Note: At some point yesterday after I started editing, they fixed the stat card for the radar to show the datalink channels. Because, of course. (Still, fixes are good!)
Some corrections: 1. In fact the first CAD designed fighter of China is JH-7 2.The triangular wing and canard layout of J-10 can be traced back to J-9-6-1 and J-9-6-2 (also designed by Chendu), it's a project started in 1970 and finally canceled then turned to technical reserves. Some of the technologies finally got used in the J-10 project (as well as the engineers from prj.J-9). So the claim that it copied from Lavi is simply ridiculous, the aerodynamic layouts of the two are quite different.
There are pictures of Song Wencong and his colleagues in a hangar with a Lavi prototype and the IAI design team. Claiming that the J-10 is not directly based on the Lavi design is absurd, there have been huge and well documented transfers of technology from Israel to China which continued long after other western nations begun to block technology access to China.
I'm glad you addressed the claims about the Lavi copy (may as well include Eurofighter copy claims), this is why I like your vidoes: you keep it real and stick to the facts.
@@TimsVariety Can be worse. It could be a long video of the whole family of jets and then, right before release, Gaijin announces/releases a new jet within the family
@@darykeng Yeah, thats why I've stopped doing series/family vids, except for *really* old stuff that they're unlikely to expand. I've been bitten by that a few times....
My hope is to make folks care a little more about the vehicle they're using, and also to explain a little *why* it is how it is (weapons, performance, etc).
I really don't know where the lavi copycat story come from... J10 project got wayyyyy more tech assistance from european sources.(the digital design software used to design j10 are imported from dassualt from example)
It bears a physical resemblance to the Lavi (the J-10 is substantially bigger), the Israelis were doing a good deal of business with the Chinese at the time, and the whole "hurr durr China can't make anything original, only copy others" thing. Mix those together and you've got where it came from.
Why not put this in the background and do your homework. Do 2 things at once, your education is important and don't let a 11:32 minute video get in the way of your success.
@@alaricpumani5372 The thing is, the J-10 along with the Eurofighter are my favourite fighter jets, I can't say no to this one. It's going to be a long grind, the snail has beaten me.
@@bigoof1105 you are your own choice, but if it's your favourite then got it and have fun playing this one, don't follow the meta you'll lack of skills and playing with the same plane make you way deadlier
The Type 1473 was the radar for early J-10As based on the Israeli EL/M-2032 radars purchased in the early 90s. Later production J-10As would be given the slightly improved Type 1473G combat radars. One notable missing missile in the loadout is the PL-10 IIR guided AAM, but this missile might be too advanced for the game right now.
The J-10 has grown on me, it may not be as sexy as the Flanker's or J-20, but they are good workhorses and the B and C with their DSI intakes look really nice. And good on addressing the Lavi copy myth. If one looks around on the internet, one can find the images of the early conceptual mockups and previous design studies that preceded the J-10. The Chinese certainly copied many things but not everything is a copy. But I have only one complaint about modern Chinese military aviation, its their adoption of the Western Inside Out or moving horizon style HUD and attitude indicators. I really find the Soviet/Russian HUD's with their moving plane/outside in attitude indicators to be much more intuitive. A shame nobody else seems to agree. So close to perfection! At least they fly metric.
@@wafflefrfrAs much as i agree that the F-106 is a really cool plane, and i'd love to see it and the F-102 in war thunder, it really didnt The mirage was exported worldwide in the thousands (can you say it like that for 1.4k? Im not sure about my wording 😅) is still in use today though slowly retiring, has seen a ton of combat in most major conflicts from the cold war to these days, and has proved really reliable mechanically Where as the F-106 was in use for just 30 years and retired 36 years ago already, never fought once, was never exported, with just 350 built and had a ton of early teething issues, though these got resolved, still led to several accidents and pilot deaths (sadly)
@@PaiSAMSEN The lack of a proxy fuze is an issue for the AIM-4 Falcon, the SARH AIM-26 Falcon however had a proxy fuze from what I gather and is missing on some of our aircraft like the J35XS.
The actual predecessor will be the Chengdu J-9 "Xinjian 01" configuration created in 1982, featuring delta wings, canards & belly intake. You can find the wind tunnel model in the Secret Projects forum article "Chengdu Jianjiji-9 / J-9 Fighter & Interceptor", and also the book "我的飞机设计生涯 (My Career on Aircraft Design)" by engineer Gu Songfen. Lavi didn't fly until 1986, technology transfer would be essential to make the final production J-10A, but the configuration and size difference means its nothing like a direct copy. Average users online don't have enough knowledge on aerodynamics to see that, nor the wills and skills to go across the language barriers to access published books by people who worked at Chengdu. So they can only proceed to shout "Typhoon/Lavi or whatever copy". PS: I am currently getting my master's deg on aerospace engineering at RMIT so I guess I will be qualified enough to call those average users "uneducated on aerodynamics".
