China Flanker thread

[tphuang]

the russian trying to market the improve version of SU-27SK call su-27skm.
according to janes,the overall radar cross section for SU-27SKM been reduce intensively,below "1 meter",since the big inlet fan blade being source of RF "echo"
the russian come with new technology possibility of RAM on the fan blade.very similiar to boeing FX-36.

I really doubt that, Crobato should know more about this than i do, I will let him fill you in the details.

As for RAM? the Russians make a lot of claims about the capabilities of their RAM. There is no evidence that their RAM technology is that much better than Chinese RAM technology.

To Mehdi, there is no official source saying this, but I believe we saw a picture of J-11 with more hard points than su-27sk. Also, certain big shrimps mentionned on Chinese forums that J-11B is definitely light than su-27sk. I think Crobato mentionned in the past that China had to use composites on J-11, because they did not have the titanium alloy technology of the Russians.

 

[mehdi]

Thanks Mod well at least for once in this forum I am getting some news which I didnt know. Infact I should say that the Russians have been boasting a lot about their Sukhois being better than those manufactured in China. who's right who's right that I let you people decide.

About the J-11 with more hard points I saw a picture of the plane but lost it on my old pc anyway the use of composite in the J-11 is for me a great achievement. A lighter structure that should imply a greater payload and a longer range am I right?

 

[adeptitus]

The basic Su-27SK export model has 10 hard-points and can carry 4,000 kg of munitions. It has downgraded avionics, but possibly more hardpoints than the Russian Su-27S, because the Russian PVO's Su-27S has ECM pods on wintips instead of AAM launch rails.

Later upgraded versions increased the payload from 4,000 to 6,000-8,000 kg. The Su-27SMK has 12 hardpoints and can carry 8,000 kg of munitions. The aircraft's frame has been reinforced to carry the heavier load.


The increased range on the upgraded Su-27SMK comes from simply having more fuel. The basic Su-27SK has 4 internal fuel tanks, 3 in the fuselage and 1 split between the 2 wings, with approx. 11,775 liters of fuel and no provisions for external drop tanks. However normal combat load is 6,600 liters for better performance.

The Su-27SMK has re-designed wings with larger internal fuel tanks, provisions for 2 x 2,000 liter external drop tanks, plus inflight refueling probe. The advantage of drop tanks is obvious -- you can drop them right before engaging combat.

 

[crobato]

The basic Su-27SK export model has 10 hard-points and can carry 4,000 kg of munitions. It has downgraded avionics, but possibly more hardpoints than the Russian Su-27S, because the Russian PVO's Su-27S has ECM pods on wintips instead of AAM launch rails.

That's not really true. Both models are almost identical exceopt that the SK has been beefed up to carry 8,000kg of bomb loads with the aid of some structural improvements and beefing up of the landing gera. This was a PLA requirement as they had ideas to use the plane as a semi-bomber. The avionics appear to be the same except that the radar has a higher frequency than the Russian one. This can mean lower range but greater tracking resolution.

Also the PLAAF Su-27s are all often seen with ECM pods on the wingtips, and are much more often seen with such, than te PVO Su-27S.

Accordingly the PLAAF Su-27s were issued with an ECM pod based on the Gardenia package used in the Russian use only MiG-29s. The PVO used the Sorbitsya pods. But that appears to be initially, and the later pods, along witn an even newer design called Omul, was acquired. When I checked the ECM pods in the PLAAF but I noted some color changes. There are those that are dark grey, then light grey, and then white radomes. I believe that the PLAAF has 3 types of ECM pods used in the Flankers, and Gardenia, Sorbitsya and Omul are most probably the three, though these are all acquired in different periods.

The SK already has the structural improvemetns and the SKM does not add to that, except for an IFR probe. The 12 hardpoints and other structural advantages proposed in the much earlier SMK proposal has been cancelled and just transferred to the MKK program.

 

[mehdi]

Thanks Crobato, am I correct if I state that no one here has been able to answer the real questions how far has the Chinese gone in the use of composites for the J-11B. I haven't seen any details of the use of composite materials in Chinese fighters only speculations. It would be worthwhile for someone to answer this. About the J-11B what radar will this plane have ?

 

[adeptitus]

That's not really true. Both models are almost identical exceopt that the SK has been beefed up to carry 8,000kg of bomb loads with the aid of some structural improvements and beefing up of the landing gera. This was a PLA requirement as they had ideas to use the plane as a semi-bomber. The avionics appear to be the same except that the radar has a higher frequency than the Russian one. This can mean lower range but greater tracking resolution.

