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

[Schwerter_]

If they were flying an A-10, I’d understand. But is this a realistic scenario for a Flanker? If not, it’s a waste of time. Yet it has become iconic of the PLAAF.

However, they don’t have the same restrictions towards AAMs. There has to be more to it than the 2 reasons you listed.

Furthermore , it makes for rather bad publicity as it portrays the PLAAF as a force who’s ground attack doctrine is still stuck in the 60s.

Basics training is basics training, you don’t get to be a good pilot without getting the basics of attacking and defending hammered into your head. Ground attack training using unguided munitions is exactly that, getting the very basics straight. This isn’t about realistic scenarios, think doing calculus in college versus being an engineer: math isn’t an “realistic” scenario of what you’ll do on the job, but training with it will help in numerous ways.

PLAAF may not have the same restrictions with air-to-air ammo, or they may have them. Regardless, a2a and a2g are two completely different directions and it is impossible to use the lack of censorship on one to justify the absence on the other. There may be other reasons to the ones I listed above, yes, but they still stand as valid reasons.

As for the bad rep, I don’t think PLAAF cares what people think. In fact this censorship on a2g capabilities may be intended exactly as a method to lull adversaries into an inaccurate evaluation of their capabilities.

 

[externallisting]

What's up with employing unguided rockets on a large multirole jet in 2022? Can someone explain how is that useful in training for modern age combat?

If the enemy has been degraded to the point that you can actually pull something like that off, your side has already won the war. The hard part is getting to that point, which is the sort of training they should be doing. Frankly, the fact that they continue to do this sort of training it has me concerned.

Lol you don't seem that new, but literally LoL.

It's just a thing that occurs, don't read too much into it.

 

[latenlazy]

If they were flying an A-10, I’d understand. But is this a realistic scenario for a Flanker? If not, it’s a waste of time. Yet it has become iconic of the PLAAF.

Control and precision in different flight conditions is a generalized and generalizable skill. The same maneuver for a unguided rocket attack can be used for unguided bombs. And sometimes you need those skills in a pinch because your guided weapon could have a malfunction in the field. You don’t train for 90% of the straightforward operational situations but 10% of the hard operational situations.

However, they don’t have the same restrictions towards AAMs. There has to be more to it than the 2 reasons you listed.

Who says they don’t have the same restrictions for AAMs? We saw glimpses of new AAMs in the past but we almost never know when they enter service until a few years out, and we almost never have footage of them getting fired. Photos of new missile are typically sparse for a few years before we see them being mounted and displayed in media. There are also likely improved AAMs out there from what’s in service that we don’t have pics of. And if you want a second class of weapons to validate that restrictions are in place, note that the Yu-8 YJ-12 and YJ-18 were in service for many years before we saw any footage of them.

Furthermore , it makes for rather bad publicity as it portrays the PLAAF as a force who’s ground attack doctrine is still stuck in the 60s.

Is the point of a military to have good publicity? Sometimes (often) OpSec trumps publicity. The military doesn’t exist to be a nationalist cheerleading prop…

 

[Zichan]

PLAAF may not have the same restrictions with air-to-air ammo, or they may have them. Regardless, a2a and a2g are two completely different directions and it is impossible to use the lack of censorship on one to justify the absence on the other. There may be other reasons to the ones I listed above, yes, but they still stand as valid reasons.

I mean, sure absence of evidence is not proof. However, it’s not just modern a2g munitions that are routinely absent. It’s quite rare to see a targeting pod installed. The PLAAF ground attack capability might be in fact be closer to the USAAF, however the publicly available evidence points to it being more comparable to the VKS.

As for claims that this is a deliberate deception, I don’t buy that. US/Japanese/ROC intelligence have much better sources than forum photos. They won’t be fooling anyone who actually matters.

 

[Schwerter_]

I mean, sure absence of evidence is not proof. However, it’s not just modern a2g munitions that are routinely absent. It’s quite rare to see a targeting pod installed. The PLAAF ground attack capability might be in fact be closer to the USAAF, however the publicly available evidence points to it being more comparable to the VKS.

