It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Some nice high res pics of the J-10.

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   
www.aeronautics.ru...

I found these whilst looking for images of russian tanks ( ! ) and put the on the board because they are really nice high res pics.

I admire the chinese for making there own aircraft, but I just wonder how effective this plane would be against western fighter air craft?

Any more pics or links would be appreciated because im sure the only way we'll know for sure is if Taiwan goes hot!




posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 12:05 PM
link   
www.air-attack.com...
suggests that it is slightly bigger and a slightly better performance wise than the JAS-39A but slightly smaller and about equal maybe slightly worse than the f-16.

Untill we know how much the j-10 costs we wont know how well it will do on the international market

Justin

[edit on 12-3-2006 by justin_barton3]



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   
High res...?? Don't know about that... I dissagree... Sorry, I have ahrd to believe that the J-10 is better than the Gripen... And it's pretty equal to an F-16...

But of course... it depends what weaponry they use too...

(Waiting to get correceted...
)



posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   
A J-10 better than a Grippen ? hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
I'm not laughing from you but such an idea.

The Swedish are specialist in jet fighters since the 40' when the chicoms have been forced to steal or buy at least 90% of the J-10 technology.

Believe me, a J-10 will NEVER be a match for a Swedish fighter neither any other Western jet fighters.

Come back to earth.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 03:10 AM
link   
Its spelt Gripen. Not Grippen

-----

Whats your reasoning behind this?



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Its spelt Gripen. Not Grippen




That is too funny!




posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Yes, id say the J-10 is the best F-16 variant I have seen to date.


What bloc version of the F-16 is the J-10 anyways?



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Yes, id say the J-10 is the best F-16 variant I have seen to date.


So a better plane than the F-16.?



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 06:29 PM
link   


So a better plane than the F-16


I dont understand, how can the F-16 be better than the F-16?

Its definatly a nice version of it though, im certain it performs well against other variations of the F-16.


If you havent picked up on my sarcasm yet I dont know how much thicker I can lay it on.

But the J-10 is clearly an F-16 clone. Its a nice plane, but its model is clearly no secret.

Widen the wings and strap some conards on it doesnt make it a new plane...

But you know what they say about immitation...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 06:39 PM
link   
It doesn't matter how much you say it, it doesn't make it true, oh, and the Vulcan is beautiful too



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 01:25 AM
link   
sarcasm. what sarcasm?.

I lay down my arms and give up. Your proof blows me away. and talk about logic

"Widen the wings and strap some conards(canards) on it doesnt make it a new plane"



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

"Widen the wings and strap some conards(canards) on it doesnt make it a new plane"



I agree with chinawhite on this one..... Change the wings and the other surfaces and you have a different plane and since i'm sure that the internals of the j-10 aint exactly the same with those of an F-16 I think it is a completely different plane. A Copy? Well what does that mean any way?

That aside I also think that the j-10 is no match for a plane like the Grippen
and it is speled with a double "p"



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by vorazechul
[


That aside I also think that the j-10 is no match for a plane like the Grippen
and it is speled with a double "p"


I wouldn't normally bother picking up on this, but as you are so insistent;

The word is 'Gripen', with one 'p' and it is equivalent to the English word 'Griffin' with two 'F's.

Don't just take my word for it, follow the link to the official website, they might be full of sales propaganda but at least they know how to spell their own name


www.gripen.com...

[edit on 14-3-2006 by waynos]



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
sarcasm. what sarcasm?.

I lay down my arms and give up. Your proof blows me away. and talk about logic

"Widen the wings and strap some conards(canards) on it doesnt make it a new plane"



The J-10 is so close to the F-16 its not even funny. Any other interpetation is your national pride blinding you. They should call it the J-16



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Skippy, maybe its your own national pride that is blinding you? The J-10 and the F-16 are EASY to distinguish because thay are so completely different, the J-10 has only the barest, superficial resemblance to the F-16 and I would tell them apart 100 times out of 100 and so would anybody else with a modicum of skill in identifying aircraft. Your 'F-16 clone' mantra is coming close to being obsessive, but it just aint so.

And I have no vested interest in promoting either type.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   
FIN to the rescue...!!!

It's pretty easy to see the differense... Just watch at the planes for a couple of hours each, (Without closing your eyes, and I'll promise you you'lls ee the diference)



An American 2-seated F-16. Now, look at the air intake... pretty much 90 degree angle, and then at the tail, it kinda goes in three different levels, first straight, then 40 degrees up and then maybe 75...




Now, look at the J-10 air-intake defenetly not 90 degrees... The F-16 doesn't have any canards witch again the J-10 has... And the tail...???

[edit on 14-3-2006 by Figher Master FIN]


jra

posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Hmmm, so how does the J-10 look like an F-16? Is it because it has an intake under the fuselage? I see no real similarities between the two. The proportions are very different between the two designs. If anything it looks more like a Eurofighter than an F-16, but even then there are still a great number of differences.

I really don't get peoples boarderline obsession with calling everything China makes is a copy. Even if everything was a copy, what are you going to do? Bitching about it on internet forums doesn't really make one look too mature. But that's just my opinion.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
The J-10 is so close to the F-16 its not even funny. Any other interpetation is your national pride blinding you. They should call it the J-16


National pride meet common sense



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Actually, yer BOTH wrong ..............................


The correct spelling of the aircraft in its original format is Gripfen, ok?



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 04:47 PM
link   
What leads you to say this? I don't speak Swedish at all but I have never seen it written 'Gripfen' in any source at all? See the link I provided. Why do SAAB spell it wrong if you are right?

edit, unless you are talking about the etymology of the word from its old high german root, in which case, stop being an arse (ety; sanskrit via old english)




[edit on 14-3-2006 by waynos]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join