I have tested the J-10 vs the JAS-39C. It quite literally comes down to the pilot, the J10 is noticeably better in the one circle due to its stupid engine power and the Gripen seems to fair better in the two circle. The biggest advantage the J-10 gets is the extra two missiles, and tbf I am genuinely enjoying the PL-5EII. The J-10 is genuinely scary to go up against, and having flown it into battle myself, if you’re a good pilot, you will dominate the battlefield
Hey, Tim glad to see you made this video I’m staying home from school today because apparently there’s a threat and I’m not risking my life over someone being angry at their own. Anyway have a lovely day.
Been absolutely loving the Jf-17 almost have the J-10 also super happy that israel got the F-16C finally great vid as always (Also something of note for anyone who cares at 3:51 that stat card does in fact say 30G but in game it is now 35G idk when that changed)
well: i was looking forward towards the j10, and i was looking forward to the review of the j10, the only thing i'm not looking forward to is the grind to get the thing, try to use my j11 to start grinding it but yeah that didn't go very well, so yeah lovely review and wish me luck trying to get the j10
Not particularly much to update with GNSS guided bombs: they act like LGBs up to point-of-release, but afterward, you have 0 control because the bomb is now independent
A mirage 2000 5F can easily beat the J10A. Currently after my own testing I think the J10A has the third best dogfight flight model. The best dogfighter is the Mirage 2K and after that the Gripen. The gripen has a better FM for normal AIR RB (than the 2K). Over all I think the J10 is pretty decent for top tier but definitely no the best. Even in the close range for ball moments and dogfights the mirage 2K can just do it better.
I know these are (very) minor complaints, but I'd love to see this plane getting more of its historical armaments... PL-11 SARH missiles would be good enough as a stock/tier 1 long range option, and help with the grind towards PL-12s, and irl, the IRCCM versions of the PL-5 were mostly used for export, the PLAAF's IRCCM missile of choice in the 2000s was the PL-8B, which I reckon would be slightly better in-game (although I'm not fully sure of how do the PL-5 and 8 compare to each other in actual gameplay tbh)
@@Foquro no no, the stock PL-12s can stay, what I meant is having the SARH missiles as a tier 1 upgrade so you can have 2xPL-11 and 2xPL-12 at the same time until you unlock the PL-12 modification
The anti-interference principle of PL-8B is the red ultraviolet quaternary multi band algorithm for anti-interference. There are currently no relevant mechanisms in the game. If these mechanisms are removed, it would probably be an AAM-3 missile with an overload capacity of 40-50g. As for PL-11, you can wait for the early version of J-10. It will use PL-5B/C/PL-8 and PL-11.PL-8B的抗干扰原理是红紫外四元多波段算法抗干扰。目前游戏里没有相关机制。如果去掉这些机制，大概就是40-50g过载能力的AAM-3导弹。至于PL-11，你可以等待J-10的早期版本。它将使用PL-5B/C/PL-8和PL-11。
Ive had pretty good luck dogfighting these in my Grippen c so far, I'm assuming its still learning and Gripen having a lighter payload? Either pulling horizontal or vertical, but by that point I'm down 2-3 amraam or just having the tipwinders and can win after a struggle.
Hey tim, i see that you have a easier time than me locking people with the HMD radar thing, usually when i try to use that u just keep looking at the target but never locks, even in only src mode (especially with american jets), do you do something else or is just the radar set?
I don't believe I'm doing anything special, but HMD locks are subject to a lot of variables - angle, background, range, radar mode, etc .. and some radars are just better than others at locking targets in certain conditions, etc .. you might not be doing anything wrong.
@@TimsVariety huh, guess it's just my luck then, I'll run some tests because this could really help in some dogfight situations, thanks Tim, you're the best
I can’t imagine any reason other than sinophobia that people would believe that china was incapable of developing this on their own and had to “steal” data from the Lavi. the idea of a canard delta fighter wasn’t exactly groundbreaking and china already had the J9 concept anyways
China will grow larger! Nice review, can't wait to get my hands on this one. And thanks for talking about the Lavi mess, the jokes about that and the "Temu Eurofighter" get really old after a while.
Hello Tim, I have always enjoyed your videos and appreciate your objective and fair attitude towards Chinese fighter jets. May I repost your video on Bilibili? I will add subtitles and will also indicate the source of the video and your UA-cam channel.
@@TimsVariety I'm very sorry to hear this. Yesterday, I spent a few hours translating your video locally. I won't upload it if you don't like it. However, I need to clarify that videos reposted on Bilibili do not generate any revenue; they simply link the video content to your channel, which doesn't harm you in any way. I purely did this because I genuinely enjoy your content. Of course, if you really insist on not wanting your video to be reposted on Bilibili, I will respect your choice.
@@SuppliceVI PL-8 existed long before the J-10. Besides, Lavi has a layout of “close coupled canard wing+swept wing+pitot tube inlet”, while the J-10 has a layout of “mid-range coupled canard wing+delta wing+supersonic rectangular inlet”. The are two fundamentally different designs. J-10 is a further evolution of J-9 project of their own. Not to say Lavi had no influence whatsoever, but end product is different and the way they work is different. Most importantly, J-10 is an actual fighter in service. Lavi is a dead project. If implication of 'Temu' here is meant to mock the quality of build and equipment found on J-10, I'd like to remind you that China is the single most experienced nation in the world when it comes to working with composites and rare minerals. So you would be again, wrong.
