so new radar radome has a pitot tube? uhhh I thought Chinese AESA don't have it any more...
also, was the color adjusted? was the flight suit too green? i thought it was more darker kind of green
China Flanker Thread II
- Thread starter sumdud
- Start date
- Status
also, was the color adjusted? was the flight suit too green? i thought it was more darker kind of green
Not on the J-16 which we know has AESA. The J-11BG (which many think has AESA) has a pitot on the nose cone point, however this doesn’t preclude the use of AESA (see F-16V).
J-11BG since it first emerged a year or more ago has long been confirmed to have a pitot/air data probe on its tip.
Other AESA/ESA equipped fighters like J-16, J-10B/C, J-20 etc do not have a probe on its radome tip.
The presence of an air data probe on the tip of the radome for J-11BG simply suggests to me that they did choose to redesign the configuration of the air data probe architecture as part of the upgrade for the aircraft, which may have necessitated a slightly more extensive bit of work compared to the avionics enhancements they did.
OTOH, if we look at other Flanker variants with AESAs like J-16, J-15D/16D, J-11D they actually have additional redesigned air data probes elsewhere on the sides of the nose which the J-11B/J-11A/Su-27.
That is to say -- the fact that new AESA equipped fighters lack air data probes on the tip of their radomes is likely just a reflection of them consciously choosing to relocate the air data probe elsewhere as part of the design/redesign choices for those given aircraft.
But the presence or lack of presence of an air data probe on the tip of the radome should not technically have any bearing on whether the radome itself hosts an AESA or not.
I made this a while ago to demonstrate, specifically relevant for the J-11BG part.
Relocation of air data probes implies going back to flight testing of the existing type so that flight computer behaves correctly during all flight regimes along with the different data input coming from a relocated probe.
They do such things on a new type because they do modifications that certainly implies modifications on flights regimes (mass distribution, airframe modifications, etc). Which is superfluous on a avionics update for an existing type.
J-11 is a fighter based on the original Su-27SK, whereas the J-16 is a striker structurally comparable to the Su-30MKK.
Even the Su-30MKK was a fighter first, striker second when China first imported them since in the early 2000s they were the only fighters in China capable of launching active radar guided AA missiles. Similarly, the J-16 will occupy the top heavy fighter niche until there are enough J-20s to supplant them in this role.
- Status