Hello Corbato,

Regarding the Su-27SK sold in 1990s, do you know if the 8,000 kg payload is specific to PLAAF requested modification, or applicable to all Su-27SK export units afterwards? Vietnam ordered 6 Su-27's in 1995-1996, I'm curious if those aircraft are "stock" with 6,000-6,200 kg payload, or have structural modifications that increased payload to 8,000 kg.

 

[crobato]

Hello Corbato,

Regarding the Su-27SK sold in 1990s, do you know if the 8,000 kg payload is specific to PLAAF requested modification, or applicable to all Su-27SK export units afterwards? Vietnam ordered 6 Su-27's in 1995-1996, I'm curious if those aircraft are "stock" with 6,000-6,200 kg payload, or have structural modifications that increased payload to 8,000 kg.

Yes it became applicable to all new planes afterwards. I'm not sure though if Vietnam bought planes that were second hand and just refurbished or if these were all new planes.

The Su-27UBKs China bought were also strengthened for the higher payload.

 

[crobato]

Thanks Crobato, am I correct if I state that no one here has been able to answer the real questions how far has the Chinese gone in the use of composites for the J-11B. I haven't seen any details of the use of composite materials in Chinese fighters only speculations. It would be worthwhile for someone to answer this. About the J-11B what radar will this plane have ?

We believe that the Chinese would apply composites in nonstructural areas of the plane, which usually means external wing and tail panels, the elevator and the ventral fins below.

But that's rather a typical use of composites in an aircraft, and this is likely true for the J-10 and the FC-1 as well.

I don't believe that use of composites would be significant however as the Chinese are not likely to "rock the boat" on the design on the Su-27.

On the J-11B, the radar is most definitely made by NRIET, and the radar is a variant of the same radar family the J-10, the FC-1 and the J-8H/F would use. The first J-8H and the early J-10s had the first generations of these family, but later the newer J-8F and J-10s, as well as the FC-1 has improved second generations of this family.

The radar is an MSA or your typical mechanically scanned slotted array radar, dual lobe, monopulse with your standard radar modes. It's likely to have a sea search mode though like the radar on the J-8H. No it's not as ambitious as Irbis but its much more likely to finish its development cycles sooner and can be be deployed in more affordable levels.

I think the major difference of this radar compared to the J-10's is the design of the servos, and the fact it may try to integrate the R-73, R-27 and R-77, as well as the PL-8, PL-11 and PL-12.

Despite the J-11B, I do think there is space for Su-30MK3/4 or Su-35BM because the J-11B is likely to be more of air to air fighter along the lines of the J-10, while the Su-35BM can serve as a mini AWACS, provide ground search and recon, and do some precision strikes. The J-11B is more analogous to the upgraded F-15Cs rather than the Strike Eagles. The Su-35BM or future Su-30MK3 or 4 are like the "special ops" for the PLAAF, though in the end, I do feel that the radars on the MKK and MK2 are not fully adequete for that purpose.

One of the reasons China was interested on the Phazotron Zhuk series was the SAR capabilities which you can spot for ground targets. Look into the air superiority over the ROC thread in this forum to get what I mean. The greatest threat the ROC can offer to the PLAAF are mobile SAMs, which is the air war version of guerilla warfare. You cannot take these out with SSMs, ARMs can be fooled by decoys and depend on the enemy using its radar, and no matter how many PGMs you have (which the PLAAF is now also building on), in order to exploit your PGMs, you need to find the enemy first.

 

[mehdi]

Way cool Crobato I was waiting to get a reply like this. Frankly I also don't see the J-11B development that promising making a new aircraft of an old one. Just change the avionics put a new engine WS-10A? all that in what name !!!

China would be better off changing the coproduction rights of the SU-27 to that of the latest SU-35 fighter incorporating some of the avionics in that of the J-11B. Canards would also be a nice change. Perhaps China might decide to coproduce the SU-33 ?? who knows anyway the SU-27's time is OVER.

 

[challenge]

PLAAF Su-30mk zhuk radar mode include SAR/MTI,this allowed the aircraft to detect moving vehicles.
currently the most advance mechanical radar in service is EF-2000's Castor radar,according to air international the radar can perform both SAR/MTI and air to air search and track -simultaneosly.