JH-7/JH-7A/JH-7B Thread

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: Jh-7 thread

MIGleader said:
How many aircraft does a PLAAF regiment consist of? i utterly clueless when it comes to order of battle. :confused:

plus, anyone know the stats of the jl-10A?
I seem to find 24-28 as the average. Although the number does vary as you see with the second JH-7 regiment (19 JH-7?)
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Re: Jh-7 thread

U.S. Commander Views China's FB7 Fighter Jet

By Edward Cody
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, May 15, 2006; 9:33 AM



SHENYANG, China, May 15 -- Adm. William J. Fallon, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, flashed what aides described as a broad grin as he sat in the cockpit of a twin-engine FB7 fighter-bomber, China's most advanced domestically produced warplane.

"They had to drag me out of there,'' recalled Fallon, a veteran carrier pilot, as he described the first such close-up look by a U.S. official of the modern two-seater that is scheduled to become a key part of China's air defenses.

Fallon's visit to China's 28th Air Division, based near Hangzhou, and his pilot's-view inspection of the newly deployed FB7 were high points in a week-long tour of Chinese military installations and meetings with senior officers, including Defense Minister Cao Guangchuan. In a windup briefing here Monday, Fallon said the visits marked a significant step forward in his drive to increase contacts between the U.S. and Chinese militaries as a way to dissolve suspicions and reduce chances that the two Pacific powers will go to war.

"They really went out of their way to accommodate nearly everything I wanted to do," he said. The goal, he added, is to keep pushing for more contacts, "to see more things, and different things, and to be more open and transparent in military matters."

Seeking to accelerate the movement, Fallon said, he invited senior Chinese officers to observe U.S.-led joint military exercises next summer near the Pacific island of Guam, promising them the opportunity to review U.S. onshore bases and board U.S. warships during air-sea drills. Understood in the invitation, he added, was the idea that, if the Chinese attend, they would reciprocate by inviting U.S. officers to observe future Chinese exercises "in a manner we would like to make a standard for both countries."

"That's what this is all about," he said, adding: "There are extensive [U.S.-Chinese] contacts in every area. The one lag, the one exception, is in military-to-military contacts. We set out last year to right that."

U.S. officers and diplomats, for instance, were not invited to observe large-scale exercises by Chinese and Russian forces last August in the East China Sea and the Russian Far East. Partly as a result, the exercises were interpreted as a gesture by Moscow and Beijing to show they have the means to protect their regional interests without reference to the United States, even though it is the overwhelming power in the Pacific.

More broadly, transparency has been a key U.S. demand in recent years as China modernizes its 2.3 million-strong military and increasingly takes its place as a major power in the Asian Pacific region. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has asked publicly several times why, in the absence of direct threats, China would need the military establishment it seems to be building if, as its leaders proclaim, its intentions are peaceful.

China has vowed to use force, as a last resort, to prevent Taiwan from gaining formal independence, raising a danger of conflict that is part of any military calculation here. The island, 100 miles from China's southern coast, has ruled itself since Chiang Kai-shek's defeated Nationalist forces fled there in 1949, but Beijing has continued to regard it as a province that must eventually return to the Chinese fold.

Partly to back up that threat, the Chinese defense budget has increased by more than 10 percent annually in recent years, reaching $35.4 billion in 2006. Pentagon specialists estimate that if unreported equipment purchases are taken into account, the real expenditures could be several times that.

Fallon said that this subject came up in his 90-minute discussions with Cao, a general who is vice chairman of the Communist Party's policymaking Central Military Commission. The response was that, with such a large military, even a little expenditure on each soldier adds up fast, Fallon reported.

In the exchange, Cao also asked Fallon why the Pentagon, in its recent Quadrennial Defense Report, suggested China is the country with the greatest potential to pose a challenge to the U.S. military in the future.

"As we discussed these items, it struck me that we have a long way to go," Fallon said.

The United States and China cut off military contacts in 2001 after a U.S. Navy EP-3 surveillance plane and a Chinese fighter collided over the South China Sea, killing a Chinese pilot and forcing the U.S. aircraft to make an emergency landing on China's Hainan island. The 24-member crew was allowed to leave only after prolonged negotiations and a U.S. statement that China interpreted as an apology.

