Page 36 of 289 FirstFirst ... 626313233343536373839404146667686136 ... LastLast
Results 526 to 540 of 4335
Like Tree4555Likes

China Flanker Thread II

This is a discussion on China Flanker Thread II within the Air Force forums, part of the China Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by challenge 海外媒体关于中国空军的新型战机又传出消息,称中国开始生产歼11B战斗机。 日前加拿大《汉和防务评论》称,中国即将开始批量生产型号为歼-11B的新型战斗机。报道称,这种俄制苏-27SK战斗机的改良型号已换装中国国产的雷达,并已成功进行PL-12空空导弹同时攻击两个目标的试验。现在已有两架歼-11B成功试飞。 汉和称根据俄罗斯消息来源,自2006年11月以来,中国向俄罗斯订购了若干批OLS-31E光电(O/E )探测系统零配件。汉和主编平可夫认为,中国大批进口OLS-31E散件,说明中国已开始自行组装OLS-31E,用于中国即将进行的歼-11B战斗机生产。 汉和还称俄罗斯NIIP雷达设计局总设计师尤里最新研发的无源相控雷达将应用在苏35战机。 贝利(YuriBely)透露,中国对苏-35战斗机使用的IRBIS无源相控阵雷达表示浓厚的兴趣。据称IRBIS雷达对三平方米空中目标的探测距 离达到四百公里。 但平可夫称俄方不会轻易向中国输出雷达技术。显然歼11B已经威胁到了苏27家族的出口市场。目前正在设计 双座型的歼-11BS多用途战斗机将取代苏-30MKK多用途战斗机。在机动性、航程、载弹量等领域,歼-11B对日本及周边都够成极大的威慑。 从各方面的消息称中国新歼-11B改进型歼-11CS已研发成功,其性能参数比苏35更先进,这也是中国迟迟不愿参与俄罗斯第五代战机研发之一。新 歼-11B采用的是更为先进的导航和火控系统。它与新型苏27MK的机体要略大。在某些地方也更优越于苏-35 有消息称中国歼11-B是苏35的翻版。那歼-11CS 其性能将全面超越苏35,而歼11-CS 与中国研发的歼14有大大的不同。不论是在机体结构还是其它方面。新歼-11CS将全面应用中国所掌握的先进技术结合国外引进的先进技术。超能激光技术也将应用在歼-11CS上,这将突破传统的战机结构设想。 PLAAF is ...

  1. #526
    HKSDU is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    393

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by challenge View Post
    海外媒体关于中国空军的新型战机又传出消息,称中国开始生产歼11B战斗机。

    日前加拿大《汉和防务评论》称,中国即将开始批量生产型号为歼-11B的新型战斗机。报道称,这种俄制苏-27SK战斗机的改良型号已换装中国国产的雷达,并已成功进行PL-12空空导弹同时攻击两个目标的试验。现在已有两架歼-11B成功试飞。

    汉和称根据俄罗斯消息来源,自2006年11月以来,中国向俄罗斯订购了若干批OLS-31E光电(O/E )探测系统零配件。汉和主编平可夫认为,中国大批进口OLS-31E散件,说明中国已开始自行组装OLS-31E,用于中国即将进行的歼-11B战斗机生产。

    汉和还称俄罗斯NIIP雷达设计局总设计师尤里最新研发的无源相控雷达将应用在苏35战机。

    贝利(YuriBely)透露,中国对苏-35战斗机使用的IRBIS无源相控阵雷达表示浓厚的兴趣。据称IRBIS雷达对三平方米空中目标的探测距 离达到四百公里。

    但平可夫称俄方不会轻易向中国输出雷达技术。显然歼11B已经威胁到了苏27家族的出口市场。目前正在设计 双座型的歼-11BS多用途战斗机将取代苏-30MKK多用途战斗机。在机动性、航程、载弹量等领域,歼-11B对日本及周边都够成极大的威慑。

    从各方面的消息称中国新歼-11B改进型歼-11CS已研发成功,其性能参数比苏35更先进,这也是中国迟迟不愿参与俄罗斯第五代战机研发之一。新 歼-11B采用的是更为先进的导航和火控系统。它与新型苏27MK的机体要略大。在某些地方也更优越于苏-35 有消息称中国歼11-B是苏35的翻版。那歼-11CS 其性能将全面超越苏35,而歼11-CS 与中国研发的歼14有大大的不同。不论是在机体结构还是其它方面。新歼-11CS将全面应用中国所掌握的先进技术结合国外引进的先进技术。超能激光技术也将应用在歼-11CS上,这将突破传统的战机结构设想。
    PLAAF is about to introduce an improve version of J-11B call J-11CS, report to be "more advance than SU-35".
    So we have a further refined variant then the J-11B, interesting. Must be further enhanced strike capability then, seeing it is gonna be a twin-seater. And its gonna be installed with AESA radar, since the Su-35 already has PESA.
    Last edited by HKSDU; 01-11-2010 at 08:10 PM.

  2. #527
    Centrist is offline Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    442

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by HKSDU View Post
    So we have a further refined variant then the J-11B, interesting. Must be further enhanced strike capability then, seeing it is gonna be a twin-seater. And its gonna be installed with AESA radar, since the Su-35 already has AESA.
    What happened to the J11BS???

  3. #528
    Hyperwarp's Avatar
    Hyperwarp is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Colombo, Sri-Lanka
    Posts
    672

    Question Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by HKSDU View Post
    So we have a further refined variant then the J-11B, interesting. Must be further enhanced strike capability then, seeing it is gonna be a twin-seater. And its gonna be installed with AESA radar, since the Su-35 already has AESA.
    Su-35 has a hybrid scanning RADAR with both Mechanical & Passive electronically scanning. Its not an AESA for example like the AN/APG-77.

