A-10 doesnt even play the same role as JH-7...
there is definitely a need for stealth design, better engines and better electronics, which means a completely new aircraft.
China Flanker Thread II
- Thread starter sumdud
- Start date
- Status
A-10 doesnt even play the same role as JH-7...
there is definitely a need for stealth design, better engines and better electronics, which means a completely new aircraft.
Why? There are no circumstance in the next 20 years where I can imagine China will need a dedicated deep strike attack asset (primarily based on China's projected role, which could change of course), which means stealth isn't a must (especially with the J-XX developing on the side). Meanwhile, you can upgrade the engines and avionics/electronics without replacing the airframe.
Right now the JH-7A fulfills a role similar to the A-10 (though not quite as specialized) as an attack aircraft while simultaneously performing the role of a naval strike platform. The multi-role attack niche already seems to be filled in by the BS variants of the J-11 and the J-10 for the PLAAF and the supposed "Naval Flanker" for the PLAN. Developing and producing a new aircraft when you don't need anything better is a senseless waste of money.
for close air support is the role of Q-5...so yeah China has plenty of room to improve there but that's less urgent cuz the PLA's artillery is really good and J-10 can help reduce the pressure as well.
but JH-7 might be needed for both anti-aircraft carrier missions and long range bombing missions, which means stealth is highly recommended.
Do you think china has the resources for two stealth plane projects (if it has any at all)?????
The more important question is why China would even need long range bombing capabilities beyond what the JH-7 offers in the next few years. It's just not a question of what capabilities your military has, but what capabilities it will end up needing. China's interests have not spread far enough around the globe to the point where it needs to begin developing those capabilities. To develop them prematurely is a waste of money, and hurts their ability to invest in better technologies in the future. Does this mean the PLAAF and the PLAN doesn't need to something better than the JH-7 eventually? Of course not, but the JH-7 performs the role it's designed for perfectly fine, and there's no need for any capabilities beyond that which some other project in development isn't already filling in for.
I don't see how anti-aircraft carrier missions will need stealth. My understanding is that because of protection from a carrier group, most of anti-aircraft carrier missions will occur WVR, where stealth is much less useful.
EDIT: A Mod should probably move this back and forth to the JH-7 topic, since we should be discussing Chinese Flanker variants right now.
Last edited:
No the A-10 is used as close range encounters, while the JH-7A is used basically right now as either standoff platform or precision strike. Remember the A-10 was built in mind as an extreme low close encounter platform that would experiance signifcant fire, thats why its built with so much armour and redesigned powerplant placement, JH-7 isn't built for the same purpose.
Actually in short, we can deduce that the J-11BS or whatever variant is, it is a heavy fighter in the same class as the US F-15 fighters. The J-10 as a lighter fighter in the same class as the US F-16 fighters, while the JH-7A is in the same class as the Tornado or Su-25.
I don't think China had any equivalent to the A-10 though.
In future if the J-10 was actually being developed into carrier borne fighters I would imagine that it was in the same class as the Super Hornets (F-18).
I don't think China had any equivalent to the A-10 though.
In future if the J-10 was actually being developed into carrier borne fighters I would imagine that it was in the same class as the Super Hornets (F-18).
Right, but I was primarily talking about how attack fighters in general face fewer performance pressures which require completely new airframes. It's just the A-10 was the first to come to my mind. In any case, the broader point was that the JH-7 fulfills its role just fine for the moment, no more, no less, and therefore doesn't need to be replaced.
China doesnt have to run two stealth projects at once, not even the US can do that. the current stealth project will give it enogh experience to develop one that is suitable for long range attack missions. if i were China i'd start at least the preliminary research on what task i want this aircraft to perform. China is due to get something to replace JH-7 gradually 20 years later.
and if you wanna prove that China does not have a stealth fighter program you should do it in that particular thread. cheap shots wont work on me.
Last edited:
yeah someone should move this...
but the Chinese geopolitical strategists said that China's goal is to maintain superiority to as far as guam. JH-7 doesnt even hit that far. so PLAAF will need AC and a new fighter-bomber to achieve that power projection.
- Status