@@mehmetbozkurt3274 yeah no shit it's meant to mock the quality, the Pakistanis can barely keep their JF17s operational due to their logistics drain from part deficiencies. Also do you not understand the PL-8/Python 3 was near the start of their cooperation? Its decades of coordination and design assistance. It's not a direct copy, it's based heavily off of. Stop being so offended
@@SuppliceVI I gave you all the answers you need. Having another read and educating yourself or staying ignorant as you are right now is up to you. I'm not offended by your baseless claims, or rather, shit takes. Though maybe by your stupidity.
The principle verification of this aircraft began at the end of 60s, namely the J-9 project. It ended with the Cultural Revolution and the economic reconstruction in 1978, with a sharp decline in defense budgets.
There is no "persistent rumor" about the Lavi. You can literally find information about this. THE CHINESE AIR force has flown an airborne earlywarning (AEW) testbed, believed to be an Ilyushin 11-76, fitted with a GEC-Marconi Avionics AEW radar and processing suite based on that developed for the abortive Nimrod AEW programme for the Royal Air Force. The Chinese have had a longstanding requirement for an AEW aircraft, with GEC one of several companies (including Beriev, with the A-50 Mainstay) which had been pursuing the programme. It is also possible that Israel could be trying to interest the Chinese in the Phalcon AEW as part of widening defence links between the two countries. A GEC team visited China in 1993 to discuss its AEW system, dubbed the Argus. Sources now indicate that a trial aircraft is being flown in China. This is thought to be fitted with the two radar design intended originally for the Nimrod AEW. GEC declines to discuss the programme, saying that it will not comment on any specific customer for the Argus. The AEW programme is a key plank in the Chinese air force's programme to revamp its fleet. Alongside the programme, the air force is funding Chengdu and Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) for development of the XJ-10 fourth generation fighter, based on IAI's cancelled Lavi fighter for the Israeli air force (Flight International, 2-8 November). US Government officials admit that there is considerable concern within Government and military circles in the USA over the Israeli/Chinese programme. They say that "high-level" discussions about the nature of the Israeli collaboration have taken place. According to one official, Israel maintains that it is not contravening a US-Israeli technology-transfer agreements by developing a Lavi-based combat aircraft for the Chinese. One key area of concern in the USA is whether Israel is providing an air-intercept radar for the aircraft. Israel has had access to the Westinghouse APG-66 (for its Lockheed F-16s) and the Hughes APG-63 (for its McDonnell Douglas F-15s). Israeli manufacturer Elta may be offering a derivative of its EL/M2021 for the Chinese programme. There are concerns, however, that much of this radar may be based on US technology. Alternatively, China could turn to GEC for its fighter radar, as well as its AEW radar. The UK company has been pushing its Blue Hawk for China's Super-7 upgrade of the Chengdu F-7. This radar could be adapted for the XJ-10. www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1994/1994%20-%202920.html
That link is dead, but again - its not proof of anything - if you trace all those reports back to original sources, its second and third hand rumors. As a reminder, I didn't say "it didn't happen" - I was very clear that it might have - I said there is no hard proof, which there isn't. Confirmed technology transfer on X doesn't mean that technology transfer on Y happend as well. Related - if I had said it WAS based on the Lavi, the comments would be flooded .. FLOODED .. with people telling me I shouldn't believe rumors, there is no proof, etc etc. Its a point of contention, so I choose to simply mention the controversy rather than pick a side with any confidence.
@@TimsVariety Sorry, second part of comment was not posted in time. There are images of the deaign team taken when chengdu came to study the Lavi, and tons of articles from the early 90s regarding the US intercepting the deal. However, anyone who says it is a "copy" is a blatant fool. The data was applied to Chengdu'a existing J10, and consultants from russia and isreal were used to finalize the design. Most of the design is completely unique from the Lavi, as the entire fighter is scaled differently, the wing is different, the intake, and other key aerodynamic features. The overall final configuration is a unique aircraft. Whilst it was informed by the Lavi, Chengdu has been attempting to get a delta canard into the air since the viggen-inspired j-9, and it's historical capability to produce such continues with the j-20. Most of the 'copy' allegations come mainly from western perception of Shenyang's works, another design firm that often produces aircraft from the PLAAF.
@@theneef174It’s still a massive problem that we had a “privileged US ally” providing advanced US technology to a post T-Square China against the wishes of the United States. Thats where the controversy on this comes from. Israel was demanding the very best from the US at the time, using the massive technical assistance and cooperation they secured to design improved versions of US tech, and then going and selling that tech to geopolitical rivals of the US.
The rumor that China's J-10 was had technology based on the IAI Lavi has some roots in the fact that the Israeli government and the People's Republic of China did have some transfers of military technology in the past late 70's to early 90's like the Python-3 missile being license-built as the PL-8 in China. Still the J-10 is not a 1 to 1 copy of the Lavi and there's no conformation from either side on what tech the chinese bought so we'll never really know for sure one way or the other.
