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

Miragedriver

Miragedriver

Brigadier
Jeff Head said:
Nice!

I have always really liked the JH-7A.

I believe it to be a very decent, long-range strike aircraft that is serving Chinese interests well.
Click to expand...

It is a very good bomb truck and with the proper combination of anti-shipping missiles it poses a serious threat to any naval task force.

nIfW3ew.jpg



I find it attractive also. Looks like a Jaguar on steroids

fYAdW3y.jpg



will now get back to bottling my Malbec
 
Last edited:
I

Inst

Captain
The JH-7A's performance is actually pretty impressive when you compare it to a H-6. They have about the same combat range and the JH-7A actually has a superior payload.
 
I

Inst

Captain
The H-6 has poor combat range / payload because on top of its heft, it runs turbojets, which are notoriously fuel inefficient. With the turbofans on the H-6K, it supposedly has around 3,500 km, which is quite respectable.

The JH-7, in general, is comparable to F-15E or Su-34 strike fighters / fighter bombers in capability (F-15E has 1240-1840km range x ~10,400 kg payload, the Su-34 has ~1100 km range at low altitude with a 12,000 kg payload). However, really bad targeting systems limits its effective targeting range to only 40-80km. It's begging for a nice AESA upgrade.
 
Last edited:
thunderchief

thunderchief

Senior Member
Inst said:
The JH-7, in general, is comparable to F-15E or Su-34 strike fighters / fighter bombers in capability (F-15E has 1240-1840km range x ~10,400 kg payload, the Su-34 has ~1100 km range at low altitude with a 12,000 kg payload). However, really bad targeting systems limits its effective targeting range to only 40-80km. It's begging for a nice AESA upgrade.
Click to expand...

No. JH-7 is comparable to previous generation of strike aircraft (slightly better then Su-24M2 , roughly equal to Tornado IDS ) . F-15E is a multirole fighter, with much better maneuverability and T/W. F-15 started as a air superiority fighter and still retains that capability. As for Su-34, although not a fighter in a strict sense, it still retains some of the characteristics of Flanker family. Also, there was a considerable effort to reduce frontal RCS of Su-34 .

JH-7 is best suited to be standoff weapons carrier and currently serves in that role in PLANAF . For PLAAF it could be useful against less sophisticated opponents, especially if air superiority is achieved . Overall, IMHO PLAAF would want to gradually reduce and replace aircraft of this type, while PLANAF may invest some money in upgrading them or building new version (rumored JH-7B) .
 
I

Inst

Captain
T/W based off payload and maximum take-off weight (subtract payload from maximum take-off weight to get loaded weight) should actually be between .9 and 95, so it's actually better than the F-35's T/W, hence I think trashing the JH-7's multi-role potential should be avoided. Same with wing area, if you assume it weighs 20-21 tons loaded, you get a respectable 390 kg/m^2 for take-off.

What limits its multi-role potential is more the lack of a good radar, possible lack of high-G stress design, and lack of aerodynamic focus on air to air combat.
 
kwaigonegin

kwaigonegin

Colonel
Inst said:
T/W based off payload and maximum take-off weight (subtract payload from maximum take-off weight to get loaded weight) should actually be between .9 and 95, so it's actually better than the F-35's T/W, hence I think trashing the JH-7's multi-role potential should be avoided. Same with wing area, if you assume it weighs 20-21 tons loaded, you get a respectable 390 kg/m^2 for take-off.

What limits its multi-role potential is more the lack of a good radar, possible lack of high-G stress design, and lack of aerodynamic focus on air to air combat.
Click to expand...

I agree. Upgrade the avionics, pair it to the latest gen multimode radar and nav kits, do an all glass cockpit, tack on a sensor or two and FLIR, upgrade the EW and she'll be more than good for the next 10-15 years easy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top