CHW-13 looks even better, I will update my web page, thanks!
China Flanker Thread III (land based, exclude J-15)
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
My point is money. If you buy fewer J-16's then there is more money for better and more equipment around the plane like pods, PGM's, missile's and better HMS. The PLA has always planned for a short war under high tech conditions. Maybe after Ukraine China needs to plan for a longer war. And you will need more munitions to fight that longer war. And I also feel that more money should go to the ground forces that is not getting the same attention as the air force and navy.
And do you really need that many J-16's when you have the J-20 and the J-35 is around the corner.
If you plan for a long war but get a short war, no problems.
But if you plan for a short war and you get a long war, Big problems!
Last edited:
It's a false tradeoff.
If your argument is for procuring and stocking more PGMs and munition, you made a very good point. But I guess nobody would argue against that.
If you're suggesting that China should cut down procuring more J-16 in order to save money for more PGMs and munition, well, I must say it sounds silly. China is not at that point yet - i.e., sacrificing one vital objective in order to achieve another, well, far from that point.
I'm not sure where your financial concerns are coming from? I suggest you read my previous post again and understand the structure of the PLA's R&D and procurement process, which is completely different from Western, and especially US, systems.
In short, while the PLA does take some final response to the development of most weapons, the costs are not actually borne by the PLA itself, so even if all the money spent on J-16 procurement was cut, that money is completely unrelated and would not be spent on the development and production of some pods, missiles etc. That's why I said it was completely irrelevant before.
Also, for most missiles, pods or large munitions, the J-16 is the best platform China has right now because it has no stealth concern and can be carried externally, just like the F-15E/EX and B-1B/B-52 are currently doing.
Most importantly, China's economy is still in a rapid expansion cycle. Although the GDP figures may not be as dazzling as in previous years, look at its relative position to other major economies, China is still almost the sole powerhouse in the world. So if the US is not worried about its approximately 3.7% of GDP being spent on the military, why should China's 1.7% be a problem? China has much more new money that could be pumped into the system, just like as it is at the moment, while almost all countries are suffering, China itself has far more monetary policies in reserve compared to all other major economies.
YES, a lot, you always need aircrafts to do dirty works and carry like 1000kg or cluster bombs, not to mention J-16D, it will cost much more if you lose one J-20 or J-35 in this kind of task.
It has nothing to do with long ware or short war, like I said before in my previous post, you can't judge PLA through Russian and their performance at Ukraine. PLA and Russian has completely different structure, system and reserves at the moment, PLA is more logistically oriented, the logistical capability of a Russian BTG is nothing compared to a PLA's brigade, these two are not even in the same order of magnitude for comparision in my opinion.
The PLA has far more high-tech equipment and smart weapons, such as new missiles, guided bombs, tactical ballistic missiles, hypersonic weapons. The J-20 has probably produced around 70 units this year, the Su-57 is a year ahead of the J-20 and now has more than 5 units in service in total?
Last edited:
SinoSoldier
Colonel
I'm going to actually count this by hand. I'll do a few columns each day so it might take over a week or so before I can put down a number.
I counted 41 vertical rows in total and counted the first 20 rows starting from the left and got 889. Row 21 has 57 so that's 889x2+57=1778
I dunno if I'm correct though.
It doesn't matter how you make the calculation every dollar/yuan spend on a J-16 or anything else is a dollar/yuan you can't spend on something else. Spending freely on the military is exactly what got the Soviet Union and America in trouble. China should avoid that mistake.
The J-16 although a good plane is already outdated compared to what China already has in the J-20 or what is coming down the pipeline like the J-35, H-20 and the J-20 Loyal Wingman. If the Loyal Wingman program succeed then the question can be asked just how many manned fighter does a air force need. And its also outdated compared to what the opponent has like the F-22 and the F-35. Why spend so much money on something that is already outdated.
I'm in favour to have a full scale production of the J-16 in the short run to get rid of the J-7's and the J-8's. The fact that those planes are still in the inventory in 2022 is a joke. Those planes in a shooting war will be nothing more than target practice for the enemy. But after that the JH-7A, SU-27SK, J-11A, J-10A and the SU-3MKK all needs to be replaced but those can be done at a slower rate since those platforms are not as badly outdated as the J-7 and J-8.
And you can deliver a 1000kg bomb or other ordnance with much cheaper and less risky ways than sending in a J-16. Like suicide drones, cruise missile's and short range ballistic missile's or 300mm rockets from platforms like the PHL-16 MLRS.
Last edited:
It’s not as if China spends a high percentage of its GDP on military? Neither are they strapped for cash to the extent that they can’t both procure munition AND buy jets.
That loyal wingman is a BIG, BIG if, and a multirole fighter jet doesn’t have to be able to go toe to toe with things like F22 and F35 in every aspect to be useful. And apparently PLAAF is spending money on procuring large numbers of J16 because it’s what they need right now: good avionics, large payload and combat range, excellent multirole capabilities, all at arguably a lower procurement cost and a much lower operational cost than the J-20.
