PLA AEW&C, SIGINT, EW and MPA thread
- Thread starter Sczepan
- Start date
E-3‘s radar is PESA while KJ-500’s is AESA plus an American general said every pulse from Chinese radars is different.
Yes. If we are looking at USAF E-3 aircraft, I would say the difference is at least 2 generations.
BTW I think the C-919 is perfect for an MPA and AWACS platform. China's MIC should be capable of covering everything up to military standards considering that they can equip the PLAAF. The threat of sanctions is a moot threat because of the size of China's airliner market. I think a military-spec C-919 could be realized in 5 years if the PLA requested such an aircraft.
Last edited:
Once the USAF starts introducing the E-7s into service to replace the E-3s, would the E-7s be on the same level of advancement as the KJ-500? Or higher?
Besides, the C919 is also perfect for becoming the 4th-generation AEW&C platform for the PLAAF, which would become even more advanced, powerful and versatile than the AEW&C aircrafts that we have right now.
Perhaps the PLAAF can aim for something further, i.e. E-10 MC2A-equivalent in the 2030s aswell with their C929.
Last edited:
How many AWACS does China have? In wikipedia the page for KJ-500 says 25 total, but page for the list of active military aircraft in PLA shows 35 total KJ-500. Counts for KJ-200 is also very different in various pages.
Also, is China actively producing new AWACS planes like the KJ-500?
Also, is China actively producing new AWACS planes like the KJ-500?
You do know everyone can edit Wikipedia right? I can change it to 500 if I wanted.
Well its the only fast source of information in terms of unit count available. I wish there was an easily accessible page of counts of various units here in SDF, then I could look it up.
Well, I found a more credible count after finding a PDF for IISS military balance report 2022. Its 19 for PLA air force and 24 for PLA naval air force.
Its surprising that PLA Air Force has less AWACS than the NAVAL Air. Overall the AWACS count seems very low compared to the US,
US Navy 74 E-2 and US Air Force has 31 AWACS planes. It seems PLA AWACS to Fighter ratio is much lower than the US.
Is there any new program to produce new AWACS to reduce this Gap in the PLA?
In terms of PLA total (i.e.: inclusive of PLAAF and PLANAF, there are:
4x KJ-2000s
at least 11x KJ-200s (likely more)
at least 40x KJ-500s (likely more)
The KJ-200s and KJ-500s appear to be somewhat divided evenly between PLAAF and PLANAF, while the KJ-2000s are PLAAF only.
Comparing USAF and USN fleets to the PLA total fleets is difficult because of how different the categories are.
E-3 and KJ-2000 are somewhat traditional large airframe AEW&Cs
KJ-500 and KJ-200 are medium airframe AEW&Cs
E-2 are small airframe AEW&Cs optimized for (and also somewhat limited by) carrier deck operations
Of the above, the E-3 is easily the oldest type, with the most obsolete mission systems.
E-2Ds that the USN operates is quite modern, but as aforementioned it is a rather small airframe with the pros and cons that has.
KJ-2000 is meaningfully more modern than E-3 but not as capable as KJ-500.
KJ-200 is also quite modern but also less capable than KJ-500 with the limitation that its primary array only has side coverage (though possibly mitigated by upgrades that give it nose and tail arrays to provide it with technically there 360 degree coverage).
KJ-500 is arguably the most capable of the lot by a margin when taking mission systems and airframe together -- its primary global competitor would be the E-7.
As far as AEW&C capability to fighter ratios go, the PLA is in a pretty decent spot globally, and they are continuing to build KJ-500s and there are signs they are going to be building more KJ-200s as well.
In the medium term future onwards it's likely they will supplement and augment their manned AEW&C fleet with AEW UAVs, and it's possible a Y-20 based AEW&C could be procured in small numbers eventually a new manned AEW&C possibly based on a domesticated C919 airframe will emerge.
Hasn't the E-3 been continually upgraded throughout its service life? It might be older, but is it necessarily the most obsolete out of the line-up here?