@thebean8255 Yes, but very small aerodynamic differences make a huge deal. There is very little in common between the two planes outside of the aft fuselage. You will not find much similar between them if you actually pay any modicum of attention to the aircraft. For example, the Gripen and Rafale ALSO use the EXACT SAME flight and design data as the Eurofighter Typhoon (known at the time as the "EAP"), and came out completely different, and only idiots would call them "copies" of the eurofighter.
@@theneef174 The controversy perhaps arises from the fact that, unlike France and Sweden, who are common allies to the EU and posed no threat to the nations that provided much of the technical assistance when designing the European fighters you’ve mentioned… China is a massive geopolitical rival to the US, is diametrically opposed to the western vision of the world, and Israel providing them US derived tech is and was a massive problem. Which is why I suspect so many leap to Israel’s defense when it comes to this particular arrangement. It was a very underhanded thing for one ally to do to another, and as we all know, Israeli technical assistance served as the foundation for much of chinas modern Air Force. The python 3 licensing, the Lavi TDP and assistance into the J10 program, and assistance in other areas really helped the Chinese. I’m not saying no other nation helped them, the US itself was prior to 1989, but that all stopped in 1989, the US and EU ended military tech cooperation with China whereas Israel did not, and instead helped them develop their best modern fighter until the Chinese 5th gen’s came online.
You can tell you were a politician because you included Israel glazing as part of the video. It’s a Lavi dude, at the very least it’s stolen from them, but it’s asinine to even suggest that the J10 doesn’t share design characteristics of the Lavi. This is a lighthearted thing kinda, but the J10 is 10000000% the Lavi and you are lying to yourself if you don’t see the resemblance. Geopolitically it lines up as well, the US forced Israel to scuttle the Lavi, they got pissed, attempted to recoup their money on the design and very clearly provided it to China. It’s not literally the same thing, obviously changes were made, but from a design standpoint it’s insanely similar.
Yeah, an Israeli project, of course. And the J-10 itself is “not at all similar” to the MiG 1.44. And no one at all, again, helped the Chinese make their “domestic” fighter.
Note: At some point yesterday after I started editing, they fixed the stat card for the radar to show the datalink channels.
Because, of course. (Still, fixes are good!)
Some corrections:
1. In fact the first CAD designed fighter of China is JH-7
2.The triangular wing and canard layout of J-10 can be traced back to J-9-6-1 and J-9-6-2 (also designed by Chendu), it's a project started in 1970 and finally canceled then turned to technical reserves. Some of the technologies finally got used in the J-10 project (as well as the engineers from prj.J-9). So the claim that it copied from Lavi is simply ridiculous, the aerodynamic layouts of the two are quite different.
There are pictures of Song Wencong and his colleagues in a hangar with a Lavi prototype and the IAI design team. Claiming that the J-10 is not directly based on the Lavi design is absurd, there have been huge and well documented transfers of technology from Israel to China which continued long after other western nations begun to block technology access to China.
Wake up, new 1:45am Tim Video just dropped.
real
UA-cam asked me if this post was good and I said it was funny
Showed appreciation to content creator
And relatable
Not on my watch.
Heh, I actually had this uploaded a few hours before it went live, but youtube's internal "processing" took way longer than normal for some reason.
This jet fondly reminds me of Battlefield 2, as that was the (iirc) the only other major non-flight game with this plane featured
I'm glad you addressed the claims about the Lavi copy (may as well include Eurofighter copy claims), this is why I like your vidoes: you keep it real and stick to the facts.
J-10A shows DL:4 in stats card of Radar
That was added yesterday, this video was likely filmed before that.
They LOOOOOOOOOOOOVE to tweak stuff just after I post content....
@@TimsVariety Can be worse. It could be a long video of the whole family of jets and then, right before release, Gaijin announces/releases a new jet within the family
@@darykeng Yeah, thats why I've stopped doing series/family vids, except for *really* old stuff that they're unlikely to expand. I've been bitten by that a few times....
@@darykeng Donut…
lovin the quick history lessons!
My hope is to make folks care a little more about the vehicle they're using, and also to explain a little *why* it is how it is (weapons, performance, etc).
That Mirage-4000 jockey you iced was a 65% RB player - very well done !
I really don't know where the lavi copycat story come from... J10 project got wayyyyy more tech assistance from european sources.(the digital design software used to design j10 are imported from dassualt from example)
The same people who though F-15 was a copy of MiG-25 based on shape alone, probably.
Because China can't produce anything domestic without copying
Get over it
It bears a physical resemblance to the Lavi (the J-10 is substantially bigger), the Israelis were doing a good deal of business with the Chinese at the time, and the whole "hurr durr China can't make anything original, only copy others" thing. Mix those together and you've got where it came from.
@@postman6118 cuz China can't make anything themselves
@@austinowings4904 Just don't tell these people that by this logic F-86 is a Walmart MiG-15, they might get a stroke
YAAAASS another excuse not to do homework. (its 10:54 at night where I live, Im gonna be dead tomorrow)
Why not put this in the background and do your homework. Do 2 things at once, your education is important and don't let a 11:32 minute video get in the way of your success.
