SinoDefence Forum

Delbert

What if China maintained its J-6 and J-5 aircrafts, upgraded its engine to faster and more modern versions. To make the aircraft more flying speed.

What the purpose?

They can be used as front lines or sacrificial aircraft. While the modern and better aircrafts were behind. But those older aircraft versions must also be armed with air to air missiles, so that they can shoot down any aircraft if given the opportunity.

This will provide a good cover for the better aircrafts, since the enemy will be focusing more on shooting down the aircrafts which are in front and immediately approaching. Because they provide significant threat.

Those older aircraft can also be used as suicide planes while combating enemy surface destroyers and frigates. Same strategy, the new and modern planes will be trailing behind carrying anti-ship missiles. Which in case if the suicide planes failed to successfully crash on the enemy ships, the better planes behind will be firing their missile when they come to the range.

Take note, when launching a suicidal attack, the plane must be fully loaded with explosives and jet fuel. To trigger further explosions in case of a successful crash on the enemy ship.

What do you think about this strategy?

But of course, I had to admit a lot of pilots will be sacrificed.

yehe

It's a good tactic I think, but you don't need a pilot for these kind of mission, just put in some kind of preconfigured AI system like those in Predator, in air combat with ROC(Taiwan) for example those could be like target drones to those BVR missiles that enemies fires, this way the auto AI system doesn't need to be too sofisticated, these would be much easier and cheaper to install than sofisticated ground/sea targeting AI system.
You would only need a AWACS or a couple advanced manned fighter to accompany and guide the fleet of older unmanned planes in first wave to waste enemy SAM or AA missiles, reveil and locate enemy defence target number and position etc. then you can follw this by a fleet of advanced manned fighter and bomber to take those ground and air targets that have already used thier long range missiles out.

FriedRiceNSpice

The problem is more sophisticated radars can differentiate between J-5s/J-6s and more advanced fighters so they can simply hold their fire until the more advanced aircraft come within firing range. Enemy aircraft can either wait to engage these fighters in WVR or can simply turn and run after the more advanced fighters has been engaged. Ships can also make short work of such suicide drones with CIWS and short range SAMS such as the RAM, since in essence these drones will just be large, slow AShMs.

yehe

J5/J6s can still carry AAM, guided by onboard radar in short range and AWACS/Advanced Manned fighter radar in BVR range, as said those J6 should not be send in all by them self, but have AWACS and Manned fighter with better radar BVR capable accompaning them, ignoring those old fighter would be equally fatal.
VS. ships those fighters can't do much, but vs surface target they could reviel SAM sites and hidden radars for the following advanced striker and fighters to destroy or electronicly interfere.

FriedRiceNSpice

The more advanced manned fighters (J-10/J-11/J-8) and enemy fighters will engage and then disengage at BVR ranges before the J-5/sJ-6s ever get into range.

You know, that sounds like a great tactic. Air defense/radar suppression is one of the primary tasks for UAVs in the PLAAF. I wouldn't be surprised if they already have some type of strategy like that, either it be on J-5/J-6 drones or some type of other unmanned platform.

evereachyu

Pilots are more important than J-5's & J-6's. You can build aircrafts with money. You cannot make men in days.

FriedRiceNSpice

These J-5s/J-6s will be unmanned.

crobato

Its a deplorable strategy to say the least.

But let's say if the J-5 and J-6s are unmanned robotic aircraft. Its a bad concept because both planes are incapable of holding significantly sized radar that can be used to detect enemy, launch and guide AAM. That's why the Soviet Union dumped the design for something that can hold bigger radars.

Its far more feasible to use purposely design and build UCAVs for this. You can also make the UCAVs stealthier while at it. The fact that China appears to be designing and displaying a lot of UCAVs recently tell us they have also reached the same conclusion.


I don't think there is a lot of J-6s still left. Many has been fed to China's burgeoning aluminum industry.

J-5s are worth some dough in the warbirds collectors market. You will get a better return of investment selling them to private collectors and museums.

__________________
"Lets do a thermal sweep."

PrOeLiTeZ

J-5/6 also lack the range to be any sort of primary use to launch offensive operations. their are only so few J-5/6 that the muesum will absorb. Steel quality isn't that good either since they were built when China metal industry was in its humble beginings. Only useful solution that the J-5/6 is convert it to a remote operated fighter, and put it to use in simulation in dog fight against current PLAAF platforms for pilot training. Also live fire exercise for ground sam system, for testing, and also live air-to-air engagment. Of course the J-5/6 will not return fire of course, but it at least gives the manned PLAAF pilots to shoot and engage something.

Pointblank

Target drones are perhaps the most useful use for the J-5's and J-6's. The US converts old fighters into target drones for weapons research and for training.

crobato

They might do that, but we have seen the PLAAF use dedicated target drones as well. Plus pictures of cut up J-6s and J-7s to the scrapyard don't seem to suggest that the PLAAF is turning old planes into drones in a large scale.

Twin seater J-5s and J-6s are still retained in the PLAAF as flight trainers.

__________________
"Lets do a thermal sweep."

Skywatcher

Couldn't one just use a J-6 drone as a cheap way to make the ROCAF expend some long range SAMs or AAMs? They can't really afford to allow those drones to go flying over Taiwan, even if they're unarmed.

bd popeye

I agree with Crobato when he stated;

What about the pilots? What a waste of training. Now..drones that may work to some extent until they get countered by any ECM.

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

SampanViking

I have always favoured this idea. These old 50 - 60 year old buckets can indeed be fitted with armament and could not therefore be ignored. If all they do is soak up ground based or Air launched missiles (usually worth many times more than the Aircraft they are targeting) they will have been well used. Enemy Radar and Missile sites will be revealed, Stealth Aircraft will be forced to break cover and valuable missiles depleted before the real PLAAF arrives.

Send them after Refuelling tankers, AWACS or against SAM and Radar Sites, they should have excellent range (as no one would plan on them coming home).

__________________
For uncensored Chinese Politics and Current Affairs join us all at New Century China Forum -http://www.newcenturychina.org/forums

FriedRiceNSpice

Enemy radar will be able to identify the type of aircraft, and will reserve less potent assets such as shorter range SAMs or WVR fighter interception to deal with them.

Depends on the type of assets being dedicated to intercepting them. The cost of fighter interception at gun-ranges will be minuscule. The only use I can see for such a strategy is a large-scale saturation attack occurring with a full-scale PLAAF strike, where the older unmanned jets can thin out enemy fighter cover, tie up enemy short-to-medium range assets, and tax the enemy information and combat management networks.

IMO such a platform is just a low-cost LACM with reduced capabilities.