China Flanker Thread II

[Air Force Brat]

Agreed. This is why the Japanese media made a huge deal out of the supposed "painting" of a Japanese patrol aircraft by a Chinese warship's fire-control radar.

Also any vessels conducting combat patrols in the area are likely to have a tail, its just the law of the jungle, the submarine being the ultimate Ninja, where did he come from, and where did he go???? Guys do love these games of cat and mouse, most incidents are the result of "overplaying your hand"....so the Flankers will not paint anybody, when you light someone up, that is a "physical threat", you are no longer talking, you are making your presence known, if you intend to shoot, you do so simultaneously with launch following the firing solution, if you are sending a "message", you must be prepared to fight if the other fellow calls your bluff....stuff of stories, books, movies, and "real trouble"..... brat

 

[thunderchief]

Maybe the anology is like a police officer patrolling a street\neighbourhood fully armed, but is he not allowed to simply point their guns on anyone? Unless the person is a prime suspects of a crime or showing aggressive behaviours on the street or involve in criminal activities.

Base on this analogy I would say, an unidentified aircraft suspected of carrying firearms (carrying missiles), entering the area where the police officer is patrolling (eg. SU-30s) warranted the police officer (SU-30s) to take out their guns and aim at the intruders\suspect of criminal activites for behaving in aggresive behaviours (intruding in a defensive zone) and may involve in criminal activities (eg. like spying, threatening)

Analogy with police officer is always bad when you are talking about international airspace, because by the international law , nobody is warranted to be a cop there .

Better analogy would be neighborhood watch . You live in a rough neighborhood , various people move trough your street , some of them could be criminals . Now street is a public place and you cannot just stop and frisk someone . You could ask them politely to identify themselves . They could refuse but you are not allowed to take any action until they actually trespass into somebody's property or start breaking laws .

 

[usaf0314]

combat load on SU-30MKK

 

[thunderchief]

combat load on SU-30MKK

Is that thing on the wingtip Sorbtsiya ECM pod or some Chinese equivalent ?

 

[bd popeye]

Gentlemen, please discuss the J-15 Flying Shark in the thread below. Thank you!


J-15 Carrier Multirole Fighter thread

bd popeye super moderator

 

[Deino]

Even if this is a J-15 image in comparison to a J-11A, does anyone know for what missile this new huge pylon under both the inner wing-pylons as well as the ones under the intake trunks are for ???

They are very much different to the PL-12-pylons !

Deino

 

[Hyperwarp]

Even if this is a J-15 image in comparison to a J-11A, does anyone know for what missile this new huge pylon under both the inner wing-pylons as well as the ones under the intake trunks are for ???

They are very much different to the PL-12-pylons !

Deino

Since that is a J-15, I suspect they are for anti-ship missiles (YJ-83K? KD-88?). You could cross check with JH-7A carrying YJ-XX and even the H-6 carrying the YJ-12.

e.g. -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Deino]

Since that is a J-15, I suspect they are for anti-ship missiles (YJ-83K? KD-88?). You could cross check with JH-7A carrying YJ-XX and even the H-6 carrying the YJ-12.

e.g. -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yes, I had a similar idea and You are correct, looks similar (albeit not the same; the front is different) to the YJ-83K-plyon. However I was a bit surprised to see the same pylon also under the intakes since I thought that the YJ-83K is simply too large and heavy for that location (even if Kh-31 = YJ-91 can be carried on that station).

Regarding the new YJ-12 I'm almost sure this monster is way too large for a Flanker at least under the wing and intakes.

Deino

 

[Hyperwarp]

Yes, I had a similar idea and You are correct, looks similar (albeit not the same; the front is different) to the YJ-83K-plyon. However I was a bit surprised to see the same pylon also under the intakes since I thought that the YJ-83K is simply too large and heavy for that location (even if Kh-31 = YJ-91 can be carried on that station).

Regarding the new YJ-12 I'm almost sure this monster is way too large for a Flanker at least under the wing and intakes.

Deino

Yes, pylons under the intake won't be able to carry the YJ-83K/KD-88 unless there is a folding fin versions. Many land base flankers can carry the Kh-31 under the intake -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

PS:

On second thought, maybe they could squeeze in a modified YJ-83 variant with smaller fins. Here is the Su-35 carrying

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. Here is a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blitzo]

I'm not sure, i think it could potentially hold YJ-83K even if it isn't modified. The YJ-83K isn't actually that big of a missile compared to the flanker.

---


Let's look at the maths of this

wingspan of YJ-83K is 1220mm, diameter is 360mm, and the difference is 860mm. 860mm/2 is 430mm, so 430mm is the length of the overall missile's entire wingspan without the fuselage diameter. However, the missile sits on the pylon with the missile rotated at a "45 degree" angle to the ground, so the distance we are interested in is sin45*430mm = 304mm
So 304mm is the distance from the missiles body to the bottom of the 45 degree tilted missile wingspan.
360mm is the diameter of the actual missile.

Therefore, 304mm + 360mm = 664mm is the minimum height that the pylon much allow the missile to hang on + a height for safety clearance.

So the question is, does the pylon in Deino's picture look like there is 664mm of height + some safety clearance height as well?