My understanding is, and on Huitong’s site, the J-16 is a strike platform, primarily.What's the point of iterating on the J-11 when the J-16 exists?
My understanding is, and on Huitong’s site, the J-16 is a strike platform, primarily.What's the point of iterating on the J-11 when the J-16 exists?
that is not necessarily the case from what we've seen tho. Most of the brigades flying the J-16 were those mainly dealing with air-to-air combat before getting the J-16, and we've seen (based on publically released photos at least) J-16 carrying A2A payload much more often than striking payloads. To date we have only a handful of photos of J-16 with KD-88 and YJ-83, and virtually none in terms of guided bombs. To be sure as a twin-seat multirole fighter the J-16 can pefrorm strike duties, and it is most likely part of the training, I just don't think that based on public information we can say that currently the J-16 is "primiarily" a strike platform, not in the way of the jets we primirarily think of fitting that role (F-15E, SU-34, etc) at least.My understanding is, and on Huitong’s site, the J-16 is a strike platform, primarily.
It’s a highly capable multirole workhorse.The J-16 is the latest replacement for the Su-30MKK and that was primarily an air to air platform.
Even if it also has strike capabilities.
that is not necessarily the case from what we've seen tho. Most of the brigades flying the J-16 were those mainly dealing with air-to-air combat before getting the J-16, and we've seen (based on publically released photos at least) J-16 carrying A2A payload much more often than striking payloads. To date we have only a handful of photos of J-16 with KD-88 and YJ-83, and virtually none in terms of guided bombs. To be sure as a twin-seat multirole fighter the J-16 can pefrorm strike duties, and it is most likely part of the training, I just don't think that based on public information we can say that currently the J-16 is "primiarily" a strike platform, not in the way of the jets we primirarily think of fitting that role (F-15E, SU-34, etc) at least.
My personal take is that J-16 will gradually lean more toward a strike role throughout its service life, especially as more 5th gen fighters enter service and it is less needed as an advanced air-to-air platform, but currently its main duty is air superority , with ground attack and striking (and potentially anti-ship) as a secondary role.
do we know if this PL21 is already in service?Even later on it will serve as an AA missile truck for PLAAF. Load it up with 6 PL-21s and pick AWACS off at 300KM.
J-11/A really were very much like the original Su-27s except for ability to fire R-77s and maybe some minor avionics upgrade or using more composites. I think they are going to start retiring them in the next few years. J-11B is the major change to use mostly domestic systems and utilize all of China's AAMs. They are the first ones to get WS-10 series engine. Their ground attack capabilities is probably limited like J-10A.
I think all the work devoted to "J-11D" is really to test out the subsystems needed to eventually upgrade J-11B to using more modern avionics and missiles. It really doesn't make sense to produce pure air superiority version of J-11s at this point. Since there is still a lot of time left in the air frame, it makes sense to keep them around probably into the 2030s. It's worth upgrading all of them to more modern standard. J-11Ds don't make a lot of sense when J-16 program has been such a success. Since flankers future in PLA is a multi-role aircraft, two seat versions make a lot more sense than single seaters. A lot of the attack duties for PLAAF/PLANAF still fall on the shoulders of JH-7/A. Over time, they will start retiring the original JH-7s first and followed by JH-7As. That along with the increasing numbers of J-20s point to a transition of J-16s to more attacking roles. They will be around until probably 2040s at least. After all, USAF intends to keep F-15Es around until 2050. There is no reason for PLAAF to retire J-16s sooner.