future plaaf's flanker upgrade

Gollevainen said:

First of all when some topic starts saying that something is "piece of crab" I usually loose all the interest towards it. Althoug many of you are kids, try to still act maturely and best thing to do so is cut out childish language. Anyone saing some system is "piece of crab" looses all his greditability in my eyes...

But to the topic. Su-27 isen't "piece of crab" (or as now on supporting the mature use of english, lets say you ment that Su-27 is uncapaple) at least when comaring to other chinese fighters in use. It's BVR capapility is best of PLAAFs inventory even whitout using the R-77 (Excluding Su-30s but they are basicly the same family, just improved version of it) as the R-27 is superior to any chinese BVR missile in service. But that doesen't mean SU-27 should not be modernised, all planes needs to be modenised after the time is cathing them.

Modernisations differences lots from each others, there can be major modernisation where the whole airframe is partially rebuild and fitted whit new engines and avionics. Or there can be minor modifications wich usually only affects on avionics tough in that way to the weapon delivery capapilityes or even to the manuvrability. As for Chinese Flanker fleet, i would go to the later one as the Su-27 isen't being surpassed in general terms by any major inovation except the F-22 (wich is years and years away from full time operational service). As to boost chinese own aviation technology industry and capapility, i would go for indegenious radar and from there to the ability to use the newest chinese weoponry like SD-10 and C-803 missiles. (yeas a multipurpose capapility would be given tough i'm not sure if china have any radar system to able to do so in the near pipeline...)

But as china have the licence manufacturing faciliatetes, an improved production line should be opened. For my obinion china should no longer manufacture the first generation Flankers nor shift to Russian improved models like Su-35 or Su-37 but developt an own 4.5 half generation fighter based on Flankers airframe. It would require new avionics, (similar that the modernised Flankers would have) new indegenious engine whit better thrust to weight ration than Al-31F, improved airframe whit canards and perhaps redesinged wings. Also more capaple fly-by-fire system would be usefull. Now thats may sound bit farfecthed when taking notice to chinese aviation industrys overall capapilityes, but i bet it is easyer and cost-effective than to produce completely indegenious J-XX wich should be compared to F-22 but will whitout doubt be inferior to it. This J-11M or what ever it should be called would give china back those decades wich would be required to developing 5th generation fighter.

Click to expand...

tphuang said:

China has shown zero interest in su-27smk, because it really doesn't meet China's requirement anymore. As far as I know, J-11B should be at least as good as su-27smk, because it has improved radar, cockpit and BVR missile and will be using WS-10A instead of AL-31F. Personally, I would like to see China attempting to upgrade the current su-27 fleet by itself rather than using the $5 million upgrade package offered by the Russians.

Click to expand...

chinawhite said:

Its not easy changing a aircrafts airframe.

Adding Caranrds to a aircraft is not like just bolt on packages you have to physically change the airframe.

Then you would need to re-configure the FBW and need newer avonics.



and where are you basing your information on?

Click to expand...

adeptitus said:

I think that Russian upgrade package is probably the result of co-development between Russian, French, and Indian firms. The technology is likely to be mature and ready to deliver. Wouldn't hurt if the PLAAF orders a couple for eval.

Click to expand...

MIGleader said:

reconfigure fbw and avionics? no problem. they part of the upgrade anyways. actually, the avionics get priority, but canards can benifit from it. ever heard of the su-35? just copy its frontal configuration. no to hard.

Click to expand...

chinawhite said:

Where did you get your degree in aircraft production/design?:coffee:

The airframe is pyhiscally different. you have to change the airframe. And with these changes it will distort the airflow and make it unstable.

Click to expand...

MIGleader said:

ok, i never got an airframe degree. but changing the ariframe is not too hard. its been proven on the su-33. there will be unstability, but that can be moniterd by an advanced fbw.

Click to expand...

chinawhite said:

Its been proven on the SU-33?

The su-33 was produced brand new and no add ons. were you planning to bolt it on and see if it works

Click to expand...