China Flanker thread
- Thread starter renmin
- Start date
- Status
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
So because the whole show with the Su-35 at Maks 2007, they say China is one of the countries that it's going to be marketed to. With China well on its way with it own aircraft programs, is this a possibility?
The PLAAF has already done this, and its currently in operation with the J-7G and the J-8F. It was deferred on the J-10 however, but some of the latest pics on J-10 pilots show they're now changing and using the same helmet with the HMS attachment as the J-11, J-7G and J-8F pilots.
Not a chance really. If you come down and think about it, bluntly, frankly, brutally, it isn't going to happen. Frankly China can't buy off the shelf now, and whatever it has to buy, has to work with its indigenous missiles, communications and datalink infrastructures.
Last edited by a moderator:
Flankers Lost to Crashes
For anyone who hasn't seen it, the latest issue of Aviation Week (10 Sept 2007) has a short, news item reporting that out of 46 Su-27 fighters purchased during the early 1990s, 15 have been lost in crashes. The article sites poor pilot training as a leading problem, with each pilot reportedly receiving no more than 10 flight hours of training each month.
Wonder where (who) they're getting their information from.
For anyone who hasn't seen it, the latest issue of Aviation Week (10 Sept 2007) has a short, news item reporting that out of 46 Su-27 fighters purchased during the early 1990s, 15 have been lost in crashes. The article sites poor pilot training as a leading problem, with each pilot reportedly receiving no more than 10 flight hours of training each month.
Wonder where (who) they're getting their information from.
the problem due to lack of fund.
Re: Flankers Lost to Crashes
Its an old and familiar story, made up in Taiwan in order to make themselves feel better from their own crashes. While there is no doubt there has been losses, the problem of pilot training was probably more acute early in the Flanker's service career, and this is not entirely all the PLAAF's fault. There was also numerous maintenance, quality and service issues, especially with engine defects.
10 hours of training each months amounts to 120 hours, which is fairly decent, since the Russians and Eastern Europeans were only doing a fraction of that. Another problem is that there are more pilots than planes, so in truth, the planes were averaging 200 hours of flight each year. Unlike the USAF, planes are not assigned to a pilot per se with personalized plates and so on; the plane is only assigned from an available pool of planes to a pilot at the start of the mission. Thus you may be flying 01 in one day, 07 in the next.
One of the main problems in tracking crashes is that people may attribute a crash that is done by a J-7 or J-8 to an Su-27, as people tend to think of the worst when something happens. Thus some plane crashes are questionable. I remember one time there was this wing or fin of a PLAAF flighter with emblem that are being claimed to be part of an Su-27 wing. Looking at the surfaces closely, the wing appears to be more of a part of a J-7's wing.
We know about 5 aircraft was damaged by a typhoon, 3 may have been completely scrapped off. And yet despite all this, the Flanker regiments appear to be in full strength, and pictures of the 2nd and the 19th, which has the old Su-27s, show that a lot of the older planes are still there and flying. There has been a number of J-11 substitutions, so a few may have attrited, but we should assume that attrition is always going to be part of the picture.
Its an old and familiar story, made up in Taiwan in order to make themselves feel better from their own crashes. While there is no doubt there has been losses, the problem of pilot training was probably more acute early in the Flanker's service career, and this is not entirely all the PLAAF's fault. There was also numerous maintenance, quality and service issues, especially with engine defects.
10 hours of training each months amounts to 120 hours, which is fairly decent, since the Russians and Eastern Europeans were only doing a fraction of that. Another problem is that there are more pilots than planes, so in truth, the planes were averaging 200 hours of flight each year. Unlike the USAF, planes are not assigned to a pilot per se with personalized plates and so on; the plane is only assigned from an available pool of planes to a pilot at the start of the mission. Thus you may be flying 01 in one day, 07 in the next.
One of the main problems in tracking crashes is that people may attribute a crash that is done by a J-7 or J-8 to an Su-27, as people tend to think of the worst when something happens. Thus some plane crashes are questionable. I remember one time there was this wing or fin of a PLAAF flighter with emblem that are being claimed to be part of an Su-27 wing. Looking at the surfaces closely, the wing appears to be more of a part of a J-7's wing.
We know about 5 aircraft was damaged by a typhoon, 3 may have been completely scrapped off. And yet despite all this, the Flanker regiments appear to be in full strength, and pictures of the 2nd and the 19th, which has the old Su-27s, show that a lot of the older planes are still there and flying. There has been a number of J-11 substitutions, so a few may have attrited, but we should assume that attrition is always going to be part of the picture.
scorpioking
New Member
Some "insiders" in China military forums are saying J-15 is actually the code for Flanker in PLAN, and the Su-33 imported is only for comparison, some even say the protype is going to have test flying this year.
Don't know how many versions of Flanker are under development.
Don't know how many versions of Flanker are under development.
- Status