You don't believe how happy I am to be done with that thing. Only now working until death
@@MuhammadAli-255 I wish you were here to tell me that 20 years ago. Maybe then I wouldn't be a slave to the snail.
A shame Gaijin put this after the F-16MLU, I haven't finished grinding that line. This thing is a straight upgrade over the Janky-11A.
Just play what you like, then have fun. It's better than grinding everything and feel frustrated
Literally just stop grinding the j line and start at the the other one
@@alaricpumani5372 The thing is, the J-10 along with the Eurofighter are my favourite fighter jets, I can't say no to this one. It's going to be a long grind, the snail has beaten me.
@@bigoof1105 you are your own choice, but if it's your favourite then got it and have fun playing this one, don't follow the meta you'll lack of skills and playing with the same plane make you way deadlier
@@ethancarter5717 not sure i agree with that. J-11B and J-15 will come there
Another epic review. Thanks Tim!
The Type 1473 was the radar for early J-10As based on the Israeli EL/M-2032 radars purchased in the early 90s. Later production J-10As would be given the slightly improved Type 1473G combat radars. One notable missing missile in the loadout is the PL-10 IIR guided AAM, but this missile might be too advanced for the game right now.
Currently in the game the 1473 radar looks like the radar on mig29smt😢.
The J-10 has grown on me, it may not be as sexy as the Flanker's or J-20, but they are good workhorses and the B and C with their DSI intakes look really nice. And good on addressing the Lavi copy myth. If one looks around on the internet, one can find the images of the early conceptual mockups and previous design studies that preceded the J-10. The Chinese certainly copied many things but not everything is a copy.
But I have only one complaint about modern Chinese military aviation, its their adoption of the Western Inside Out or moving horizon style HUD and attitude indicators.
I really find the Soviet/Russian HUD's with their moving plane/outside in attitude indicators to be much more intuitive. A shame nobody else seems to agree. So close to perfection! At least they fly metric.
Im with you on the HUD thing, I've always preferred the soviet style ones. Just personal preference I guess.
every update we get closer to the F-106, truuuust me. single-engined delta wing interceptor? very F-106-y.
F-106 is 1.5 generations behind this jet. Should have come years ago. Also Mirage exists.
@@FirstDagger F-106 did the Mirage III's job better
@@wafflefrfrAs much as i agree that the F-106 is a really cool plane, and i'd love to see it and the F-102 in war thunder, it really didnt
The mirage was exported worldwide in the thousands (can you say it like that for 1.4k? Im not sure about my wording 😅) is still in use today though slowly retiring, has seen a ton of combat in most major conflicts from the cold war to these days, and has proved really reliable mechanically
Where as the F-106 was in use for just 30 years and retired 36 years ago already, never fought once, was never exported, with just 350 built and had a ton of early teething issues, though these got resolved, still led to several accidents and pilot deaths (sadly)
I wonder how AIM-4 Falcon would "perform" in War Thunder.
@@PaiSAMSEN The lack of a proxy fuze is an issue for the AIM-4 Falcon, the SARH AIM-26 Falcon however had a proxy fuze from what I gather and is missing on some of our aircraft like the J35XS.
The J10's technology should come from the J9 canard and the J8IIACT
The actual predecessor will be the Chengdu J-9 "Xinjian 01" configuration created in 1982, featuring delta wings, canards & belly intake. You can find the wind tunnel model in the Secret Projects forum article "Chengdu Jianjiji-9 / J-9 Fighter & Interceptor", and also the book "我的飞机设计生涯 (My Career on Aircraft Design)" by engineer Gu Songfen.
Lavi didn't fly until 1986, technology transfer would be essential to make the final production J-10A, but the configuration and size difference means its nothing like a direct copy. Average users online don't have enough knowledge on aerodynamics to see that, nor the wills and skills to go across the language barriers to access published books by people who worked at Chengdu. So they can only proceed to shout "Typhoon/Lavi or whatever copy".
PS: I am currently getting my master's deg on aerospace engineering at RMIT so I guess I will be qualified enough to call those average users "uneducated on aerodynamics".
Love your videos Tim.
Thanks!
And I just need to research the F-5A and F-16A MLU first to even test flight this beauty.....
When you have an interview at 8am but Tim just dropped. 💯
I have tested the J-10 vs the JAS-39C. It quite literally comes down to the pilot, the J10 is noticeably better in the one circle due to its stupid engine power and the Gripen seems to fair better in the two circle. The biggest advantage the J-10 gets is the extra two missiles, and tbf I am genuinely enjoying the PL-5EII. The J-10 is genuinely scary to go up against, and having flown it into battle myself, if you’re a good pilot, you will dominate the battlefield
Hey, Tim glad to see you made this video I’m staying home from school today because apparently there’s a threat and I’m not risking my life over someone being angry at their own. Anyway have a lovely day.
Stay safe.
@@TimsVariety I will thank you Tim have a amazing day.
This is the best thing I ever saw.
Great video! Could you make a video tutorial about top-tier VR? Always wanted to play but could never figure out the weapon/radar controls.
