J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

[Deino]

Well, the "need to, should have, will be" is just as applicable to the Eurofighter, as it is to J-10Bs. From what I know, the Eurofighter is yet to have an operational AESA radar and also, it is yet to have A2G capability.

Isn't that kinda where the J-10B stands right now, awaiting its AESA radar, EW suite and A2G weapons and pod??

I still believe that the J-10B holds a lot of potential for the PLAAF and if China knows better, it would know to deploy this fighter in heavy numbers, once it has AESA, EWS, A2G incorporated in it.

Not really, about the necessity to have an AESA - and as far as I know at the moment we discuss none of both types have one ! - we can even more discuss, but all the other systems (targeting pods), weapons (LGB's, stand off cruise missiles, ..) are already tested on several EF's (even German ones !) but - as You said not ready integrated and deployed. IMO none of these have so far been tested on the J-10B.

Deino

 

[Dizasta1]

Not really, about the necessity to have an AESA - and as far as I know at the moment we discuss none of both types have one ! - we can even more discuss, but all the other systems (targeting pods), weapons (LGB's, stand off cruise missiles, ..) are already tested on several EF's (even German ones !) but - as You said not ready integrated and deployed. IMO none of these have so far been tested on the J-10B.

Deino

Well if that is the case, I hope that the J-10B's development progresses comprehensively and that we hear the good news about AESA, EW, A2G, A2A and so on.

 

[SinoSoldier]

during the mid 90's China send a number test pilot to france ,they flew Mirage -2000, eurofighter,and rafale (and possible tornado)according to there assessment, they have praise for euofighter man machine interface,by far there biggest impression was rafale.her flight control system navigation and weapon control. everything about the aircraft is "pure perfection."
according to one test pilot,he suggest the PLAAF choose rafale over SU-30/Su-27.

As of now the J-15 and J-11B pretty much is the Rafale of the PLAAF. J-10B is more like the Eurofighter of the PLAAF.

 

[plawolf]

Well if that is the case, I hope that the J-10B's development progresses comprehensively and that we hear the good news about AESA, EW, A2G, A2A and so on.

I am not sure that a2g weapons integration is that much of a priority for the PLAAF when it comes to the J10.

The PLAAF have the JH7A and Su30s as it's dedicated strike platform, topped off with H6 bombers. That is a strike fleet bigger than most air forces. On top of that, they have Q5s as a dedicated CAS, and are now adding WZ10s to the mix.

If it is true that even the twin seat J11BS does not yet have precision strike capability, then it goes to show just how confident the PLAAF feel about their precision strike capabilities.

You have to remember that the PLA is not like a western army. Despite the recent cut backs, if China goes to war, the army will be deployed to win the fight, and the PLA will not try to bomb an enemy into submission with air strikes alone.

With that in mind, the role of the PLAAF is mainly to clear the skies of enemy air assets to protect the PLA ground forces first and foremost. The PLA has enough organic firepower and the numbers needed to get the job done so long as the PLAAF can keep the skies clear.

Don't get me wrong, the PLAAF is hardly neglecting it's ground attack, just look at the size of it's dedicated strike wing.

The key difference is that while western air forces have gone all in on multirole on as much of their air force as possible (the only exception being the USAF F22s), the PLAAF is still running dedicated aa and ag assets.

That has it's strengths and weaknesses. The strengths are that dedicated units means that the machines and pilots are 100% focused on the single mission they are tasked to perform. An elite PLAAF pilot might only spend 150-200 hours a year flying compared to 200-300 hours for western pilots, but if the PLAAF pilot dedicates 100% of his time to honing his AA stills while the western pilot spends 50% on AA and 50% on AG, who clocks more dogfighting and BVR training hours?

It's a similar thing with the aircraft. The F16A blk15 is by far the most agile of all F16s, even though the lastest blk52s have far more powerful engines.

Adding precision strike capabilities doesn't just cost money, it also costs weight, and that extra weight has to be carried around whether you are loaded out for AA or AG.

The downside to this is that there is less tactical flexibility in having dedicated units, and less efficient use of resources throughout a campaign, since your AG fleet will have to sit out the battle for the skies, and your AA fleet is of not much use after you had won control of the skies and you start switching to hitting ground targets.

But given that most of the potential foes the PLAAF might face will take some beating to win control of the skies from, and given the overwhelming advantages the PLA enjoy against the ground forces of those potential foes, it would seem that the PLAAF prefers to make sure it can actually win control of the skies before they start thinking about what they will do with that control too much. And I have to agree. Having an all multi-role fleet is worse than pointless if the cost of doing so is that you are unable to win control of the skies to start with.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Why can't the j-10 compete with the rafale/eurofighter on a2g?

