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

[gelgoog]

A lot of countries have VHF phased array radar. Russia has exported their Resonanz-N radar to Egypt, Algeria, and Iran at least.
Then you have the smaller more mobile systems like the Nebo-M.
I highly doubt China would not have similar systems. They have L-band radars on the Type 052D destroyers.

I think it is a matter of time until someone comes up with an embedded L-band radar in the fighter aircraft's wings and renders stealth irrelevant. Some claim the embedded L-band radars on the Su-35 or Su-57 serve this purpose already. Some claim they are only for IFF.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The high kill ratio for stealth fighters are for unaided excercise probably.

The common misconception is that 5th gen aircraft appear as the size of a marble or tennis ball from all angles when that’s only the case in X-band and a narrow frontal cone of the aircraft. RCS from the sides can be as large as one m^2 even for F-22/F-35 due to the presence of vertical slabs. It is important for stealth fighter pilots to learn how to keep the opponent within the frontal RCS optimized cone of the plane.

 

[zavve]

I think it is a matter of time until someone comes up with an embedded L-band radar in the fighter aircraft's wings and renders stealth irrelevant

Would it make stealth "irrelevant"? Sure it would negate some of the stealth advantages but I find it hard to believe it will ever be irrelevant. If an L-Band radar in a fighter's wing could see stealth at 50nm, they would see a non-stealth aircraft at an even greater range, therefore stealth would not be irrelevant.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Some claim the embedded L-band radars on the Su-35 or Su-57 serve this purpose already. Some claim they are only for IFF.

It isn't 'some', it is known for sure that L-arrays in Su-57 (not Su-35s) are radar arrays. 'some' here are in an open denial.

Would it make stealth "irrelevant"?

I honestly struggle to see how lesser signatures in key fire control/detection bands can be made irrelevant.
Less decisive? yes, to some degree - but the same is true for the effect of other technologies(radar, IRST, networking).

Then again - the next generation of USAF stealth fighter aircraft is quite widely expected to have an order(s?) of magnitude smaller practical signature in x-s, and to be stealthy in c-l.

 

[Atomicfrog]

It isn't 'some', it is known for sure that L-arrays in Su-57 (not Su-35s) are radar arrays. 'some' here are in an open denial.


I honestly struggle to see how lesser signatures in key fire control/detection bands can be made irrelevant.
Less decisive? yes, to some degree - but the same is true for the effect of other technologies(radar, IRST, networking).

Then again - the next generation of USAF stealth fighter aircraft is quite widely expected to have an order(s?) of magnitude smaller practical signature in x-s, and to be stealthy in c-l.

Advantages is not irrelevant, L-band is just adding up on the numerous systems used. We will see new IR, LIDAR and optical systems to replace radars for guidance if they are not efficient anymore and after that a new geometry or coating to block them. It's always adaptation to the threats.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Even after all these technologies, a blunt lower tech aircraft with rocket pods and dumb bombs can become the tool to destroy the enemy in heavy EW environment. Look at these stupid GERAN-2 doing the work of way more advanced systems...

 

[Deino]

Can anyone help to confirm and even more what's the original source of these images?

"Another Chinese Air Force unit, from the Eastern Theater Command, receives their J-16.

It could be the 95th brigade based in Lianyungang. To confirm."

Via East Pendulum / @HenriKenhmann

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1660611860511723520

 

[Deino]

Can anyone help to confirm and even more what's the original source of these images?

"Another Chinese Air Force unit, from the Eastern Theater Command, receives their J-16.

It could be the 95th brigade based in Lianyungang. To confirm."

Via East Pendulum / @HenriKenhmann

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1660611860511723520

Me again ... in fact the 95th more or less just recently gained J-11BGs and I heard other rumours, it would rather more likely be one of the next to get J-20As similar to the 1st AB at Anshan, which also transitioned from J-11B/BG to J-20A.

 

[HighGround]

The common misconception is that 5th gen aircraft appear as the size of a marble or tennis ball from all angles when that’s only the case in X-band and a narrow frontal cone of the aircraft. RCS from the sides can be as large as one m^2 even for F-22/F-35 due to the presence of vertical slabs. It is important for stealth fighter pilots to learn how to keep the opponent within the frontal RCS optimized cone of the plane.

This discussion reminds me of an article I read a few years ago.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

There is also a part 2 of this article as well, make sure to read that. In particular note the following,

Discussions today regarding a contested environment are focused on building an aircraft that is survivable over the modern battlefield, ignoring the external capabilities that ensured that the A-10 only had to survive against a threat dominated by anti-aircraft artillery and small missiles. The notion of “high-threat CAS” is nonsense. There is no piece of magic aircraft design or technological prowess that will enable an aircraft to loiter over a dispersed target with credible, radar-guided self-defense capabilities.

This holds up very well in the wake of the Ukraine War. A war in the Pacific will be a very different affair of course, but I think many of these points still work. Stealth aircraft are a necessity in a modern battle force, but they are not a magic bullet. Unlike the think-tank-land consensus, technological superiority is no substitute for competent mission planning and well designed CONOPS that works against an enemy system.

Too often, I think, we are caught up in looking at weapon systems and capabilities, rather than doctrine, which is ultimately what dictates objectives and how they are achieved. F-22s and F-35s cannot beat China all on their own.

 

[Atomicfrog]

Too often, I think, we are caught up in looking at weapon systems and capabilities, rather than doctrine, which is ultimately what dictates objectives and how they are achieved. F-22s and F-35s cannot beat China all on their own.

And it's why China is pumping all these J-16. Drones are clearly taking close air support slot. J-16 are the workhorse and J-20 the spearhead.

J-20 cannot beat all on their own too.

 

[YES]

Can anyone help to confirm and even more what's the original source of these images?

"Another Chinese Air Force unit, from the Eastern Theater Command, receives their J-16.

It could be the 95th brigade based in Lianyungang. To confirm."

Via East Pendulum / @HenriKenhmann

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1660611860511723520

according to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, it's from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of May 22th, but they deleted the playback just for that day, judging by playbacks from 21th and 23th is normal, so yeah.