J-11B's radar detection is probably 30% more than that of J-10. But J-10 has much smaller RCS, so they probably balance each other out.
thanks. that looks good to me (the range vs radius part).Looking at the [sry, german text] (equations 10 and 12) I think the detection range increases linearily with antenna diameter.
Radius is quadratic in antenna area A, wich is linear in antenna gain G, wich is quadratic in the range R (12) that means radius is in the fourth dimension in R. But it's also in the fourth root. So that should be linear.?
Does that make sense, or is it even understandable ... ??
One point I like to mention is the important thing is not necessarily how J-11B and J-10 compare against each other, but again their common enemies. Most probably F-16s. But also -15, -18, ...
J-11B can detect them from farther away while J-10 can stay undetected for longer.
One thing that's also mentioned rather often is that Flankers could bring more kinetic energy. But I'm not sure if that's that important an advantage over the J-10.
In PLAAF J-10 is mainly an air superiority fighter, whereas J-11B is a multi-role fighter for ground/ship attack. So in air combat J-10's better maneuverability and smaller RCS will give itself a decisive advantage.
No, J-11BJ/J-15 is the end of Chinese Flanker development, which is the naval carrier variant w/o canards.Then again, since the J-10 lacks an IRST, it's only sensor to detect other aircraft is it's radar, wich can be jamed and gives away the aircraft precense. (Though AESA tech will reduce those riscs somewhat)
The J-11B's IRST can be a helpfull part in finding other assets without radiating or being jamed.
The J-10 will also become multirole (as did the Flanker, wich started as an air superiority fighter), though perhaps doing "lighter" strike missions.
The J-10 is also a newer design.
BTW, are there signs that later J-11s will also get canards?