China Flanker Thread II

[Schumacher]

I think you are being overly generous to the Su35. If it was so superawesomesource, why are the Russians struggling so much to find anyone willing to buy it that they need to keep flogging the dead horse of a Chinese order just to try and generate some buzz and interest in the type?

The Su35 has entered many international competitions for orders, and even excluding cases where politics makes a Russian win improbable, just in terms of actual performance, I have yet to read any claims that the Su35 came out on top of existing 4th gen offerings like the Rafale and Typhoon, in any competition. Even current J10B and J11B may well have reached the standard of Rafales and Typhoons. Even if the Eurocanards have the edge, the difference would not likely to be that big, which puts the J10B and J11B easily on a similar level to the Su35 in terms of avionics and radar.
..............

Su35 needs to stop losing to the likes of Gripen, F16 & even their own old Su30 in international competitions first before even being compared to the top Euros Rafale and Typhoon.

 

[SteelBird]

I gotta get me one of dem dare Chinese Flankers, I like them little itty bitty canards???? who woulda thunk it??????

"Shan CG" always does very good jobs in their CG. Who are they? Do they make profit from their works?

 

[MiG-29]

Su35 needs to stop losing to the likes of Gripen, F16 & even their own old Su30 in international competitions first before even being compared to the top Euros Rafale and Typhoon.

The most important is Su-35 is entering operational service in the Russian air force, and it might enter service in the PLAAF.

Plus Su-35S will work with AESA based NEBO radar stations to track difficult targets like stealth aircraft

the meeting of wavelengths between radar and aircraft causes resonation between the two, significantly raising an aircraft's reflection in the radar spectrum, making it much more visible. VHF radar has been incorporated into the Russian military's 1L119 Nebo SVU, its first VHF-band active electronically steered array (AESA); although detailed analysis of this vehicle-mounted array, Russian sources report it has achieved excellent results in spotting stealth aircraft.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The aircraft is a weapons system that is used to integrate a very fast interceptor, with supercruise capability, excellent IRST system and a good radar of excellent range in a very maneouvrable platform.

with a VHF radar passive radar like Kokchuga or the NEBO AESA which both boast anti-stealth capabilities

 

[Engineer]

I think you are being overly generous to the Su35. If it was so superawesomesource, why are the Russians struggling so much to find anyone willing to buy it that they need to keep flogging the dead horse of a Chinese order just to try and generate some buzz and interest in the type?

The Su35 has entered many international competitions for orders, and even excluding cases where politics makes a Russian win improbable, just in terms of actual performance, I have yet to read any claims that the Su35 came out on top of existing 4th gen offerings like the Rafale and Typhoon, in any competition. Even current J10B and J11B may well have reached the standard of Rafales and Typhoons. Even if the Eurocanards have the edge, the difference would not likely to be that big, which puts the J10B and J11B easily on a similar level to the Su35 in terms of avionics and radar.

Exactly. There is zero international order for the Su-35, and news about China purchasing the aircraft have been nothing but rumors. People on Chinese forums call such news "period", because it occurs monthly like a woman's period. The Russians air force doesn't appear too impress with the aircraft either, and purchases the Su-35 partially out of charity.

The Russian air force, however, doesn't seem that interested, and is looking ahead to the T-50 fighter. Watching the Su-35 demonstration flights in July, Alexander Zelin, commander of the air force, said: "This aircraft is being developed to test and verify ideas fo rthe fifth-generation fighter. Then we will work on the main task--to create the T-50."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In terms of aerodynamics, the up-engined Su35 likely hold the upper hand over the J11B, but as others have already pointed out, the baseline design is still principally the same as a 30 year old flanker airframe.

The Russians did find some magic with the flanker airframe, and it was one of, if not the best 3rd gen fighters in terms of overall aerodynamic performance. But that was decades ago, in the meantime, the cutting edge of aerodynamics has moved on, and the currently most agile airframes are presented by the canard deltas, and the J20's design is a progression and refinement of the canard delta concept.

With J10s already dominating Flankers in WVR as well as BVR in PLAAF service, I have very high confidence that the J20 will at a bare minimum do just as well as J10As in WVR against Flankers, and almost certainly much better, especially with a combat load.

The J20's performance will not be affected much by carrying weapons since they will be stowed internally. A Su35 might be able to super cruise and pull fancy stunts clean, but hang a typical war load of missiles, pods and pylons on it and suddenly it ain't flying so sweetly.

What you have said is so true. The Su-35 can fly at supercruise speed in clean configuration, but once external stores are added, that supercruise speed is going to decrease dramatically. The Russians themselves hardly mention anything about the external configuration during supercruise tests, which illustrates the problem.

An aircraft flying at Mach 1.2 without afterburner can technically be called supercruising. However, without providing the context, such supercruise capability is highly misleading as the capability might not be doable under realistic combat scenarios. In comparison, the F-22 can supercruise at Mach 1.8, nearly twice the cruising speed of existing fighters in service. The same term is used, but the difference is enormous.

 

[Engineer]

As I have said before I don;t disagree with you because generally speaking AESA is obviously superior to PESA HOWEVER we cannot say that for a fact when it comes to a one to one comparo until we know the specifics of the two radars we are comparing. Hope that make sense.