  4. #529
    pla101prc is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,352

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by Centrist View Post
    What happened to the J11BS???
    what do you expect? its BS

  5. #530
    Bltizo's Avatar
    Bltizo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The People's Republic of Socialist Romanticism
    Posts
    5,700

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by pla101prc View Post
    what do you expect? its BS
    Oh the pun... *sobs*

    I thought the Su-35's radar was a PESA?
    And how reliable would other posters say that article is?

  6. #531
    Engineer's Avatar
    Engineer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,741

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by pla101prc View Post
    what do you expect? its BS
    Isn't that true of everything coming out from Shenyang now days?

  7. #532
    HKSDU is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    393

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by Centrist View Post
    What happened to the J11BS???
    We have seen some limited photo mostly background photos of the twin seater J-11BS, but if this is true then Shenyang must of found some limitations or serious upgrades for them to dish out another variant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyperwarp View Post
    Su-35 has a hybrid scanning RADAR with both Mechanical & Passive electronically scanning. Its not an AESA for example like the AN/APG-77.
    Thanks for pointing out the typo. It reading "and its gonna be installed with AESA radar, since the Su-35 already has AESA."

    it was meant to read "it was meant to be "and its gonna be installed with AESA radar, since the Su-35 already has PESA."

    The Su-35 platform uses N035 PESA radar.

    Quote Originally Posted by pla101prc View Post
    what do you expect? its BS
    He probably meant the twin seater variant of the J-11B, J-11BS. S=Shuang

  8. #533
    tphuang's Avatar
    tphuang is offline Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    6,732

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    just a couple of things to clear up.

    That original article is just typical junk out of wforum that's a combination of kanwa article and something else.

    As for J-11BS, we haven't seen any updates recently, but I assume one of the major hurdles is crossed now that the engine issue is resolved.

  9. #534
    Centrist is offline Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    442

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by tphuang View Post
    just a couple of things to clear up.

    That original article is just typical junk out of wforum that's a combination of kanwa article and something else.

    As for J-11BS, we haven't seen any updates recently, but I assume one of the major hurdles is crossed now that the engine issue is resolved.
    I did have a question regarding the J11BS. Supposedly there is a JH7B in development...isn't it redundant to develop two fighter bombers for China? Since we know the J11BS is in development, why would China spend money developing a Qingling-2 engine/JH7B?

  10. #535
    rhino123's Avatar
    rhino123 is offline Pencil Pusher
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Somewhere out there.
    Posts
    1,871

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by Centrist View Post
    I did have a question regarding the J11BS. Supposedly there is a JH7B in development...isn't it redundant to develop two fighter bombers for China? Since we know the J11BS is in development, why would China spend money developing a Qingling-2 engine/JH7B?
    I believe JH7B was more of a attacking aircraft much like Tornado. J-11BS is more of a fighter-bomber (more on an air-superiority fighter like the F-15).

  11. #536
    crobato's Avatar
    crobato is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,852

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    I kind of doubt JH-7B would be pursued. I believe it was an idea hatched by XAC to gain more aircraft contracts in competition with SAC and CAC.
    "Lets do a thermal sweep."

  12. #537
    pla101prc is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,352

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by crobato View Post
    I kind of doubt JH-7B would be pursued. I believe it was an idea hatched by XAC to gain more aircraft contracts in competition with SAC and CAC.
    then what is China gonna use for fighter-bombers then, when JH-7A becomes obsolete in a few years?

  13. #538
    latenlazy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,154

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by pla101prc View Post
    then what is China gonna use for fighter-bombers then, when JH-7A becomes obsolete in a few years?
    Obsolete compared to what? Attack aircraft don't face the same pressure from arms races as fighters do. The JH-7A performs its role for its projected scenarios just fine. There's no point creating a super advanced replacement if you're never going to need those advanced features.

  14. #539
    rhino123's Avatar
    rhino123 is offline Pencil Pusher
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Somewhere out there.
    Posts
    1,871

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by latenlazy View Post
    Obsolete compared to what? Attack aircraft don't face the same pressure from arms races as fighters do. The JH-7A performs its role for its projected scenarios just fine. There's no point creating a super advanced replacement if you're never going to need those advanced features.
    Actually attack plane are equally pressurise... what with the advances in radar and air-defence system. The JH-7 series of aircraft must be able to play in these environment.

    Thus there is a point to update the JH-7 with higher technology and most probably find a so call 'super advanced replacement'. And rest assure, you are going to need all those advance features such as stealth, great air-to-ground attack capability, more powerful armour against ground base weapons, etc.

  15. #540
    latenlazy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,154

    Re: China Flanker Thread II

    Quote Originally Posted by rhino123 View Post
    Actually attack plane are equally pressurise... what with the advances in radar and air-defence system. The JH-7 series of aircraft must be able to play in these environment.

    Thus there is a point to update the JH-7 with higher technology and most probably find a so call 'super advanced replacement'. And rest assure, you are going to need all those advance features such as stealth, great air-to-ground attack capability, more powerful armour against ground base weapons, etc.
    Should have specified. I meant in terms of the basic airframe. You're not going to have to completely replace the airframe with a new design like you would with an air superiority fighter. That's why the US has gone through two or three generations of fighter planes but still use the A-10 as its primary attack aircraft.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •