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

[latenlazy]

View attachment 112551

J-16 pilot talks about the challenge of evading enemy missiles (BVR?), which is an equation involving enemy position/condition, missile trajectory, and the pilot's current bearing/position. After factoring them in the pilots need to calculate the current location of the enemy missile and what kind of maneuver could shake the lock.

Sounds like something that can become automated.

EDIT: This commentary is also related to something I’ve been thinking a lot about wrt to principles of A2A combat. For all the talk of maneuverability, agility, energy advantage, etc you can probably simplify down the driving principle of all A2A tactical capabilities to relative positional advantages for maximizing your probability of getting a kill and minimizing your probability of being killed. This goes back to why kinematic capabilities like supercruise, thrust to weight ratio, and thrust vectoring are actually still really big deals for air combat. Fixating on reductive and piecemeal performance details like turn rates misses the much broader canvas of kinematic performance determinations. Energy advantage does get pretty close to a catch all general principle for air combat capabilities but perhaps a refinement of that framework is to think more about how energy advantage translates to positional advantage, and from that a whole range of potential tactical maneuvers and piecemeal performance parameters emerge, with different maneuvers and key performance parameters tailored to different sets of aerodynamic designs.

 

[broadsword]

Sounds like a job for AI.

 

[ougoah]

I thought that modern missiles (phased array radars and modern seeker tech - software) can't be fooled by maneuvers. "Breaking a lock" can only be done via electronic spoofing. Doppler based radars though used to be "fooled" by certain maneuvering and notching based on how the radars were programmed to anticipate the position of its target but even then, those tricks were barely something to be relied upon.

 

[Hitomi]

AI can probably be trained to find the optimal flight path to defeat a missile kinematically in BVR engagements. This is something they might look into for loyal wingmen drones and thus retroactively fitted into a manned fighter.

 

[ougoah]

AI can probably be trained to find the optimal flight path to defeat a missile kinematically in BVR engagements. This is something they might look into for loyal wingmen drones and thus retroactively fitted into a manned fighter.

This is true but it would also need good data to develop the models it would use to optimise movement. Data on missile kinematics are top secret. Therefore despite narrow AI having had this capability LONG ago, and I'm sure many nations have applied and even implemented this despite the obvious issue, these things would only become useful after a war has begun and the models are fed refined data over time. Of course having the systems in place at the ready is necessary preparation.

For a fighter without such a capability in place (or accurate model) the best is still to err on the side of caution to defeat missiles by draining missile energy with a turn, descent, turn, and then a climb... guaranteed to defeat all rocket missiles (except maybe a very decent dual pulse rocket missile like a PL-15). Even a R-37M would struggle to gain 5km of potential energy after being dragged down.

I've always wondered if Chinese and American/European missile makers have programmed some "intelligence" to their missiles to prevent them from being misled by a descent of target. It's sort of hinted to the public that even modern AAMs operate using intercept point modeling. When they really should be calculating intercept point with the aim of preserving altitude unless the missile and target relation is approaching parameters that make intercept highly unlikely without missile exchanging PE for KE. Otherwise if you receive a missile launch warning or radar warning, you can notch and hug the terrain then turn and climb and easily defeat a "dumb" AAM if the AAM immediately exchanged PE for KE because a missile out of initial boost has very poor ability to climb without quickly losing most of its energy. One or two turns and the missile is soundly defeated. Anyway this is hardly a difficult task and I'm certain most capable missile makers have long imparted clever software to optimise missile energy no matter target evasion.

 

[Flanker enjoyer]

Anyone have a link to this mentioned interview?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657727435344080898

 

[siegecrossbow]

Anyone have a link to this mentioned interview?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657727435344080898

There is some dispute regarding whether he is talking about J-20 vs J-16 or whether it is an earlier engagement between J-11A and J-11B since the aircraft type is not specified. That said, stealth aircraft are not invincible. Even though the J-20 dominated when it first entered service in the six or so years following induction PLAAF has had plenty of time to develop tactics for countering it.

 

[Jingle Bells]

This video is talking about an mysterious TER/MER shown on a J-16, in a recent CCTV-7 documentary:

The exact moment is at 1:55 to 1:58, below is a screenshot at 1:58:

 

[siegecrossbow]

This video is talking about an mysterious TER/MER shown on a J-16, in a recent CCTV-7 documentary:

The exact moment is at 1:55 to 1:58, below is a screenshot at 1:58:
View attachment 112620

Guess it is confirmed that the battle is between J-16 and J-20 then.

 

[Jingle Bells]

Guess it is confirmed that the battle is between J-16 and J-20 then.

Sure, I guess, I mean that's the only conclusion we can draw from the available information right now, nothing in detail.