Talk:Shenyang J-6

Untitled

Someone know if this aircraft was fitted with AA-2/PL-2s? I know only that it was fitted in Pak service with AIM-9B/J perhaps P Sidewinders, but not sure if AAMs were fitted as standard in China service.--Stefanomencarelli 00:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Albanian models were fitted with PL-2s, as example, but is this a standard for the Chinese too?--Stefanomencarelli 18:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone find a second source for the claim that the J-6 is "disposable" I find it incredibly dubious that anyone would spend a few hundred thousand dollars on something meant to fly for only 100 hours. LouieS (talk) 17:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

No source, but it is true that it was considered disposable by the Soviets. It could fly for more than 100 hours, it was in service with China and Pakistan for over 30 years. But the airframe had to be overhauled every 100-130 flying hours.Hj108 (talk) 15:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I have different figures. Maybe J-6 was 'disposable'. But one articles in 'Aerei magazine', fall 2000, about the Pakistani F-6s, claimed exactly that: 253 aircrafts flew until then over 400,000 hs. This means over 1,500 hrs for every airframe. Hoverhauled or not, this meant a lot of air activity. If not, nobody could hold in service an aircraft for 35 years with 100 hrs available.. Yeager was wrong about scrapped, without any doubt, even if the aircraft is 'short life'. After all, many western aircrafts weren't much better: LW F-104Gs flew an average of 2,000 hrs in over 20 years of service, as example. So, absolutely the affermation of 'scrapping' must be replaced with 'hoverhauled'.--Stefanomencarelli (talk) 09:46, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Iraq

Iraq never operated the J6. They had 18 MiG19s which they flew for just 5 years before retiring already in the mid 1960s. They never bought J6 from China, only chinese aircraft Iraq ever bought was the F7B which also never flew in combat since it was deemed inferior even to the MiG21MF and the 30 planes were used solely as advanced trainers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.17.235 (talk) 18:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Shenyang J-6/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article needs considerable expansion. It needs some discussion of the considerable difficulty which the Shenyang factory experienced when it attempted license production. M Van Houten 00:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 00:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 05:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Shenyang J-6. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090501082102/http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/1971War/Appendix3.html to http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/1971War/Appendix3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Disposable

"The J-6 was considered "disposable" and was intended to be operated for only 100 flight hours (or approximately 100 sorties) before being overhauled. The Pakistan Air Force was often able to extend this to 130 hours with diligent maintenance."

That's not the aircraft, it's the engines. Standard Soviet practice, instead of investing a lot of effort and expense into high tech turbine materials, just accept a low TBO and set up an extensive logistic system to routinely rebuild engines. It worked perfectly well. It's simply a different approach to the problem than the West used. It doesn't imply the engine is disposable, and the aircraft itself is good for far longer than the life of the engines. You can't just "overhaul" an aircraft after it's design life is expired, you need to essentially rebuild it, and the fact that so many of them were still in service after decades makes it obvious that the airframe was not limited to only 100 hours of flight time. I doubt any of the users were having their fleets rebuilt every 100 hours for several decades. Idumea47b (talk) 14:02, 25 September 2023 (UTC)