Since taking over as head of the Honolulu-based U.S. Pacific Command in February 2005, Fallon has campaigned to restore and expand the ties, seeking to multiply contacts at all levels of the two countries' military hierarchy. At the top, Rumsfeld visited China in October, touring strategic command headquarters. Fallon said Chinese and U.S. officers will meet in June to discuss exchanges of lower-level officers in the two strategic commands.

Cao also endorsed the idea of restoring and growing military-to-military relations, telling the official New China News Agency they are "an important part of bilateral relations." But he did not immediately respond to Fallon's invitation for Chinese officers to observe next summer's Valiant Shield exercises around Guam.

Fallon said that, in addition to the air base near Hangzhou where he sat in the FB7, he visited an air force training academy near Xian, home of the celebrated terra cotta warriors -- which he also viewed--and the 39th Infantry Regiment south of Shenyang, in Liaoning province 400 miles northeast of Beijing and a short distance from the border with North Korea.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Re: Jh-7 thread

No wonder no bodys posting..The sight has some sort of glich...Oh well.

I'm jealous of USN ADM Fallon's visit...Man I really wish I could do something like that. As long as I had a good inturputer and some concubines..ooppss!! JUST KIDDING!!!..did I say that?? Any way as China watcher I would really love to see the PLA assests up close. Espically the Navy and any aircraft. I genuinelly hope that this visit was productive and fosters some cooperation and more respect between the USA and PRC. Maybe there will be some naval excersise like the USN had with Russia earlier this year.

I betcha those PLA forces were the sharpest that could be put foward for any visitor to see. Excellent job by the PLA!: china: :china: :china: Wish I coulda been there!

ADM Fallon seems to have been the right person to send for the visit. Afterall he is;

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Rummy the dummy tried to put a USAF general in charge in of the Pacific US forces. But the US congress shot him down...That's one of the reasons I call him "Rummy... the dummy"...
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: Jh-7 thread

one constant question on the capability of Chinese fighters lay in the radar department.

There is always speculation on when Chinese fighters will get AESA radar.

The item below is something I found on Chinese forums regarding a possible AESA radar developed for future models of JH-7A.

328/328甲全固态机载相控阵雷达(JH-7A飞豹2的机载雷达)
名  称: 328/328甲全固态机载相控阵雷达
体  制: 全固态有源阵、单脉冲、脉冲压缩
波  段: X
研制单位: 中国科学院电子研究所、长风机器厂、航天部二院二十五所、上海电子物理研究所、中国雷华电子研究所等多家科研机构
研剖奔洌骸?993年开始,1999年完成第一阶段计划:328全固态机载相控阵雷达
研制目的: 研究全固态机载有源相控阵雷达
现  状: 2002年9月已发展到第二阶段:可装备试用阶段:328甲全固态机载相控阵雷达

I'm thinking this is just one of the many ongoing AESA radar projects, but we will see.

It says that type 328 radar started development in 1993, finished first round of development in 1999 and finished second round of development in September of 2002 and can begin trialing

Again, no indication that this radar has landed on JH-7 or that China has developed the capability to produce millions of T/R modules, but we will see how this goes.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: Jh-7 thread

interesting article on the differences between jh-7 and jh-7a:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the pictures indicating jh-7a and jh-7 respectively
13429021_2006062613201479226700.jpg

13429021_2006062613201481514600.jpg

13429021_2006062613201483193100.jpg

Note, the first one is JH-7a and the next two are jh-7s.
basically, a shift to one-piece windshield from a 3-piece windshield
added hard points in jh-7a
removal of wing fences
single underbelly fin with two small underbelly fins
 

planeman

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Re: Jh-7 thread

so what's the benchmark of the JH-7 fleet today - how many aircraft and what weapons would they be equiped with if they went into an operational scenario literally today?
 

chicket9

New Member
I'd say for JH-7 basic variant, nothing more than the YJ-81/2 air launched anti-ship missiles, and unguided rockets/bombs, and PL-5 wingtip AAMs for self defense. So pretty much should be reserved only for anti-shipping stirkes. Then again, there aren't an aweful lot of JH-7s (only one batch of bout 18-24 as pre-production?).

