You don't really know J-7 pilots at all. Pilots being chosen for J-10 and J-11 are being chosen because they are the youngest and thus have the longest career time ahead of them. Thus, it is best for the training investment. Also, they are the most malleable nuggets. It's got nothing to do if you're better or not---generally if you reach to this stage, you are already good. There is no shortage of recruits in the PLAAF, and there is a very strong Darwinian process working before you can even get to fly a plane, much less a fighter or any fighter.
Many of the J-7 and J-8II pilots are old. They may not be getting as much flight hours per year, but they are still more experienced, and they might still kick a young buck in a J-10 or J-11. When they get retired or move to the airline jobs, they won't get replaced on a one to one basis.
I don't think a J-7 datalink would cost as much as a Link 16 terminal. The Link16 does a lot more but a J-7 datalink does not need the same requirements. Other than plane to AWACS, plane to GCI and possibly peer to peer with Su-27s/Su-30s/J-8IIs.
J-7s are not likely to fly over the water for long range maritime missions. They won't meet F-18s unless F-18s would be flying over the mainland, and by then, would be evading SAMs.
When an airspace gets crowded because of dense numbers of both friendly and opposing aircraft fighting each other, chances of BVR fratricide gets pretty good. You will have to fight this one close up mano o mano. I have always felt in general that BVR is a bit overrated while WVR is greatly underrated. Let us not forget to mention, some fighter tactics don't use the radar at all in order not to alert the opponent. Your RWR and your datalink are your best friends. In that sense, a radar like the J-8II's won't be an advantage.
A J-8II is not necessarily that much faster than a late model J-7E or J-7G. The J-8II is a lot bigger and easier to eyeball than a J-7G. The J-8 will show up in the radar bigger and faster. BVR weapons are certainly not infallible and the J-7 will have the same close in weapons as the J-8II. Lower radar cross section, smaller size, superior agility makes the J-7 more survivable than a J-8II when a missile is fired upon.
China is already working on their own UCAVs too. A number of semi retired J-6s and J-7s might end up as drones. By the time UCAVs come into force 20 years from now in the US, the number of surviving J-7s are going to be pretty small, maybe less than a hundred to two hundred, and most probably assigned in the backwater, west or the interior of China. They are not going to face the best and the brunt of enemy fighters, but those who survived the first and second tier defenses. More likely than not, these J-7s would be intercepting UCAVs, cruise missiles or unmanned bombers. And who is to say that these J-7s might be unmanned themselves.
Many of the J-7 and J-8II pilots are old. They may not be getting as much flight hours per year, but they are still more experienced, and they might still kick a young buck in a J-10 or J-11. When they get retired or move to the airline jobs, they won't get replaced on a one to one basis.
I don't think a J-7 datalink would cost as much as a Link 16 terminal. The Link16 does a lot more but a J-7 datalink does not need the same requirements. Other than plane to AWACS, plane to GCI and possibly peer to peer with Su-27s/Su-30s/J-8IIs.
J-7s are not likely to fly over the water for long range maritime missions. They won't meet F-18s unless F-18s would be flying over the mainland, and by then, would be evading SAMs.
When an airspace gets crowded because of dense numbers of both friendly and opposing aircraft fighting each other, chances of BVR fratricide gets pretty good. You will have to fight this one close up mano o mano. I have always felt in general that BVR is a bit overrated while WVR is greatly underrated. Let us not forget to mention, some fighter tactics don't use the radar at all in order not to alert the opponent. Your RWR and your datalink are your best friends. In that sense, a radar like the J-8II's won't be an advantage.
A J-8II is not necessarily that much faster than a late model J-7E or J-7G. The J-8II is a lot bigger and easier to eyeball than a J-7G. The J-8 will show up in the radar bigger and faster. BVR weapons are certainly not infallible and the J-7 will have the same close in weapons as the J-8II. Lower radar cross section, smaller size, superior agility makes the J-7 more survivable than a J-8II when a missile is fired upon.
China is already working on their own UCAVs too. A number of semi retired J-6s and J-7s might end up as drones. By the time UCAVs come into force 20 years from now in the US, the number of surviving J-7s are going to be pretty small, maybe less than a hundred to two hundred, and most probably assigned in the backwater, west or the interior of China. They are not going to face the best and the brunt of enemy fighters, but those who survived the first and second tier defenses. More likely than not, these J-7s would be intercepting UCAVs, cruise missiles or unmanned bombers. And who is to say that these J-7s might be unmanned themselves.
Last edited:
