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

[...........]

Isn't the j11bg upgraded with aesa radar, engine and flight system similar to J16 so that any missle J16 from Pl10 to 17can carry j11bg can too. Why would they give a whole different designation Just for a antenna upgrade makes no sense That rumor sounds like straight bs

 

[Blitzo]

Isn't the j11bg upgraded with aesa radar, engine and flight system similar to J16 so that any missle J16 from Pl10 to 17can carry j11bg can too. Why would they give a whole different designation Just for a antenna upgrade makes no sense That rumor sounds like straight bs

The upgrade given to J-11BG is likely a little bit more than just an antennae upgrade in isolation; some minor other avionics likely have occurred as well.

However it is also well established that J-11BG's overall scale of upgrade and capability is far less deep/extensive than say, J-10C or J-16 relative to their original baseline variants.


Putting it another way, no, J-11BG is not similar to J-16, it is quite a bit less sophisticated and less capable.


Whether J-11BG can carry PL-15 or PL-17 is a different question.

 

[Blitzo]

This is getting into orbat discussions again, which I note tends to be taken extravagantly down this course by @AndrewS, often in context of "PRC needs XYZ number to meet ABC capability" in a manner that takes it as granted.

Various posts deleted.

The number of Flankers to be procured is within discussion of this thread, but you should actively try to avoid expanding the discussion into general larger scale orbat.
Members that have been here for a few years should know by now which types of posts and sentences tend to lead down to off topic posts.

 

[ougoah]

The upgrade given to J-11BG is likely a little bit more than just an antennae upgrade in isolation; some minor other avionics likely have occurred as well.

However it is also well established that J-11BG's overall scale of upgrade and capability is far less deep/extensive than say, J-10C or J-16 relative to their original baseline variants.


Putting it another way, no, J-11BG is not similar to J-16, it is quite a bit less sophisticated and less capable.

There is no doubt whatever the extent of J-11BG upgrade, it is in no way a substitute for the J-16. It may be a worthy alternative if it is able to shoot PL-17s. This is without a doubt one of the primary strength and utility of J-16.

Whether J-11BG can carry PL-15 or PL-17 is a different question.

I think a BG upgrade needs to include PL-15 and PL-17 compatibility to convert the J-11B into a relevant platform in the 2020s and 2030s.

Without these two primary weapons which btw are actually in the process of being succeeded if not already succeeded in the case of PL-15, there is little point to any J-11BG upgrade outside of swapping Al-31 with domestic engines. These missiles already represent mainstays in PLAAF in the last few years. In the case of PL-15, a mature close to/ at retirement missile (production wise). What usefulness would the BG platform have if it can't even use these missiles and still have up to 20 years of airframe life left. PL-16 and PL-17 would have long been replaced by then.

 

[Blitzo]

There is no doubt whatever the extent of J-11BG upgrade, it is in no way a substitute for the J-16. It may be a worthy alternative if it is able to shoot PL-17s. This is without a doubt one of the primary strength and utility of J-16.



I think a BG upgrade needs to include PL-15 and PL-17 compatibility to convert the J-11B into a relevant platform in the 2020s and 2030s.

Without these two primary weapons which btw are actually in the process of being succeeded if not already succeeded in the case of PL-15, there is little point to any J-11BG upgrade outside of swapping Al-31 with domestic engines. These missiles already represent mainstays in PLAAF in the last few years. In the case of PL-15, a mature close to/ at retirement missile (production wise). What usefulness would the BG platform have if it can't even use these missiles and still have up to 20 years of airframe life left. PL-16 and PL-17 would have long been replaced by then.

Well, if the role of J-11BG as an upgrade isn't to make it a "relevant platform" but rather to "keep it from becoming fully obsolete" then not possessing the ability to guide PL-15/16 or PL-17 could make sense.

It would be relegated essentially as a homeland defense/air policing platform with only moderate A2A capabilities for the 2020s/2030s.


All of which is to say -- we still do not actually know if J-11BG is capable of accommodating PL-15/16/17, however we shouldn't take it for granted that it is capable of doing so, and should instead await either photographic evidence, or await the Chinese language side to give indicators.

 

[antiterror13]

India's desire to upgrade the Su-30MKI to "Super 30" or whatever the nickname is is basically similar to what China's already been doing with the J-11B.