It's like saying a Ferrari is much faster than a Toyota which generally speaking is true however if we're comparing two specific cars we need to know the exact make and model of each to form a definitive conclusion.

Your argument would work if we are comparing two AESA radars manufactured by different countries. However, since we are comparing PESA to AESA, your argument isn't applicable. The reason is that it is generally known that AESA is obviously superior to PESA already. There is no need to make further comparisons to verify something which is already true.

 

[Engineer]

Brat first let us focus, F-15 will be upgraded with AESA and HMS



The Air Force plans to retain 176 F-15Cs. Only two units—one at Kadena AB, Japan, and one at RAF Lakenheath in Britain—will serve with the active duty. Some 54 F-15Cs are on contract to be fitted with an AESA radar, and all F-15Cs are now fitted with the Joint Helmet Mounted Cuing System. The F-15Cs will also receive an IRST system to detect stealthy targets.
Like the F-15C, Andersen said the E models will get an AESA radar—the APG-82—plus all the other enhancements. Right now, helmet mounted sights are only funded for the front seat of the two-seat airplane, but ACC wants to fit backseaters with the JHMCS as well.

source

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

See it is the air force magazine.

What a load of distraction, which has absolutely nothing to do with what Air Force Brat said in post #3033. Air Force Brat is completely right in saying the F-22 is not intended for up-close and personal battles. The advantage of stealth is that it allows the aircraft to fire a missile before the opponent aware of the aircraft. No amount of HMS or TVN will help when the opponent doesn't even realize he is about to get killed by a BVR missile that is only seconds away.

 

[kwaigonegin]

Your argument would work if we are comparing two AESA radars manufactured by different countries. However, since we are comparing PESA to AESA, your argument isn't applicable. The reason is that it is generally known that AESA is obviously superior to PESA already. There is no need to make further comparisons to verify something which is already true.

I think we have to agree to disagree... Not all AESA's are made equal just like NOT all PESA's are made equal. IRBIS-E is a very very good PESA and until I know more of the technical specifics of the particualr AESA it is compared to I cannot categorically say for a fact that just because it is an AESA it is automatically better than IRBIS-E in detection, range, tracking etc etc...

Now will the odds be in favor of the AESA? sure.. but will I bet my first born on it? No!

 

[MiG-29]

What a load of distraction, which has absolutely nothing to do with what Air Force Brat said in post #3033. Air Force Brat is completely right in saying the F-22 is not intended for up-close and personal battles. The advantage of stealth is that it allows the aircraft to fire a missile before the opponent aware of the aircraft. No amount of HMS or TVN will help when the opponent doesn't even realize he is about to get killed by a BVR missile that is only seconds away.

To say the F-15 Eagle is alive and well is not bravado. The U.S. Air Force has taken delivery of 232 F-15E Strike Eagles, with four in production and scheduled for delivery in 2004. They will remain in operation through 2030 and beyond.

At least 179 F-15Cs will continue in operation through 2020. The U.S. Air Force is considering a program to add air-to-ground capability to the C model. The F-15 fleet will complement the Air Force F/A-22 as part of the high end of the service's force structure over the next three decades.

source Boeing

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in the same way J-20 and J-31 will soldier on with J-11s and J-10s for a while

 

[Engineer]

To say the F-15 Eagle is alive and well is not bravado. The U.S. Air Force has taken delivery of 232 F-15E Strike Eagles, with four in production and scheduled for delivery in 2004. They will remain in operation through 2030 and beyond.

At least 179 F-15Cs will continue in operation through 2020. The U.S. Air Force is considering a program to add air-to-ground capability to the C model. The F-15 fleet will complement the Air Force F/A-22 as part of the high end of the service's force structure over the next three decades.

source Boeing

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in the same way J-20 and J-31 will soldier on with J-11s and J-10s for a while

Like I have said, what you posted is a load of distraction, which does not address the concept of stealth as explained in post #3033. Your arguments are therefore irrelevant.

The small RCS on a stealth aircraft allows it to see the opponent long before the opponent can see the stealth aircraft. A stealth aircraft can shoot down non-stealthy aircraft like F-15 and Su-35 without having to get close and maneuver with them.

The F-22 provides "first-look, first-shot, first-kill" transformational air dominance capability for the 21st Century - it can see the enemy first while avoiding detection itself.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The entire philosophy behind the F-22 was “see first, shoot first, kill first” in an effort to avoid the type of maneuvering fight that had previously been the norm in air to air combat.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Engineer]

I think we have to agree to disagree... Not all AESA's are made equal just like NOT all PESA's are made equal. IRBIS-E is a very very good PESA and until I know more of the technical specifics of the particualr AESA it is compared to I cannot categorically say for a fact that just because it is an AESA it is automatically better than IRBIS-E in detection, range, tracking etc etc...

Now will the odds be in favor of the AESA? sure.. but will I bet my first born on it? No!

Your argument doesn't work, since my original statement involves a technological comparison of AESA to PESA, not a comparison between specific set of radars. So far, all you have done is attempted to change the comparison into something else, vaguely refer to technical specifics, while providing no technical specfics yourself.

The best method is to take preferences of air forces at face value. Until data shows otherwise, one cannot say PESA is equivalent or superior to AESA.