I’m not sure where you got the idea that J-7 and J-8 in this day and age are supposed to go into a shooting war, it’s not as if each theatre doesn’t have a plethora of advanced platforms? Those old jets are there mainly to make sure that there’s a certain number of aircrafts in the fleet and that pilots will have something to actually fly. This is far from ideal and yes PLAAF does still have quite a lot of catching up to do in that regard (getting rid of older jets and procuring new ones), but that in no way means these older airframes are the backbone or are actually supposed to go fight any major adversary. Regarding the older flankers and JH-7, those are already out of their depth in 2022, they need to go as well, and since currently there’s an operating J-20 production line as well as an operational J-16 production line I see absolutely no reason not to use both to replace older airframes? Especially the units operating JH-7 and su-30s will have already had roles regarding surface targets, using J-16 to replace whatever they were flying makes a lot of sense.
Yes but against adversaries with actually capable and well-established anti-air systems (which is to say almost everybody around China) having a platform able to perform SEAD and strike high-value targets with guided munitions is still very important. Artillery and rocket artillery are far less maneuverable and flexible, ballistic missiles even less so and are expensive as hell, suicide drones are useful but in certain scenarios, try slapping advanced guidance systems and/or large warheads on them and you essentially get a cruise missile, again expensive. Also if you haven’t noticed everything listed above have little to no ability to target small, moving and/or time sensitive targets and are limited in their ability to search for targets themselves. These are the exact areas that the Air Force flourishes——and in the case of the PLAAF——especially an advanced multirole jet with large payload and range, AKA J-16. Mind you the niche for multirole jets aren’t going away any time soon, and for the time being and foreseeable future the J-16 still has an advantage in terms of loadout flexibility and operation costs over stealth fighters like J20.
For the record I’m not saying they should produce the J-16 indefinitely, just that it is still very much relevant now and in the near future, and there’s a substantial need for it both in terms of getting old jets out of service and in terms of fighting possible adversaries
lcloo
Captain
Agreed.
No, J16 is not out-dated in strike fighter jet role since its eletronic has been updated and its strike weapon laod capacity is unmatchd by other strike fighter jets in PLAAF, except the H6K bomber (which is not a strike fighter). You should study why B-52 bombers are still in service today and will remain in service into 2030. And J20 is not a strike fighter.
J20B and strike role variant loyal wingman are not yet in service. J16 production may be wind down only after J20B + loyal wingman are in mass production in future. Also comparing J16 strike fighter against air superiority fighters like F-22 is like comparing orange vs apple.
Using J16 strike fighter comparing with point defense J7 (now mostly transferred to Aviation university training roles) and aerial recon roled J8 is againt like comparing a bus and a dump truck (apple vs orange). J7 single seat trainer and recon J8 are not going into shooting war with any one.
1000Kg bomb is too heavy and extremely destructive vs the relatively small explosives carried by suicide drones. And dumb iron bombs are cheap and used normally against areas/targets not heavily defended by SAM.
Dumb iron bombs, suicide drones, SRBM and rockets each have different targets, to be deployed in different situations, and also used by different branches of PLA armed forces. They supplement each other rather than excluding each other. It is like differences in snipper rifle, assault rifles, sub-machine guns, grenade launchers, heavy machine guns etc, they each have different roles.
Last edited:
none sense, what brought soviet and US to their knees were not purely military, the cause are much more complex, the reasons were much more complex and more due to socio-economic problems, besides, although the United States is now in decline, its military spending compared to its total GDP is still far below the level of the Soviet Union.
So ...... Just because the US has F-22 and F-35, China doesn't need to deal with lesser threats like the F-15EX/F-16/Arleigh Burke and various surface targets? Wouldn't it cost more if you did it with just the J-20? Aren't you the one who keeps mentioning economic reasons?
Do you know how many J-7s/J-8s are still in service? What are they being used for?
Also, do you know how many JH-7A, SU-27SK, J-11A, J-10A and SU-3MKK the PLA has? Again, you keep mentioning economic reasons, so tell me, how much would it cost to replace all of these with J-20s? Who will pay the extra cost?
More importantly, do you know how many J-20s are produced each year? What will the PLA do if the number of aircrafts that need to be retired exceeds the production of J-20s? Reduce the size of the PLA air force and send the pilots home?
OK .... Wow ...... First of all, where is it? Your so called 1000kg suicide drone.
Secondly, do you know why people are interested in loitering munition these days? It's because suicide drones are actually very expensive, especially those long-range drones that carries heavy payload, so get your facts straight before you say that.
A 1000kg suicide drone with capable of breaking through modern air defences (such as a US carrier group) effectively, would cost at least millions, and what makes you think cruise missiles are cheap? Just because the US uses a lot of Tomahawk, doesn't mean it's cheap and effective against modern air defences. The new AGM-158C isn't cheap at all.