China Flanker Thread III (land based, exclude J-15)

[by78]

Making wheels for Flankers.

 

[GOODTREE]

I don't want to offend him, but he is claiming a lot and much of his claims are too often just too positive & exaggerated!

Such a high number does not fit to the number of operational units.

By the way, again an unnamed J-16 brigade even more so since I don't remember a J-16 unit operating from an air base featuring HAS and also I don't know the unit badge!

Edit via @foolsball: "26th AB, Huizhou Pingtan"

(Images via @太湖军I名 from Weibo)

View attachment 144976View attachment 144975View attachment 144974View attachment 144973

According to the writing on the wall in the last picture, this is the unit stationed in Huizhou named “剑锋劲旅“.
The brigade's ”brigade soul“ is “剑锋所指、所向披靡”. (writing on the wall)
Here's a little news article about it:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[siegecrossbow]

The problem for China MIC exports to Russia is that there are few items Russia can buy without undermining its commitment to self-sufficiency. China can buy a few S-400 batteries or a few dozen Su-35s without serious implications for its own MIC objectives (indeed, many would argue that those acquisitions are ultimately intended to benefit China's own MIC). Russia's defence-industrial situation is much more precariously balanced on the edge of sustainable self-sufficiency in terms of research, development, supply and demand. Russia's post-Cold War issues in the development and production of modern systems are fundamentally problems of long-term demand: the orders just weren't there to keep the factories and assembly lines running, maintaining the skilled workforces, let alone investing in tools enabling modern production techniques. Considerable effort was made to preserve high-level expertise in strategically critical fields such as aerospace, nuclear submarines and nuclear forces and we have seen both the impressive fruits and real limitations of those efforts. In a very real sense, any order from China is an order that doesn't go to maintaining Russia's own MIC. You are trading off short-term capability benefits against long-term strategic autonomy objectives, and that is a trade-off that will rarely survive scrutiny, and almost certainly would not do so in the context of future PLA combat aircraft.

That isn't to say that all such efforts are futile, however. One opportunity is in the short-term provision of items that are experiencing temporarily elevated levels of demand, such as all equipment and munitions that Russia is chewing through in Ukraine. For better or worse, such opportunities have been largely foreclosed by China's decision not to directly support Russia in that conflict. Another opportunity is in relation to small-scale procurement of specialized capabilities that are within Russia's technological grasp, but are simply uneconomical to pursue, as with the French use of American E-2D Hawkeye for carrier-based AEW. France could build their own system, but does it make sense to do so? But the most compelling opportunities for cooperation would be those that actually align with and reinforce Russia's long-term MIC objectives. Despite vociferous criticism from Russian nationalists, that's really what the now abandoned Mistral deal with France was about. The ships were the price to be paid for French assistance in rejuvenating Russia's naval shipbuilding sector with modern production methods. Needless to say, China too has a lot to offer Russia in the art of building stuff better. Of course, any such arrangements would have to work for China as well.

Can we please stick to the topic? Any Russian fighter is irrelevant and the RuAF will unlikely ever purchase a Chinese Ffghter.

I’m carrying on the convo in a more relevant thread.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Otter claimed that Russians desperately sought Sino-Russian cooperation on flankers. Given the context it seemed like they wanted upgrades to radar/avionics.

 

[Lethe]

Otter claimed that Russians desperately sought Sino-Russian cooperation on flankers. Given the context it seemed like they wanted upgrades to radar/avionics.

I wonder if this could be as simple as substitutions for formerly western-sourced components that are now difficult to come by, or if we are talking more at the level of systems. Improving export competitiveness for certain clients sensitive to such things (Iran?) could be one motivation.

A hypothetical situation whereby a Chinese electronic component or system outperforms its Russian equivalent by ~40% would seem insufficient to motivate a switch. If there is path to improving the performance of the domestic system, even if it is a protracted one, that would seem preferable in most cases to importing the superior Chinese solution at the potential cost of undermining those domestic pathways going forward. The exceptions would be if the domestic manufacturers and upstream research institutes are fully utilised regardless and further expansion is not possible or desirable, or if there are roadblocks in enabling technologies such that further linear improvements to "close the gap" are not possible.

 

[Wrought]

I wonder if this could be as simple as substitutions for formerly western-sourced components that are now difficult to come by, or if we are talking more at the level of systems. Improving export competitiveness for certain clients sensitive to such things (Iran?) could be one motivation.

A hypothetical situation whereby a Chinese electronic component or system outperforms its Russian equivalent by ~40% would seem insufficient to motivate a switch. If there is path to improving the performance of the domestic system, even if it is a protracted one, that would seem preferable in most cases to importing the superior Chinese solution at the potential cost of undermining those domestic pathways going forward. The exceptions would be if the domestic manufacturers and upstream research institutes are fully utilised regardless and further expansion is not possible or desirable, or if there are roadblocks in enabling technologies such that further linear improvements to "close the gap" are not possible.

Lots of plausible explanations, but not enough information to credibly extrapolate from.

 

[Deino]

Crosspost from the J-20 thread:

J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII

J-20

www.sinodefenceforum.com

Another hint towards the 19th AB!

 

[SinoAmericanCW]

Scramble also suggests that it's the 19th AB.

 

[symplectic]

Scramble also suggests that it's the 19th AB.
View attachment 145317

I think the last word should be Yanqing, not Janqing. There is no way to prononce "Janqing" in mainland China standard Pinyin system.

 

[Deino]

Interesting ... a former PLAN Naval Aviation Su-30MK2 carrying still a NA H1004001 serial number but being repainted with the standard PLAAF colour scheme. Unfortunately it lost the eagle tail art!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Does anyone have the original full-sized image?

 

[Deino]

Cool image of a modernised J-11BG assigned to an ETC Brigade - as such most likely the 95th Air Brigade based at Lianyungang, Baitabu AP - carrying a KL700B ECM-pod and a single inert PL-10 AAM.

(Image via @央广军事 from Weibo)