Been absolutely loving the Jf-17 almost have the J-10 also super happy that israel got the F-16C finally great vid as always (Also something of note for anyone who cares at 3:51 that stat card does in fact say 30G but in game it is now 35G idk when that changed)
They love to tweak stuff just after I post content....
well: i was looking forward towards the j10, and i was looking forward to the review of the j10, the only thing i'm not looking forward to is the grind to get the thing, try to use my j11 to start grinding it but yeah that didn't go very well, so yeah lovely review and wish me luck trying to get the j10
I was just surgested your DeV preview and wondered when you would release this, and what do you know there it was.
ahh yes I was waiting for this
Nice video. Can we see an updated to the ordinance video about how to use those newer guided bombs like JDAMs?
Eventually, but it won't be right away - updating those guides is a huge project. Other stuff to finish up first.
Not particularly much to update with GNSS guided bombs: they act like LGBs up to point-of-release, but afterward, you have 0 control because the bomb is now independent
A mirage 2000 5F can easily beat the J10A. Currently after my own testing I think the J10A has the third best dogfight flight model. The best dogfighter is the Mirage 2K and after that the Gripen. The gripen has a better FM for normal AIR RB (than the 2K). Over all I think the J10 is pretty decent for top tier but definitely no the best. Even in the close range for ball moments and dogfights the mirage 2K can just do it better.
Tim's sleep schedule is also trash let's go
I know these are (very) minor complaints, but I'd love to see this plane getting more of its historical armaments... PL-11 SARH missiles would be good enough as a stock/tier 1 long range option, and help with the grind towards PL-12s, and irl, the IRCCM versions of the PL-5 were mostly used for export, the PLAAF's IRCCM missile of choice in the 2000s was the PL-8B, which I reckon would be slightly better in-game (although I'm not fully sure of how do the PL-5 and 8 compare to each other in actual gameplay tbh)
Nah, why are you giving the snail ideas to take away the stock PL-12s?
@@Foquro no no, the stock PL-12s can stay, what I meant is having the SARH missiles as a tier 1 upgrade so you can have 2xPL-11 and 2xPL-12 at the same time until you unlock the PL-12 modification
The anti-interference principle of PL-8B is the red ultraviolet quaternary multi band algorithm for anti-interference. There are currently no relevant mechanisms in the game. If these mechanisms are removed, it would probably be an AAM-3 missile with an overload capacity of 40-50g. As for PL-11, you can wait for the early version of J-10. It will use PL-5B/C/PL-8 and PL-11.PL-8B的抗干扰原理是红紫外四元多波段算法抗干扰。目前游戏里没有相关机制。如果去掉这些机制，大概就是40-50g过载能力的AAM-3导弹。至于PL-11，你可以等待J-10的早期版本。它将使用PL-5B/C/PL-8和PL-11。
PL8B is arealy in the game now, but no plane can use it, just like they did to PL8, put it in the game for like a year and finally issued it
Ive had pretty good luck dogfighting these in my Grippen c so far, I'm assuming its still learning and Gripen having a lighter payload? Either pulling horizontal or vertical, but by that point I'm down 2-3 amraam or just having the tipwinders and can win after a struggle.
the j10 beats the gripen in a slow fight
Please do the A-10s. any of the 3 of them!
Another downside to this plane is it doesn’t get a reticle on the HUD for the target you’re tracking.
1:11 honestly I'd rather make a thousand of these things by hand than use AutoCAD or 3DSMax again.
Hey tim, i see that you have a easier time than me locking people with the HMD radar thing, usually when i try to use that u just keep looking at the target but never locks, even in only src mode (especially with american jets), do you do something else or is just the radar set?
I don't believe I'm doing anything special, but HMD locks are subject to a lot of variables - angle, background, range, radar mode, etc .. and some radars are just better than others at locking targets in certain conditions, etc .. you might not be doing anything wrong.
@@TimsVariety huh, guess it's just my luck then, I'll run some tests because this could really help in some dogfight situations, thanks Tim, you're the best
I can’t imagine any reason other than sinophobia that people would believe that china was incapable of developing this on their own and had to “steal” data from the Lavi. the idea of a canard delta fighter wasn’t exactly groundbreaking and china already had the J9 concept anyways
Is it just me or does the livery in the thumnail look the freccie tricolori one?
China will grow larger! Nice review, can't wait to get my hands on this one. And thanks for talking about the Lavi mess, the jokes about that and the "Temu Eurofighter" get really old after a while.
Development taking a very long time seems to be a running theme for Chinese jets.
Hello Tim, I have always enjoyed your videos and appreciate your objective and fair attitude towards Chinese fighter jets. May I repost your video on Bilibili? I will add subtitles and will also indicate the source of the video and your UA-cam channel.
Please don't. I've had people put my stuff on bilibili a few times before, and its almost impossible for me to get them taken down.
@@TimsVariety I'm very sorry to hear this. Yesterday, I spent a few hours translating your video locally. I won't upload it if you don't like it. However, I need to clarify that videos reposted on Bilibili do not generate any revenue; they simply link the video content to your channel, which doesn't harm you in any way. I purely did this because I genuinely enjoy your content. Of course, if you really insist on not wanting your video to be reposted on Bilibili, I will respect your choice.
shouldn’t glide bombs give more range too?