As for claims that this is a deliberate deception, I don’t buy that. US/Japanese/ROC intelligence have much better sources than forum photos. They won’t be fooling anyone who actually matters.

According to Yankeesama (in one of their podcasts) what the outside sees does not represent all that the PLAAF is doing with a2g. If I remember correctly what he said was along the lines of “the air force basically gives the official media a handful of pictures and video clips and told them to make do, so we’re seeing heavily reused assets and a lot of unguided munitions, while in reality that isn’t the case” he went on to say that PLAAF has a lot more experience with firing and using guided munitions than VKS, albeit that’s not a very high requirement. Pods are also included in the scope of their discussion, so don't read too much into PLAAF jets not regularly getting on camera with pods.

As to you not buying the deceiving part, sure, that’s just my take on the situation. However PLAAF is going to keep doing what they do, and keep making public what they want the public to see, we can’t change that. And what they’re currently doing is actively hiding a lot of material on advanced a2g munitions and their employment.

 

[drowingfish]

people are reading way too much into this. i think it is not about deception, it isn't even about honing basic skills. it is the simple fact that these pilots need to complete live a2g attacks as a part of their training, and you dont always get to use guided munitions for that.
remember a2g missions, like any other missions the military does, has a whole process. from receiving orders, get there, identify your target, strike and confirm your hit. dropping bomb/rocket is only one step of that entire process, so if the pilots in training want to practice a2g attacks, what is the cheapest, most efficient way of doing this? it is to use these rockets. you can carry dozens of them at once, fire only a few per run, then you get to practice going through the entire process of executing an a2g mission multiple times before you have to return to base, and you are only expending cheap rockets.

the point is, practicing a2g isnt just about practicing the firing, it is the entire process before and after that people never talk about.

 

[Michaelsinodef]

I mean, sure absence of evidence is not proof. However, it’s not just modern a2g munitions that are routinely absent. It’s quite rare to see a targeting pod installed. The PLAAF ground attack capability might be in fact be closer to the USAAF, however the publicly available evidence points to it being more comparable to the VKS.

See the post above you and the 2 below.

AKA #393, #395 and #396

 

[Deino]

Report from 2022-12-13, more than 20 2nd Gen fighter pilots from a certain Brigade under the STC are undergoing conversion training at Huizhou AB which is the home base of the 26th Brigade also under the STC
View attachment 104100

View attachment 104101

View attachment 104102

Recent report about the ground crew of a certain AB under the STC
View attachment 104105

View attachment 104106

Are both reports connected - aka, the flight training on J-16s at the 26th AB AND that given J-7-brigade and its mechanics?

Then it looks to be the 125th Air Brigade at Nannaning-Wuxu still flying J-7IIH and JJ-7s ... so eventually a hint of getting a new type soon?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608904571723862016

 

[Deino]

Video of a J-11 pushing a RC-135 away

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608544092107198464

Seen from the Flanker's side ...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609173930769801216

 

[lcloo]

Seen from the Flanker's side ...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1609173930769801216

According to Henri kenhmann
Face à l'accusation de l'USINDOPACOM, la marine chinoise publie à son tour la vidéo filmée par le J-11BSH en question, indiquant que c'est le RC-135 de l'USAF qui a changé de trajectoire à 11:25:17 UTC+8 et s'est rapproché de l'appareil chinois, volant près des îles Paracel.

Translated from French
Faced with USINDOPACOM's accusation, the Chinese Navy in turn publishes the video filmed by the J-11BSH in question, indicating that it was the USAF RC-135 that changed course at 11:25 :17 UTC+8 and approached the Chinese aircraft, flying near the Paracel Islands.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Using the position of a particular cloud relative to the wing tip of J11BSH, it is obviious that J11BSH did not change course, Henri is right that it was the RC-135 that changed course, and gave a mis-information to the press.

And Happy New Year 2023! It is 1.15AM 2023-01-01 here.