth that so unacceptable? China has the most advanced and largest Flanker fleet in the world, one of the largest in the world, one of the largest in the world (because I don’t know how many heavy fighters there are in the United States right now, but I know that the size of Russia’s heavy fighter fleet cannot be compared). Do those funny guys understand? That’s just the way it is.
3 Likes
Now I would like to make a statement to you: the Chinese engine may not be the best in the world, but it will certainly meet the needs of PLAAF. Now you’re satisfied, right? Tell me, where else can some of you get a sense of superiority from other than making some ridiculous statements about the engine?
1 Like