JH-7A, at least two batches I know of (each batch again round the 20 mark), one serving with PLANAF and one with PLAAF.
Despite the models and mock ups of JH-7A capable of deploying a huge variety of Russian/Chinese munitions, I am sure that not all munitions are ready or in production yet...

But I'd say the Kh-31A ARM, YJ-81/82, PL-5 AAM, KAB-500 LGB, and possibly the YJ-85 ALCM. Those are the weapons currently in bulk service with PLAAF/PLANAF, and of course you can add the Russian Kh-29 and Kh-59 ASMs if they can be compatable (as there are large numbers of these weapons in service with the Su-30MKKs). + a huge load of unguided munitions as well.

Weapons that could be made available in smaller numbers or would be soon available in wartime are indigenous made ARMs and LGBs. And soon, longer range ALCMs.

Mod Edit (SwimmerXC): About this comment " Last edited by swimmerXC : 1 Minute Ago at 08:43 PM. Reason: try using the edit button please" please forgive me, I made a mistake into merging Planeman and your post together.. Anyways I got rid of Planeman's part. Sorry.
But his original message was..
planeman said:
sSo it would be fair to estimate 20 JH-7s and 40 JH-7As, all typically carrying YJ-83 missiles when employed in the anti-ship role?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Re: Jh-7 thread

There is currently known 4 regiments of JH-7s and JH-7As. There might be one or two more in the process of conversion, at least based on rumored message traffic.

2 regiments are in the 16th Division PLANAF. The first regiment consisted of original JH-7s. The second regiment used JH-7s with upgraded radar and avionics. It is highly possible to assume that the original JH-7s would have been upgraded by now to the same operational standard as the second batch.

One regiment in the 9th Division PLANAF. This is JH-7A.

One regiment in the 28th Division PLAAF in Hangzhou. This is JH-7A. The darker grey planes you see are PLAAF, while the lighter grey or white planes are PLANAF.

There really isn't an awful lot of JH-7s and JH-7As. The factory seems equally as busy making new H-6s and both PLAAF and PLANAF are commissioning them. To say the least, the JH-7s is facing some sibling competition here, the H-6s are also built in Xian AC.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: Jh-7 thread

crobato said:
There is currently known 4 regiments of JH-7s and JH-7As. There might be one or two more in the process of conversion, at least based on rumored message traffic.

2 regiments are in the 16th Division PLANAF. The first regiment consisted of original JH-7s. The second regiment used JH-7s with upgraded radar and avionics. It is highly possible to assume that the original JH-7s would have been upgraded by now to the same operational standard as the second batch.

One regiment in the 9th Division PLANAF. This is JH-7A.

One regiment in the 28th Division PLAAF in Hangzhou. This is JH-7A. The darker grey planes you see are PLAAF, while the lighter grey or white planes are PLANAF.

There really isn't an awful lot of JH-7s and JH-7As. The factory seems equally as busy making new H-6s and both PLAAF and PLANAF are commissioning them. To say the least, the JH-7s is facing some sibling competition here, the H-6s are also built in Xian AC.
this is the part that really confuses me. I just don't see why PLA is getting more H-6s, when JH-7 seems to be the better option. For example, H-6M seems to only be able to carry 4 air launched version of YJ-83, that's not any more than JH-7A.

It could be because they only produce enough engine for so many JH-7, but I'm not sure that is the reason.
 

planeman

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Re: Jh-7 thread

Can someone volunteer some estimated figures, I'm trying to grasp the current anti-ship firepower of PLAN/PLAAF.

One thing, are the PLAAF JH-7As used for anti-ship role or something else?


_______

Also, I'm going to be asking the same of the H-6s used in the anti-ship role; how many and what are they carrying?





PS. Great thread. Lots of quality info gathering and assessment. :)
 
Top