I know you mainly talk about air but any chance you know why the strv’s don’t get gen 2/3 thermals?
Off the top of my head, no idea.
Incoming cringe Temu jokes…
No this is wish Eurofighter
Temu Lavi
I don't care that there's not hard proof. PL-8 is literally a licensed Python 3, there was plenty of cooperation on it.
@@SuppliceVI PL-8 existed long before the J-10. Besides, Lavi has a layout of “close coupled canard wing+swept wing+pitot tube inlet”, while the J-10 has a layout of “mid-range coupled canard wing+delta wing+supersonic rectangular inlet”. The are two fundamentally different designs. J-10 is a further evolution of J-9 project of their own. Not to say Lavi had no influence whatsoever, but end product is different and the way they work is different. Most importantly, J-10 is an actual fighter in service. Lavi is a dead project.
If implication of 'Temu' here is meant to mock the quality of build and equipment found on J-10, I'd like to remind you that China is the single most experienced nation in the world when it comes to working with composites and rare minerals. So you would be again, wrong.
@@mehmetbozkurt3274 yeah no shit it's meant to mock the quality, the Pakistanis can barely keep their JF17s operational due to their logistics drain from part deficiencies.
Also do you not understand the PL-8/Python 3 was near the start of their cooperation? Its decades of coordination and design assistance. It's not a direct copy, it's based heavily off of.
Stop being so offended
@@SuppliceVI I gave you all the answers you need. Having another read and educating yourself or staying ignorant as you are right now is up to you. I'm not offended by your baseless claims, or rather, shit takes. Though maybe by your stupidity.
Yay glorious video to wake up to
The Chinese usernames just keep getting more terrifying
Attack the d point!
IAI Lavi at home
only four views in 53 sec bro really fell off (i love your vids)
THEY USED ONSHAPE TO DESIGN THE J-10
Get this before eurofighter...
Huh, and I thought this jet is based on MiG 1.42/1.44 🤔
The principle verification of this aircraft began at the end of 60s, namely the J-9 project. It ended with the Cultural Revolution and the economic reconstruction in 1978, with a sharp decline in defense budgets.
Was wondering when we'd be getting a video on the Eurofighter on Wish
Jokes aside, another lovely video as always Tim, love the work
There is no "persistent rumor" about the Lavi. You can literally find information about this.
THE CHINESE AIR force has flown an airborne earlywarning (AEW) testbed, believed to be an Ilyushin 11-76, fitted with a GEC-Marconi Avionics AEW radar and processing suite based on that developed for the abortive Nimrod AEW programme for the Royal Air Force. The Chinese have had a longstanding requirement for an AEW aircraft, with GEC one of several companies (including Beriev, with the A-50 Mainstay) which had been pursuing the programme. It is also possible that Israel could be trying to interest the Chinese in the Phalcon AEW as part of widening defence links between the two countries. A GEC team visited China in 1993 to discuss its AEW system, dubbed the Argus. Sources now indicate that a trial aircraft is being flown in China. This is thought to be fitted with the two radar design intended originally for the Nimrod AEW. GEC declines to discuss the programme, saying that it will not comment on any specific customer for the Argus. The AEW programme is a key plank in the Chinese air force's programme to revamp its fleet. Alongside the programme, the air force is funding Chengdu and Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) for development of the XJ-10 fourth generation fighter, based on IAI's cancelled Lavi fighter for the Israeli air force (Flight International, 2-8 November). US Government officials admit that there is considerable concern within Government and military circles in the USA over the Israeli/Chinese programme. They say that "high-level" discussions about the nature of the Israeli collaboration have taken place. According to one official, Israel maintains that it is not contravening a US-Israeli technology-transfer agreements by developing a Lavi-based combat aircraft for the Chinese. One key area of concern in the USA is whether Israel is providing an air-intercept radar for the aircraft. Israel has had access to the Westinghouse APG-66 (for its Lockheed F-16s) and the Hughes APG-63 (for its McDonnell Douglas F-15s). Israeli manufacturer Elta may be offering a derivative of its EL/M2021 for the Chinese programme. There are concerns, however, that much of this radar may be based on US technology. Alternatively, China could turn to GEC for its fighter radar, as well as its AEW radar. The UK company has been pushing its Blue Hawk for China's Super-7 upgrade of the Chengdu F-7. This radar could be adapted for the XJ-10.
www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1994/1994%20-%202920.html
That link is dead, but again - its not proof of anything - if you trace all those reports back to original sources, its second and third hand rumors. As a reminder, I didn't say "it didn't happen" - I was very clear that it might have - I said there is no hard proof, which there isn't. Confirmed technology transfer on X doesn't mean that technology transfer on Y happend as well.
Related - if I had said it WAS based on the Lavi, the comments would be flooded .. FLOODED .. with people telling me I shouldn't believe rumors, there is no proof, etc etc. Its a point of contention, so I choose to simply mention the controversy rather than pick a side with any confidence.
