PLA Air Force news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Some of those weapons most certainly are not standoff lol (the first two "cheap short range guided bombs").
Personally I don't think we know what on earth the JH-7A2 is even meant to be and what supposed upgrades it has. In fact, have we even had any pictures of the JH-7A2 supposedly on display at Zhuhai this year to see what it's fitted with?
As far as new weapons are concerned, I think 2/3 of the list you described can be summed up as:
100kg, 250kg and 500kg PGM families, with or without wing extensions, and with or without certain additional guidance modes.
But we all know that the PLA doesn't seem to have committed to a family of direct attack PGMs in large numbers yet.
The others, being a stealthy stand off missile, and a new ARM, are of course awaited, but not exactly JH-7A2 centric.
But even without new weapons, there could be some iterative improvements to the JH-7A to let it keep up with modern times a bit better... even if it isn't anything as dramatic as an AESA radar upgrade.
I'd also add that the description of the JH-7A2 at Zhuhai is very vague and may or may not mean what we think it does as far as the extent of expanded weapons compatibility.
Last edited:
Satellite images of expansion activities at western airbases. Not sure about the analysis and identification, as it's done by some Indian guy, but the images are nonetheless interesting.
Bad analysis. The "J-8"s are are clearly JH-7s (swept instead of delta wings) and the flankers can't be Su-35s, which use blue paint job and are stationed no where near the Western borders.
Is it normal having all the hardened air shelters all in the same location? It should be an inherent vulnerability having that many high-value aircraft so close to each other
Also, shouldn't the air shelters not be connected with each other? So that the destruction of one air shelter doesn't structurally weaken or compromise the other 2 (left and right) which are connected to it.
On the other other hand you could argue that having them connected means that the impact/explosion forces can be (depends on many variables) directed nearby and thus potentially reducing the damage in the structure
Probably cheaper to build them next to each other and saves ramp space. In any event, the bigger advantage is foiling spy satellites rather than protecting the aircraft from explosions. HAS made sense when PGM's were rare and expensive, but now they are cheap and plentiful v- as Saddam Hussien's air force found out the hard way.
by78
General
There are only so many places where you can erect shelters without complicating ground logistics and traffic management. When the order to scramble comes, getting the planes off the ground in the shortest possible time is of the highest priority. Having shelters scattered around the base is not the way to do that. In this age of precision strikes, it makes little difference if the shelters are placed apart here and there; they'll get hit along with the runways. The key is to get the jets airborne safely and quickly before the base is hit. Also, I'm not sure if the shelters are actually connected. All ground images of the hardened shelters I've seen thus far make no indication that they are connected. Placed next to each other, yes, but connected, probably not.
Last edited:
by78
General
Exactly, which is why I said not to trust it. Indians seem to have making even the most basic visual identifications accurately.
I dont know if u guys noticed, but at the end, he cites @Deino's book as his main source. +10 points