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

[EDIATH]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

JH7 was funded by PLAN in the first place, possibly aiming for anti-ship missions which used to be the weak link for some time. I wouldn't imagine they sacrificed the payload for extra armor on this under-powered naval striker.

Even if we take PLAAF into consideration, they've got Q5 already for ground supporting missions, there is not much need to fortify JH7A for its stand-off attacking missions.

Besides, I reckon they classify JH7 as a fighter-bomber, and even arm it with short-ranged AAMs, adding its weight with armor doesn't really fit the picture.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

Besides, I reckon they classify JH7 as a fighter-bomber, and even arm it with short-ranged AAMs, adding its weight with armor doesn't really fit the picture.

I agree with everything else you said except for the fact that the JH-7 may be used in the "fighter role". Keep in mind that even the A-10 carries short-ranged AAMs for self-defence purposes. The JH-7 is not very manueverable and I expect that the AAMs are used when they are attacked by enemy fighters and that they will strictly adhere to the shoot'n scoot tactic.

 

[challenge]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

i'll attempt to bring this thread back on topic.
I know the internet is awash with claims of a new JH7B but it is now claimed to have been leaked by CCTV7.Someone has posted details on Pakdef forum and the following link looks quite credible. I'll try find the CCTV7 leak .Watch this space.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

a Chinese translation been circulating in the chinese web site
for the last 3(or was it 4) years, the report should be treating with doubt.
unless there is official confirmation, or just wait for this coming zhuhai air show.

 

[challenge]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

Alright, this is getting ridiculous. Please cut out on these rumour talks. Challenge, what you posted is nonsense. Please stop posting such wild rumors. The entire back fire story is just rehashed junk from five years sho. I don't understand why I even need to come here to tell people to ignore him. Zoom, what you posted is nonsense too. Until we see real evidence of jh7a iii, that is what it is. This is not a forum for wild speculations.

actually and may not rumor (or junk), since it was quoted in flight magazine and western military website. .
PLAAF on and off on the purchase of Tu-22M-4 may have reflect internal debate within PLAAF itself.

 

[rhino123]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

I agree with everything else you said except for the fact that the JH-7 may be used in the "fighter role". Keep in mind that even the A-10 carries short-ranged AAMs for self-defence purposes. The JH-7 is not very manueverable and I expect that the AAMs are used when they are attacked by enemy fighters and that they will strictly adhere to the shoot'n scoot tactic.

I think the primary mission for JH-7 is anti ship, as such they do not need to be very manueverable. However as suggested by its name state, I think being a 'fighter' is also what this plane is designed to be.

JH-7 do not necessary need to be fighting aircrafts, they might be used to fight shipborne helicopters that were launched from enemy's ships.

Just my two cents.

 

[tphuang]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

a bunch of pictures of JH-7A in the 5th division (14th regiment I think). Including numerous photos showing JH-7A carrying KD-88. We've actually seen quite a few pictures coming out of 5th division recently. My guess is that this means 5th division JH-7A has finally reached the point of fully comfortable with JH-7A. Remember, it took a while before the 28th division JH-7A photos came out repeatedly. I wonder how long it will take before the 11th division JH-7A get to this stage.

 

[Miragedriver]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

The JH-7 (if re-engined with the AL-31) will give it an increase in its acceleration. This aircraft is really the unsung hero of Chinese aircraft design. The potential that this aircraft has to be an excellent naval strike platform (in conjunction with the J-11) I don’t believe has been fully realized. Imagine this aircraft with a couple of YJ-82’s and several drop tanks. You could get some real long strike distances, and anytime you’re not limited by range you can have a tactical advantage of attacking from a direction that your opponent is not expecting. T will be interesting to see who there first major export customer will be.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

The JH-7 (if re-engined with the AL-31) will give it an increase in its acceleration. This aircraft is really the unsung hero of Chinese aircraft design. The potential that this aircraft has to be an excellent naval strike platform (in conjunction with the J-11) I don’t believe has been fully realized. Imagine this aircraft with a couple of YJ-82’s and several drop tanks. You could get some real long strike distances, and anytime you’re not limited by range you can have a tactical advantage of attacking from a direction that your opponent is not expecting. T will be interesting to see who there first major export customer will be.

The Al-31 won't be able to fit the JH-7; the Spey/WS-9 engines they were designed around are smaller.

And I doubt there will be any export customers; the JH-7A is undeniably an aged design, and many newer multirole fighters can do its job while also having higher manouverability.

That's not saying it's useless though; it can still rain down the whole PLAAF inventory of PGMs, and will be important in any ground/naval attack scenario.

 

[Miragedriver]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

The Al-31 won't be able to fit the JH-7; the Spey/WS-9 engines they were designed around are smaller.

And I doubt there will be any export customers; the JH-7A is undeniably an aged design, and many newer multirole fighters can do its job while also having higher manouverability.

That's not saying it's useless though; it can still rain down the whole PLAAF inventory of PGMs, and will be important in any ground/naval attack scenario.

I will adit that the JH-7 is an elderly design however it can pack a very hard punch and has the advantage of being cheep to produce. As for the engines I believe that you are incorrect in your statement. The Diameter, length and dry weight of the AL-31 is less than that of the Spey engine.
Should you wish to check, gere are some facts:

Spey WS-9 AL-31
Length 204.9 in (5204.4 mm) 4990 mm
Diameter 43.0 in (1092.2 mm) 905 mm
weight 4,093 lb (1856 kg) 1570 kg
Thrust military 12,140 lbf (54 kN) 74.5 kN
Thrust with afterburner 20,500 lbf (91.2 kN) 122.58 kN
Fuel consumption 0.82 lb/(lbf·h) 0.67 lb/(lbf·h)

 

[Blitzo]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

I will adit that the JH-7 is an elderly design however it can pack a very hard punch and has the advantage of being cheep to produce. As for the engines I believe that you are incorrect in your statement. The Diameter, length and dry weight of the AL-31 is less than that of the Spey engine.
Should you wish to check, gere are some facts:

Spey WS-9 AL-31
Length 204.9 in (5204.4 mm) 4990 mm
Diameter 43.0 in (1092.2 mm) 905 mm
weight 4,093 lb (1856 kg) 1570 kg
Thrust military 12,140 lbf (54 kN) 74.5 kN
Thrust with afterburner 20,500 lbf (91.2 kN) 122.58 kN
Fuel consumption 0.82 lb/(lbf·h) 0.67 lb/(lbf·h)

Oh whoops -- well it's good to know it can undergo an engine upgrade

BUT -- the fact that we haven't heard anything about re-engining the JH-7A probably says a lot; I think the PLAAF might not want to waste Al-31F's on an aging airframe and spend so much time having to redeisgn and rebalance for a boost in performance.