@@TimsVariety
Sorry, second part of comment was not posted in time.
There are images of the deaign team taken when chengdu came to study the Lavi, and tons of articles from the early 90s regarding the US intercepting the deal.
However, anyone who says it is a "copy" is a blatant fool. The data was applied to Chengdu'a existing J10, and consultants from russia and isreal were used to finalize the design. Most of the design is completely unique from the Lavi, as the entire fighter is scaled differently, the wing is different, the intake, and other key aerodynamic features.
The overall final configuration is a unique aircraft. Whilst it was informed by the Lavi, Chengdu has been attempting to get a delta canard into the air since the viggen-inspired j-9, and it's historical capability to produce such continues with the j-20.
Most of the 'copy' allegations come mainly from western perception of Shenyang's works, another design firm that often produces aircraft from the PLAAF.
In otherwords, it's akin to saying the yf17/f18 is based on the f5.
A truth, but not a simple one.
@@theneef174It’s still a massive problem that we had a “privileged US ally” providing advanced US technology to a post T-Square China against the wishes of the United States.
Thats where the controversy on this comes from. Israel was demanding the very best from the US at the time, using the massive technical assistance and cooperation they secured to design improved versions of US tech, and then going and selling that tech to geopolitical rivals of the US.
Hello
The rumor that China's J-10 was had technology based on the IAI Lavi has some roots in the fact that the Israeli government and the People's Republic of China did have some transfers of military technology in the past late 70's to early 90's like the Python-3 missile being license-built as the PL-8 in China. Still the J-10 is not a 1 to 1 copy of the Lavi and there's no conformation from either side on what tech the chinese bought so we'll never really know for sure one way or the other.
It's not a copy, it just used flight data to inform aspects of the design.
Is ture that PL-8's from Python-3, but for J-10 it's based on the canceled J-9 and J-13, barely nothing with Lavi...
I mean the aerodynamic design.
good lord tim sleep
When Eurofighter Typhoo with IRIS-T and Meteor?
We'll probably not get any advanced tranches with Meteors any time soon.
Israel complaing about someone stealing their tech is fucking rich.
Sitting in bed at 2:00am
Sees new tim video.
Sleep can wait. i must see if china number one.
cringe
temufighter
For sure a lavi
Ah, another dumbass
Temu typhoon
Temu Eurofighter is just what I wanted 💀
It had nothing to do with typhoon
Who doesn’t love the Temu eurofighter
Rafale and Typhoon is better.
It came from the lavi cant change my mind. China has yet to produce anything domestic from the ground up when it comes to aviation
*when it comes to anything
No, it just used deaign data/flight data. Chengdu is not a copy company, you are probably thinking of shenyang.
@@theneef174The design data and flight data is a massive aspect of the design of an aircraft lmao.
@thebean8255 Yes, but very small aerodynamic differences make a huge deal.
There is very little in common between the two planes outside of the aft fuselage. You will not find much similar between them if you actually pay any modicum of attention to the aircraft.
For example, the Gripen and Rafale ALSO use the EXACT SAME flight and design data as the Eurofighter Typhoon (known at the time as the "EAP"), and came out completely different, and only idiots would call them "copies" of the eurofighter.
@@theneef174 The controversy perhaps arises from the fact that, unlike France and Sweden, who are common allies to the EU and posed no threat to the nations that provided much of the technical assistance when designing the European fighters you’ve mentioned…
China is a massive geopolitical rival to the US, is diametrically opposed to the western vision of the world, and Israel providing them US derived tech is and was a massive problem. Which is why I suspect so many leap to Israel’s defense when it comes to this particular arrangement. It was a very underhanded thing for one ally to do to another, and as we all know, Israeli technical assistance served as the foundation for much of chinas modern Air Force. The python 3 licensing, the Lavi TDP and assistance into the J10 program, and assistance in other areas really helped the Chinese. I’m not saying no other nation helped them, the US itself was prior to 1989, but that all stopped in 1989, the US and EU ended military tech cooperation with China whereas Israel did not, and instead helped them develop their best modern fighter until the Chinese 5th gen’s came online.
You can tell you were a politician because you included Israel glazing as part of the video. It’s a Lavi dude, at the very least it’s stolen from them, but it’s asinine to even suggest that the J10 doesn’t share design characteristics of the Lavi.
This is a lighthearted thing kinda, but the J10 is 10000000% the Lavi and you are lying to yourself if you don’t see the resemblance. Geopolitically it lines up as well, the US forced Israel to scuttle the Lavi, they got pissed, attempted to recoup their money on the design and very clearly provided it to China. It’s not literally the same thing, obviously changes were made, but from a design standpoint it’s insanely similar.
I'll just let you argue with all the people who insist, and are 100000% sure, that its a copy of the eurofighter 2000.
Yeah, an Israeli project, of course. And the J-10 itself is “not at all similar” to the MiG 1.44.
And no one at all, again, helped the Chinese make their “domestic” fighter.
There is literally zero aerodynamic similarity between 1.44 and j10.
*The Battlefield 2 opening screen F-18 killer.* Good times b4 the cancer of the "frostbite" COD clones came out.