The Su-30MKI is a more flexible multirole fighter compared to the air superiority focused J-11B but for air superiority alone, the J-11B would hold its own against MKI. The MKI as it is cannot hope to touch a 4.5 gen in most circumstances. IAF's support network (ground air and space based ISR, comms and EW) is also atrocious - low in numbers, backwards in modernity and a hodgepodge of Israeli, French, Russian and Indian hardware and software.

With BG upgrade for J-11B, it's giving PLAAF ~200 units of 4.5 gen level fighters on the cheap and doesn't really take away much operational availability while the upgrade is being performed.

Do you have any "rumour" of the cost replacing to WS-10s and upgrading to BG level?

 

[ougoah]

Well, if the role of J-11BG as an upgrade isn't to make it a "relevant platform" but rather to "keep it from becoming fully obsolete" then not possessing the ability to guide PL-15/16 or PL-17 could make sense.

It would be relegated essentially as a homeland defense/air policing platform with only moderate A2A capabilities for the 2020s/2030s.


All of which is to say -- we still do not actually know if J-11BG is capable of accommodating PL-15/16/17, however we shouldn't take it for granted that it is capable of doing so, and should instead await either photographic evidence, or await the Chinese language side to give indicators.

No it's not taken for granted that it is capable of doing so but based on requirements we can expect of even homeland defense/ air policing into the 2030s, I'd say it's fine to infer what is likely required for the next decade of service. Maybe the upgrades are not worth the additional cost but PL-15/16 and PL-17 compatibility certainly takes care of J-11BG relevance until the platform's retirement.

Do you have any "rumour" of the cost replacing to WS-10s and upgrading to BG level?

Nope.

 

[Blitzo]

No it's not taken for granted that it is capable of doing so but based on requirements we can expect of even homeland defense/ air policing into the 2030s, I'd say it's fine to infer what is likely required for the next decade of service. Maybe the upgrades are not worth the additional cost but PL-15/16 and PL-17 compatibility certainly takes care of J-11BG relevance until the platform's retirement.

What you are writing is somewhat taking for granted that "PL-15/16" is "likely required" for the next decade of service in the "homeland defense/air policing role into the 2030s".

Whereas IMO, based on requirements, it is absolutely plausible that J-11BG may not be deemed worthy to be an upgrade worth giving PL-15/16 for. After all, it wasn't that long ago that the PLA still had large inventories of late model J-7 family aircraft in service lacking any BVR capability at all (which was a commensurate equal to today's PL-15/16/17). If J-7Es can fly into the 2000s and 2010s with only IR SRAAMs as their most capable A2A weapon, it's not out of the question that J-11BGs might fly into the 2020s and 2030s with PL-12 variants as their most capable A2A weapon.

So it is absolutely within the realm of possibility that J-11BG is not intended to give these aircraft genuine 4.5th generation capabilities but rather just to warm them over as "slightly improved" 4th generation.

Of course, it is also equally possible that J-11BG does have PL-15/16/17 capability but we just have yet to see it or read about it.


The problem is basically that it is equally reasonable for J-11BG to lack PL-15/16/17 compatibility, and also equally reasonable for J-11BG to have PL-15/16/17 compatibility.

 

[MeiouHades]

If the J-11BG has indeed received comprehensive avionics upgrades (essentially a J-16-lite, for the lack of a better term, or maybe the canceled J-11D without changes to the airframe), what utility does it really have? In a peer-to-peer conflict, say against the US Air Force, China already has more than enough 5th gens and 4.5 gens with J-20/J-35/J-16s to sling long range AAMs. The only utility I see is perhaps against lower threat adversaries (India, for instance, doesn't need to be countered with J-20s. J-11BGs and J-10Cs should be more than enough to neutralize the IAF), or some small conflict in SE Asia, or maybe just homeland security/defense (does China not have a "National Guard" of its own yet? Why not?). There aren't a whole lot of areas where a J-11BG would be used honestly.

 

[mack8]

The americans are upgrading old F-15, F-16 and F-18 with AESA, new electronics and weapons, China not doing same with the newer J-11B and J-10A would be criminal negligence to say the least. Some months back we were going back and forth about J-15 not having PL-15 until PLANAF indulged us. PL-15 is even available on JF-17 so why not on J-11BG? A J-11BG with J-16 AESA and electronics, or perhaps more likely derived from those on J-11D, would actually be a bit better air to air kinematically because it's probably a bit lighter and less draggy.