What I think of the planes:
J-8II
Pros: Cheap high speed BVR platform with fairly large radar, with PL-11, PL-12 support. Can dual role as a fast bomber and striker. Proven platform with bugs refined out for the years. Rugged. Fully domestically made. High speed, hit and run tactics can give the J-8II a good account of itself against more modern fighters.
Cons: Not very maneuverable. Sucks gas like there is no tomorrow. Mediocre range. Highly dedicated interceptor design aka supersonic SAM platform is inadequete for air superiority use, which also requires a premium in maneuverbility.
Future assesement: Latest variant, J-8F will probably only see limited new production runs. Instead, the bulk of J-8H and J-8D versions will be upgraded to the J-8F standard. Older J-8A and J-8B will eventually be retired so we will see a large reduction of the force, but upgraded more newer airframes will still last for some more years. This can still number signifcantly to about 200 aircraft.
Rating
3-1/2 stars.
J-7
Pros: Very cheap, very agile fighter. This is a great peacetime fighter that is good to train pilots in WVR combat, add flight hours, and use as aggressors. Fully domestically made. Will still give a 4th generation fighter a good run for it in a dogfight.
Cons: Extremely limited flight and radar range. Its still almost a day fighter highly focused on WVR combat.
Future Assesement: All earlier variants of J-7 prior to J-7E will be retired. This will encompass the still common J-7B versions to the limited J-7C/D variants. J-7G will be produced in a limited number, the vast majority of J-7E will just be upgraded to this standard and moved to other category B regiments to replace their earlier J-7 fighters. The J-7E/G will become like a "training fighter" and regiments with them are like on standby, using the planes for exercises, before they ultimately upgrade to the J-11, J-10 or FC-1. My guess is that the J-7 fleet, which numbers from nearly 800 to 1000 planes, will be reduced to about 300, mainly J-7E/G.
Rating:
2 stars
J-10
Pros: Simply currently the PLAAF's most modern and capable aircraft.
Cons: I estimate that it's also expensive. Currently dependent on imported Russian engines.
Future Assesement. Foreign dependence on engine will limit its number until domestic engines can take over, which can take some time. I believe production of the original J-10A serial variant will end in about 100 planes, then production will shift to the "Super 10" variant with TVC and probably better radar. While not superior to the F-35, the Super 10 is the PLAAF's best chance of closing the gap with the F-35 should the ROCAF and JASDF acquire them.
Rating:
5 stars.
J-11
Pros: Very capable airframe. Great speed, maneuverbility, range and payload. Lots of airframe potential and expansion.
Cons: Avionics not up to Western standards or even up to some of the latest Chinese designs. A bit expensive and demanding to maintain. Issues with reliability and vendor service. Currently dependent on Russian and therefore imported munitions.
Future Assesement: China has turned around and appeared intent to finish the 200 plane contract. But instead of acquiring kits, they choose to source the parts independently. Again, this shows that much of the plane is now domesticated and China only needs to procure the gaps. This includes the engine and some avionics. The J-11 variant of the Su-27SK is somewhat more capable, with radar enhanced to support the R-77 and has a better IRST. However, even these appear crude to the avionics being installed on the J-10, JH-7A and proposed on the FC-1. This was supposed to be rectified with the J-11B variant that would feature Chinese avionics and integration with Chinese missiles. But it seems to me that SAC must have underwent a culture shock after rival CAC displayed the latest FC-1 systems. The J-11B could have gone back to development to revise its avionics systems in order to compete with the J-10 and FC-1. Currently the problem is that CAC has stolen much of SAC's and the J-11's thunder with its "Thunder".
To sum it up, the future of the J-11 now rests on the J-11B variant, and how well its systems can keep up with the local competition. Having said this, even some of the systems Sukhoi proposed, from the Su-27SM upgrade to the Su-35s, still kind of look antiquated compared to what the FC-1 and the increasingly confident Chinese avionics industry seems able to display.
Rating:
4 stars
JH-7A
Pros: Completely domestically made. Support for local weapons including the latest Chinese precision guided munitions. Modernized avionics.
Cons: Airframe increasingly antiquated. Dedicated strike role design becoming more passe in the age of multirole. Fairly vulnerable to 4th generation fighter opposition due to high weight and low engine thrust even with increased use of building composites and possible upgrade in thrust.
Future Assesement. Until the true multirole J-10 and J-11B models---and I mean those with precision strike capability---finally come out, the JH-7A is currently the most versatile PLAAF strike platform. But those rivals might still take some time, and so the JH-7A will be made and gradually replace Q-5 regiments. While it does not perform as well as the MKK in air combat, the role of a striker is not as demanding as a fighter, and so it needs only to be fast, get in, fire and get out as soon as possible. The airframe appears adequete for all sorts of expansion. So long as it avoids air combat, and is well covered by other fighters, the JH-7A is quite capable of doing its specialized job. Being a two seater also gives it an advantage because it allows for a specialized weapons officer. The J-11s appear to be single seater, and there is still a question if China is licensed to produce a twin seater J-11. At the same time, even with the new two seater variant, the J-10 platform appears to be smaller and won't be able to handle larger munitions like four YJ-83s as well.
Rating:
4 stars
Q-5
Pros: Unlike the JH-7A, this plane has lightning fast reflexes and fighter like maneuverbility. Rugged, cheap, with already a built in infrastructure to maintain it. Modernization allows them to carry Chinese made laser guided munitions.
Cons: Small payload, short range. Difficult to fly. Short airframe life and engine. Little room for avionics expansion.
Future Assesement. Surprisingly, this plane might stick around. CAS ops don't demand so much on aircraft performance, and the Q-5, due to its MiG-19 heritage, can run rings around more modern attackers and even LIFT trainers. Being cheap, they're also expendable and can overwhelm a target with speed and numbers. They're quite fast on the deck, and for an old plane, might be hard to catch. However, their short range and payload greatly hinders their overall capability, so they have to be augmented by more advanced, higher payload aircraft.
Rating.
3 stars
FC-1
Pros: Smooth development. Pretty impressed with what we have seen so far. Nice avionics suite. Appears to be highly agile. Cost effective, has BVR capability that might support the PL-12 ARH.
Cons: Overall performance does not appear to be much better than the Taiwan IDF which has been in service for over a decade, and the ROCAF appears on the way to acquire even much more advanced aircraft. Airframe has limited growth potential and range.
Future Assesement: I still would rather see an emphasis on the J-10 and J-11 for modernization. Although more cost effective than the other two, the range and small payload can seriously hinder this plane in mission roles. It's not any faster than the J-8II, nor is the flight range expected to be much better; the radar is smaller than the J-8II, JH-7A, J-10 or J-11's, so its detection range won't be any better. While the plane appears to be agile, to what degree it's that much better than the much cheaper J-7E/G is the question.
Rating
3-1/2 stars.
