Modern and upgraded J-7

seeing that china has a great many of the J-7/Mig-21 what would be the thought of The PRC upgrading many of its aircraft to the likes of the Mig-21 Lancer the likes of which Romania has. This aircraft armed with the Opher IR guided bomb would give the J-7 a stand off range of 4+ miles with great probability of hitting ships or tanks with a super sonic aircraft in great numbers.

These J-7 would give it greater strike or loiter time/range and much greater speed than the Q-5 fantan while giving you a great PGM platform. What are your thoughts....cheers ute.

The Opher uses an infrared seeker that enables autonomous target designation after and before launch. This principle is also referred to as launch and forget because the weapon guides to its target using only its infrared homing head. Thanks to the IR technology, the Opher bomb can operate even in adverse weather. In addition, a single aircraft can release various Opher bombs simultaneously against separated targets. The Opher bomb converts into Lizar by switching the seeker. The Opher is only suitable against targets with high heat signature such as armored vehicles and ships

I thinkt he primary issue with the MiG-21/J-7 platform is limited range and payload capacity. It was designed as a high-speed point-defense fighter/interceptor, not strike aircraft. Even with upgrades, I don't think it'd be as capable as the Mirage F-1 for strike missions.

yes I agree....but taking into account what they have it would be a cost effective short term fix. The Opher is a great system and I could see 20 or 30 J-7 attacking an American or Taiwan shipping or ports with great success with such weapon systems. Then you compond the fact of having SU30 with supersonic and subsonic ASM in the mix this would cause big problems for any navy...cheers ute

Here's some specs on the upgraded MiG-21 Lancer:


Lancer is cleared for missiles such as the R60, R73 and Python 3 missiles, 250 and 500 lb bombs, laser guided munitions, targeting, ECM and Reconnaissance pods etc. The Lancer has demonstrated a circular error point (CEP) accuracy of 7 mil/radian and below, while maintaining 1-2meter CEP with laser guided weapons. The aircraft is also cleared for asymmetric loading of weapons, which provides a more flexible and economical use of weapons. Among the 110 aircraft, 85 are configured for ground attack, equipped with a ranging radar, while 25 are air defense variants, using the Elta EL/M-2032 air combat radar.

The Israeli solution is a combination of internal upgrades and external equipment. For the ground-attack variant, we have the upgraded EL/M-2032 radar, which has air-to-air, air-to-ground, and air-to sea modes:


Combined with external LITENING targetting pod:


With 1-2 meter CEP it's prolly good enough for dive-toss bomb attack on ships. But the MiG is still short on a "lite" anti-ship missile.

Just a quick addition to the thread -

I noticed that Rosoboronexport is advertising the Kh-35E/U anti-ship missile for export. The missile weights 520kg, with 145kg warhead, 3.85 meters long, 0.42 meters in diameter, speed up to March 0.8, and range up to 130km.

The missile's specs say that it can be equipped on the MiG-21. However when I read the MiG-21-93 upgrade specs, it says the new weapons capability includes RVV-AE, R-27T1, R27R1, R-73E, and KAB-500Kr. The Kh-35U is not listed:


I'm not sure how much fuel (internal & external) a MiG-21 can carry when loaded down with anti-ship missiles, but for nations on a budget, this offers their AF an AShM option.

Remember that J-7 is not the exactly equivalent to the MiG-21s the Lancer and -93 program had in mind for an upgrade. The J-7s are based on the original and light airframe -21F/FL, with a smaller nose and less of a spine. The third and fourth generation Fishbed -21MF and -21Bis that these upgrade programs are targeting look almost like a totally different aircraft, bigger radar, big spine, deeper tail, more weight, etc,.

China has a couple of regiments of J-7C/D variants that are based on the 3rd generation Fishbed airframe MiG-21MF. These planes can be potential candidates for similar upgrades. Please note, it was the Israelis that thought the Chinese how to integrate the Python 3 aka PL-8 missile to the J-7s, and the J-7D was the first J-7 to have this missile.

In effect, the Israelis may have contributed their share in upgrading and evolving the J-7s.

However, the J-7C/D variant proved to be unpopular with the PLAAF, although the 3 and 4th generation MiG-21 is used ubiquitiously everywhere in the world. Perhaps there was something lost in the translation of reverse engineering, but the Chinese usually fix and improve what they copy upon. The problems lie in the higher stall speed compared to the old J-7B, longer take off and landing distances, and subsequent loss of maneuverbility due to the higher weight, which is not compensated with any increase of wing area from the first generation Fishbeds.

So the production ended after two regiments were supplied, and CAC went back to the original J-7B version, added the more powerful engine of the -21MF, now reverse engineered as the WP-13, and developed a new double delta wing that enhanced maneuverbility and range.

However, going to the smaller and slimmer body, you are once again, going back to the small radar too. A few hundred of these were built, along with an improved variant, the J-7G. The radar size would limit the set's functionality. The J-7G itself is an upgrade, the radar on the J-7E is replaced by a more modern slotted array, inspired from the sets used on the export only F-7MG and F-7PG versions.

Problem with the J-7 airframe is its limited stores. Grant you, the J-7's airframe is upgraded with the -H version which allows two bombs and two fuel tanks to be carried simultaneously, but it is going to be a tight space for a laser target designator pod and the avionics to support it. The Opher sounds like an interesting alternative and I don't think its difficult for China to develop an autonomous infrared guided bomb.

As a note, radar emitters also produce a high heat signature, so that opens up the list of targets that can potentially attacked by such a bomb.

IMO, China has already made a commitment to convert some J-5, J-6 and J-7 into UACs! I have always assumed that if the PLA was ever to launch 100s of this outdated fighters as UACs they could make a huge hole in Taiwan's air defense. (There has been some discussion of such a strategy on CDF.

Peace,

"To Get Rich 'IN SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE' Is Good!"

John Fryer

First of all, MiG-21/F-7 can't carry the Kh-35 because it is too large (dimensional, not necessarily as weight). It would also generate a lot of drag. Its booster's huge smoke trail would choke the engine, causing a flame-out. For the same reasons (drag and smoke) the R-27, altough integrated, is not carried by the MiG-21-93/Bison, the lighter and more capable R-77 being its weapon of choice.

It's not worth using MiG-21/F-7 in anti-shipping missions because of its light payload (max. 2 Opher/LGB can be carried), lack of dedicated AShM. The J-7 is even more handicapped in this role because of the smaller radar diameter (meaning less radar range).
MiG-21-93 (Bison) has a max radar range of 56km
MiG-21MF-75 Lancer C has a max radar range of 90km - impressive for a MiG-21, but too small for (effective) antishipping duties.