Single engine plane; can't carry too much weapons and does not have enough range.

---------- Post added at 06:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:29 PM ----------

J-10Bs don't lack in A2G capability because it is an inferior aircraft, rather it needs better, more advance A2G weapons developed for it, that it may deploy them against targets. What J-10Bs needs stand-off weapons which are smaller in size, but equal or greater in range and accuracy. These Stand-Off weapons can be in the shape of missiles and gps-guided bombs.

The fact that J-10Bs are touted to have AESA radars, means that they are able to employ A2G weapons with consummate ease. More refined, tweaked and matured A2G weapons technology is all that the J-10Bs need. As they are already in the category of the Eurofighter and Rafale.

FYI, Eurofighters of the RAF, were actually using Tornadoes to point targets to employ it's Paveway bombs in the Libyan conflict. This is documented in Air Force's Monthly and apparently there was a whole lot of hoopla by the members of the British Parliament. The British ministers were crossed at the fact that French Rafales were able to drop bombs on targets with their new Damocles and RECO-NG Pods .... while the RAF Eurofighter pilots had to rely on their Tornado colleagues to drop bombs on targets.

So in that respect, I doubt that the J-10Bs are in any way lacking in A2G, compared to Eurofighters.

I actually do not think the PLAAF needs to invest in stand off weapons. They have the KD-88 as well as some other ones like YJ-12 which was revealed at an earlier airshow and reports of a YJ-22 and YJ-85 in development. What the J-10B needs is payload and range. J-15 and J-11B have that but they do not possess the level of RAM or composites seen on the J-10B.

---------- Post added at 06:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:31 PM ----------

Brrrr my young friend, not too fast with the young horses (mavericks) like we say in German. .P

I agree with You that the J-10 is a quantum leap in avionics and overall system-architechture in comparison to the J-7/-8 and also Su-27/J-11 but if it could outperform both Eurocanards in terms of being a "weapon-system" is highly questionable.

You mention a TVC ... completly overrrated IMO and just in comparison to both Eurocanards it would be more important to be a complete & functioning weapon-system than to hae such gimmics.

Besides that - as also mentioned: There is no Shenyang f-60 (not even a J-60) ... You surely think of that nice RC-model made by some students and in regard to a "stealthy" fc-1b - also not if ever under development - not by SAC it is much too light to be capable for anything.

Sorry my friend, but the PLAAF in 2020 will not be very much different to the PLAAF today if You expect some new toys to be operation in large numbers.

What he meant by F-60 is the 601 fighter, which is rumored to be under development. I would hold off on the subjective statements of the J-10B, but I would like to point out that according to Eagle Hannan, the J-10B comprises over 50% composites, which is more than the 40% composite use in the Eurofighter, operates a larger 1200 T/R module AESA, has extensive RAM, DSI as opposed to the Eurofighter's intake ramps, and a new cockpit. Roughly speaking the J-10B has a very good chance of competing and even outperforming the Eurofighter on the A2A basis.

Regarding the JH-7B, etc, those are rumored to be under development with images of designers inspecting models.

Saying that the PLAAF will be "not very different" by 2020 would be ridiculous. 5th generation aircraft will be in the PLAAF. We have seen a horde of UAV and UCAV that will enter service, like the Xianglong and Pterodactyl and the Sky Wing. J-10B and J-15 would enter production. So will Y-20 and potentially a new form of transport aircraft. And that is just the tip of the iceberg; we haven't even looked at AEW aircraft yet.

Funny ... You are correct in pointing towards the lack of self-designator-capability for the EF (esp. in comparison to the Rafale) but the TYphoon is jusdt getting a decent A2G capability since it was always its second aim and additionally it was (is) always delayed due to (German) politics.

On the other side has the J-10 ever been seen with such a capability ?? (regardless of models + mock-ups) ???

As such to compare the EF "today" and its lack in capabilities with a projected capability of a J-10B with a lots of "need to, should have, will be" is a bit way off.

Deino

I thought J-10B has solid state integrated electronics?

Anyways, the upgrades on the J-10B has been pretty much confirmed by now. The "projection" is essentially a reality.

 

[escobar]

Single engine plane; can't carry too much weapons and does not have enough range.

J-10 range is not so bad. it is over 1000km.

the J-10B comprises over 50% composites

where dou you get that??

 

[challenge]

J-10B comprise over 50% composite???
and do J-10B carry radar cancellation EW system? rafale ,F-22 and B-2 EW system capable performing RCT.

 

[HKSDU]

Personally, I feel that PLAAF ought to have a balance on the USAF. What I mean't to say is, just look at the number of F-16s USAF has, nearly 1200, as well as the number of F-15s, which is around 300. PLAAF should ideally have a large fleet of its mainstay fighter, J-10Bs (at least 500-700 fighters or more). J-11Bs should be proportionately less to the J-10Bs, however, not as less in proportion, as the USAF have on the F-15s to F-16s ratio.

Ideally, if finances, logistics permit it, PLAAF should have (300) J-20s, (300 to 500) J-11Bs, (700-900) J-10Bs and about (150-300) JH-7Bs. But I guess everyone here would laugh at such numbers. In spite this, I still say, that an air force of PLAAF's stature deserves the large fleet lay out, as I have mentioned. It's fit for a Superpower, that is China!

That is the problem with people at the moment. If the USA has it we must have it, if the USA has this much we must have this much. USA isn't the benchmark for everything. China's military is built around necessity, it puts economy first above everything else and the military grows accordingly to defend that economy. Military strength should be based on the size of the economy otherwise you end up where the Soviet Union, USA and Australia are at.

China current fighter inventory quantity is sufficient. The just need to phase out the 3rd Generation fighters. Evidently we see a trend where J-8 are replaced with Flankers, J-7 with J-10 and Q-5 with JH-7A. Now JH-7A numbers already surpass your low figure of 150, we are in the ~220 mark for JH-7A. It seems from observation that the production of JH-7A has been moving very slowly, possible indication of a new variant of JH-7 or something else entirely new. J-10's production have been slowed down, we have seen the J-10B been in testing for awhile now. High and mostly probable indication that the J-10A production line will cease were the J-10B will replace it.

I don't see the need for PLAAF to acquire 300 J-20. Mid 100's should be sufficient in protecting China's airspace even against the most strongest airforce. The biggest problem for PLAAF now is replacing the large number of J-7, and also engines now they can make small batches with good quality. But the problem is they cannot make enough to meet demand of what the PLAAF needs. They got to power J-11 & J-10.

 

[franco-russe]

No, we do not see a trend where J-8 (II) is replaced by J-11.

The only J-8's that are phased out are J-8A/E (I), most recently 24 Ftr Div 70 Regt Zunhua, which got J-7G instead. The only one that got J-11/SU-27 was 6 Ftr Div 16 Regt Yinchuan.

The J-8 II's are fairly recent, being produced between 1996 and 2007. I did a study of the J-8B/D/H/F fleet and found (somewhat to my surprise) that they basically have 28 planes each (26 in the two Navy regiments).

My hunch is that J-8 II will be replaced by J-20.

 

[franco-russe]

By the way, HKSDU, if you are in the mood to update your fine tables of Chinese air combat regiments, these are the changes I would suggest:

J-11/SU-27
2 Div - 6 Regt J-11/SU-27UBK
6 Div - 16 Regt J-11/SU-27SK/UBK
6 Div - 17 Regt - delete
19 Div – 57 Regt J-11B/BS
29 Div – 86 Regt J-11/SU-27UBK
30 Div – 89 Regt J-11B/BS
37 Div – 111 Regt J-11B/BS

J-8
9 Div – 27 Regt J-8DH
21 Div – 62 Regt J-8DH/H
24 Div – 70 Regt J-7G
26 Div – 77 Regt JZ-8F/JZ-6 ex 3 Ind Recce Regt
4 Ind Recce Regt JZ-8F/JZ-6
PLANAF
5 Div – 15 Regt J-8E/J-8F/JZ-8F
9 Div - 25 Regt J-8BH/DH

JH-7A/Q-5
5 Div – 14 Regt Q-5C/L - add
11 Div – 32 Regt Q-5 - add
15 Div – 44 Regt Q-5 - add
20 Div - 58 Regt Q-5 - delete, became 3 Regt, Shenyang MR Training Base
28 Div – 84 Regt JH-7A
37 Div – 110 Regt JH-7A

J-7
3 Div - 7 Regt J-7G
6 Div - 18 Regt J-7H – add
7 Div – 21 Regt J-7E - add
14 Div – 41 Regt J-7H
15 Div – 43 Regt J-7D
19 Div – 56 Regt J-7B – add
30 Div – 88 Regt J-7E
30 Div – 90 Regt J-7E
31 Div – 91 Regt – delete, became 12 Div, 34 Regt
33 Div – 97 Regt J-7E
35 Div – 103 Regt – delete, became 9 Div, 26 Regt, now at Huiyang with J-10

All J-8 and J-7 regiments probably have 4 JJ-7A each, but it is not possible to prove this for each J-7 regiment.
Q-5 regiments are acquiring Q-5J to replace JJ-6.