China Flanker Thread II

[Blitzo]

Re: The mysterious J-19

No. The F-15K is a heavily upgraded variant of the F-15E with upgraded avionics, engines, electronics, and heavier payload.

The F-15K is more powerful (in terms of strike) than any J-11B variant currently deployed.

As is the F-15E...

That's not what I was pointing out. Each aircraft has a fixed number of weapons stations. The F-15K simply has more weapons stations than the F-15E. This means the F-15K can carry a lot more weapons especially if cluster hardpoints are used.

How much more is a lot more?

Huitong puts the J-16's capabilities as superior to the Su-30MKK, which is widely regarded as equivalent or even superior to the F-15E. J-16 will have much more powerful avionics, greater weapons load, and range.

The MKK is "widely regarded" as comparable to the F-15E, yes.

J-16's improvements over the J-11B/S is very similar to the F-15K's improvements over the F-15E.

I've already given you my comparisons, and the belief that the J-11B and BS probably can not fire PGMs.

There is little difference between the basic J-11 and Su-27SK, true, but certainly not the J-11B. The J-11B is a completely indigenous fighter apart from the airframe. Avionics, engines, coating, composite materials, electronics, weapons systems, cockpit, etc, are completely indigenous. The J-11B is pretty much a new fighter except for the airframes.

The J-11B is classified different from the Flanker and is not part of the Flanker family.

Whatever. At the end of the day it's a Flanker built by China using Chinese materials and Chinese avionics.

China's fighter aircraft currently lacks versatile avionics. An AESA radar (such as the one on the J-10B) will be a very cheap way to upgrade existing fighters by a great deal without having to rely on other technologies such as engines or airframes.

What do you mean versatile? Do you mean a radar which is powerful, with low side lobe emissions and A to G modes or one which can be "universal" for all fighters?
AESA upgrades as MLUs could be possible, but not at this stage when fighter AESAs for China are in comparitive infancy.

Being that AESA are already in testing or developed, I don't see why it can't be mass-produced and installed.

Cost maybe? Infancy of the technology? Lasers are already in testing or being developed by the US, why dont' they install that on every weapons platform they have?

Read my last paragraph above.

I have, and

What I'm saying is that land-based aircraft can be more flexible and doesn't have to take on multiple roles. Land-based aircraft can be either in the form of air-superiority (like F-16 or F-22) or strike (like F-15E or F-35).

Naval aircraft will have to combine roles.

Sure air force aircraft don't "have to" but they "can". Just like naval aircraft. The point is that naval and air force aircraft are not "drastically" different.

The F-14 was mainly an interceptor. The reason why the F/A-18 was deployed along with it is because the F-14 is nearing its retirement age and they wanted to make the F-14's last days count.

I'm not even sure what this statement means...

This is taken from the Sukhoi schedule. Sukhoi rarely misses its deadlines and they are far more than ready to build another T-50 derivative. I wouldn't be surprised if their FGFA makes it to the production line in a few years.

F-35 isn't what you call a "light fighter". Both T-50 and F-35 are heavy-class fighters that are built for power (one of the key aspects of a strike aircraft). Seeing that the Mikoyan LMFS will fill the light fighter role, it's safe to assume that the T-50K will be a strike fighter.

It's not a light fighter, but it's not a heavy fighter either. It's a medium weight fighter, and yes that class does exist.

Role is the most important variable by which aircraft are classified, and seeing that both the F-35 and T-50K share similar purposes, their relationship can be justified.

If there was a T-50K....

My numbers come from sources. The number is in all articles that mention the J-11B's RCS.

If you go about with your "misguided" theory, then the J-20 technically doesn't exist.

We have definitive pictures of the J-20 with years of credible rumors. With J-11B RCS reduction it's far less credible. I'm not saying it's unlikely the RCS is reduced, but you shouldn't at least be trumpeting it as such a major upgrade that will somehow make it better than everyone else.
Really, parts of your posts sound more at home on a brochure for Lockheed or Northrop than anywhere else...

Yeah, but when the 4.5++ generation fighter is compared to a 4th-generation fighter, the differences are big.

But very small when compared to the gap between 4th and 5th generation aircraft.

J-15 is based on J-11B, so logically the J-15 will have the same radar-reduction features the J-11B uses. J-11Bs are 8 times stealthier than the Flanker and are being constantly upgraded, therefore it's expectable that the J-15 will be not much different from that.

I don't have a quarrel with this anymore, seeing as you believe the J-11B has RCS reduced by eight times... I'm more annoyed at how you claim this as near certain fact and the promoting this as such a major upgrade...

I have pictures of J-11B models and SAC posters of J-11B with guided air-to-surface equipment. Need I show you them?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yes you have pictures of models shown from years ago. Until we see J-11Bs with PGMs attached on hardpoints we can't confirm they have that capability. And with recent revelations that J-11Bs and J-11BS seemingly can not carry PGMs that puts the capability in even more doubt.

Models show plans of what they want or think the item of interest will be like, or what they hope their items of interest will be or are. The fact that we haven't seen proof of J-11Bs or BS carrying PGMs leads to the belief those models were what they hoped or believed the aircraft would be capable of. But plans obviously don't always go to plan.
Espicially considering how SAC are in charge.

 

[i.e.]

Re: The mysterious J-19

@ Bltizo

he is just a over eagered youth. there is no point to argue in detail.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: The mysterious J-19

@ Bltizo

he is just a over eagered youth. there is no point to argue in detail.

Lol yeah I always fall back into arguing a few days after I say I wouldn't... This time it's for real

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: The mysterious J-19

As is the F-15E...

In strike capabilities only.

How much more is a lot more?

About 9 hardpoints more. With increased engine thrust greater loads can be carried.

The MKK is "widely regarded" as comparable to the F-15E, yes.

"Widely regarded" as in comparison of performance and subsystems, yes.

I've already given you my comparisons, and the belief that the J-11B and BS probably can not fire PGMs.

Yes, the "belief" that has no evidence to back it up and is further impeded by the fact that it goes against the statement and J-11B models/posters released by SAC.

Whatever. At the end of the day it's a Flanker built by China using Chinese materials and Chinese avionics.

Therefore it's an indigenous fighter aircraft besides the airframe. Done, next point.

What do you mean versatile? Do you mean a radar which is powerful, with low side lobe emissions and A to G modes or one which can be "universal" for all fighters?
AESA upgrades as MLUs could be possible, but not at this stage when fighter AESAs for China are in comparitive infancy.

What I mean is that China needs AESA radars that are capable enough to satisfy high-performance fighters like the J-20 and at the same time be easy enough to manufacture for 4th and 4.5th generation aircraft like the J-11 series.

We all know China doesn't have fighter AESAs in operation yet. Upgrades will probably be implemented in the next decade.

Cost maybe? Infancy of the technology? Lasers are already in testing or being developed by the US, why dont' they install that on every weapons platform they have?

So are the jets that they are planned to be inducted on. Given a few years, the development of AESA will be parallel to that of such fighter aircraft. J-11B and J-15 will continue to be improved upon. It's not like AESA radars are holding up the fighter jet assembly line.

Sure air force aircraft don't "have to" but they "can". Just like naval aircraft. The point is that naval and air force aircraft are not "drastically" different.

"Can" is not enough in battle. Sure, even the J-10A can perform the fighter-bomber role, but the PLAAF will not use it to carry out heavy airstrikes.

I'm not even sure what this statement means...

Meaning that at the time the F/A-18 entered service, the F-14s were still not at retirement age.

It's not a light fighter, but it's not a heavy fighter either. It's a medium weight fighter, and yes that class does exist.

And what are the boundaries between the light, medium, and heavy weight fighter that you claim?

If there was a T-50K....

...And there is.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

We have definitive pictures of the J-20 with years of credible rumors. With J-11B RCS reduction it's far less credible. I'm not saying it's unlikely the RCS is reduced, but you shouldn't at least be trumpeting it as such a major upgrade that will somehow make it better than everyone else.
Really, parts of your posts sound more at home on a brochure for Lockheed or Northrop than anywhere else...

So it's not credible because we can't "see" RCS?
Seriously man, we can't "see" the WS-15's thrust either, but we know it's what is reported.
I don't "trumpet" these things. Facts do. I don't make up numbers, and even if I did, it wouldn't be 3.

Sure, I may have the marketer's tongue, but facts will remain facts. Acceptance not required.

But very small when compared to the gap between 4th and 5th generation aircraft.

That's why it's called 4.5 generation. Its gap isn't as large.

I don't have a quarrel with this anymore, seeing as you believe the J-11B has RCS reduced by eight times... I'm more annoyed at how you claim this as near certain fact and the promoting this as such a major upgrade...

Then that means you haven't read the articles regarding the J-11B.

Yes you have pictures of models shown from years ago. Until we see J-11Bs with PGMs attached on hardpoints we can't confirm they have that capability. And with recent revelations that J-11Bs and J-11BS seemingly can not carry PGMs that puts the capability in even more doubt.

Models show plans of what they want or think the item of interest will be like, or what they hope their items of interest will be or are. The fact that we haven't seen proof of J-11Bs or BS carrying PGMs leads to the belief those models were what they hoped or believed the aircraft would be capable of. But plans obviously don't always go to plan.
Espicially considering how SAC are in charge.

They are from years ago, so that means that the capabilities, even if they were only planned, should be incorporated right now. Again, I stress the fact that us not seeing the J-11B/S carrying PGMs does not rule out the fact that it can. J-11B may take on an air-to-air role in the PLAAF, so PGMs might not be needed in training.

The model shows what the standard J-11B is, not what future variants look like. After all, being multirole is one of the key differences between the J-11B and the J-11A.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: The mysterious J-19

@ Bltizo

he is just a over eagered youth. there is no point to argue in detail.

Yes, and you are a mature adult who doesn't even know that "eagered" is not a word.

And BTW, the second part of your claim is true. You can't argue with facts. Especially if you don't even know the damn details.

 

[Deino]

EDIT: ... in mind of several more than emotional posts here and esp. since no-one can proof his own ideas on that I would like to suggest to end that ...

This discussion isn't going anywhere, I'm just going to stop now, ...

Agreed ... but my own conclusion is that most important is to look "who" has written a post and "who" has become a respected or reliable member here after a long time ... and not just one who's posting "wild theories", who can't argue and is then simply calling names.

End from my side.

Deino

 

[Blitzo]

This discussion isn't going anywhere, I'm just going to stop now, sinosoldier.

GG, WP

 

[i.e.]

Re: The mysterious J-19

Yes, and you are a mature adult who doesn't even know that "eagered" is not a word.

And BTW, the second part of your claim is true. You can't argue with facts. Especially if you don't even know the damn details.

jeeesh.
what side of the bed did you woke up in the morning?

btw, go to f_y_j_s and ask for who I am. then come back and have this tone with me.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: The mysterious J-19

jeeesh.
what side of the bed did you woke up in the morning?

btw, go to f_y_j_s and ask for who I am. then come back and have this tone with me.

i.e. -- who are you? I'd ask the **** board but my chinese is pretty daft.
(Or PM me if you don't wanna say in public? )

 

[i.e.]

Re: The mysterious J-19

i.e. -- who are you? I'd ask the **** board but my chinese is pretty daft.
(Or PM me if you don't wanna say in public? )

oh I am nobody.