The Q-5, J-7, J-8 and older PLAAF aircraft

FORBIN said:

In more about 100 JJ-7s, 4 by Rgt plus some and others in training units ? i have 150 max.

Deino
Please the JJ-7 is eventualy able for combat ( ofc limited )coz on Huitong only last J-7 variants... he have radars, guns, IR AAMs ?

Click to expand...

Seems normaly can't to be able for combat, no guns for AAMs doubtfull he have.

• JJ-7: Based on J-7II but is 40% different than J-7II,equipped domestic HTY-2 ejection seat, Type 226 ranging radar, and other domestic Chinese systems. Guns are deleted but belly pylon can carry semi-buried twin 23 mm gun. Program formally begun on January 4, 1984, with state certification received on February 4, 1988.
• JJ-7A: Improved JJ-7 including more advanced avionics such as HUD and FJ-1 data recorder. Improved air conditioning system. Development begun in Feb 1994, with state certification received on Dec 7, 1996.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Franklin said:

You make a great point. They should replace all the J-7's as soon as possible.

Does anyone have a rough estimate how many Q-5's, J-7's and J-8's there are in service today ? The numbers i'm finding on the net ranges from 400 to close to 800 J-7's.

Click to expand...

Pardon me but have you read my post ? #386

Q-5 6 x Rgts of 24 + some = ~ 160
~ 60 J-8A/B/D in 2 Rgts
~ 142 J-8F/H 62/80 in 4 Rgts
~ 75 JZ-8F in 3 Rgts

J-7s with dumb bombs.

Totoro said:

It actually makes some sense not to give new planes to units currently operating Q5. Surely part of the reason is money, perhaps even that's the biggest part.

But there's also the role of the plane and the training needed to switch from it to something newer.

Q5 pilots trained exclusively for low level subsonic flight, for short range air support missions, possibly with fairly little night training. and most of their trained attacks were for very close range unguided weapon attacks. (more units had no models that could use targeting pods than units that did have them. And it's also unlikely there were targeting pods available for most planes per unit)
.

Click to expand...

but it is not a museum piece

Well the Chinese sold off a number of Q5 to allies and close neighbors. The North Koreans and Myanmar for example.
Q5 represents a concept of a aircraft that has increasingly fallen out of favor. Close attack with guns and dumb bombs. Was a necessity for a long time but comes at a cost as survivability is not really a guarantee for the pilot.
I mean if you are in range to spray 23mm shells at an enemy armored division, the enemy armored division is with in range to spray you.

sanblvd said:

I know Q-5 is an old and obsolete aircraft but it does has its functions, it fly slow and carry a lot of bomb for close air support, the closet China has to A-10 and Su-25. JH-7 and J-16 are more off stand off missile carriers and not the same role.

After Q-5 is gone is there anything to replace it? Or China is going directly to drones?

Click to expand...

Drones have limitations that prevent them from taking the direct attack role, most are to light, there are issues of targeting and communications to. What has really killed direct replacements for such is first the cost, second increased attrition rates for such platforms, third increased availability of Attack Choppers, fourth reduced need thanks to advanced long range high accuracy antitank guided missiles. These have pushed to allow multirole fighters and light weight armed trainer class aircraft to take the mission set more and more.
The top 2 tank buster aircraft the A10 and SU25 have survived mostly because they have adapted to this and carry missiles and smart weapons with there cannons and rockets.

A pair of JL-7s.

siegecrossbow said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A pair of JL-7s.

Click to expand...

Are these JJ-7s or JL-7s?

IMO a JJ-7 and not a JJ-7A. The designation JL-7 was IMO never used officially.

jobjed said:

Are these JJ-7s or JL-7s?

Click to expand...

JJ-7s. My mistake.