How about the future of JH-7A?
This is a discussion on JH-7/JH-7A Thread within the Air Force forums, part of the China Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by crobato SAR is basically used only for identification work. Detection work is through MTI or Moving Target ...
How about the future of JH-7A?
It seems okay for now, but the plane that really threatens it are the J-11B, because they combine the flight excellence of the Su-27 Flanker series with the convenience and logistical compatibilities of using indigenous Chinese weapons and avionics.
compare with JH-7A,Su-27 are far superior in avionic,range,aerodynamic design ,bomb load and strong potential for growth.with this purchase of JH-7 was cut back in favor of SU-27 .
attempt to reengine the JH-7 with AL-31F was abandone in 1995,when is discover the entire fuselage has to redesign .instead according to Chinese source,the JH-7 with Sukhoi assisstant ,redesign the JH-7 airframe new alloy and composite material were introduce,thus increasing the life span.
SAR mode was obtain thru doppler beam sharpening.aside from ground mapping,it can also use for airborne identification.
since each jet turbine fan engine has different "rotatin signature" a data obtain from DBS can compare it on board computer to determine friend or foe. it can also discriminate target flying at close formation at long range.
What if J-11BS has a better performance than JH-7A, are they gonna abandoned JH-7A?thx
Most importantly, JH-7A is a completely Chinese product, and "Walking on two legs" is the overriding theme of Chinese military procurement.
J-11B is probably not under any limitation, except probably a small per plane commission fee for Sukhoi. One can imagine that the licensing model of the J-11B to be similar to that of the Z-9.
Right now, the so called air superiority fighters in the PLAAF had always some kind of ground role requirement, even if it is to use dumb bombs and rockets. That explains---to the horror of the Russians---why Su-27s, J-11s and Su-30MKKs, are still being exercised in the manner you do with a Q-5. Even a plane that appears to be a pure air defense interceptor like the J-8II, has ground options.
The ground role currently has been expanded on the J-10 by using FLIR/IT pods and LGBs. It is expected that the J-11B would follow on its footsteps.
What makes the JH-7A unique is the ability to support antiship missiles, and stand off land attack missiles (SLAM). Notwithstanding Q-5 experimentation with YJ-81s, the current PLAAF/PLANAF doctrine is that longer ranged air to surface weapons must require a second officer.
So far it has yet to be demonstrated by the J-10S, much less the J-11BS, that these aircraft are testing the YJ-83 and KD-88 series. So far now, the JH-7A's role in the two PLA branches are safe. But if the J-10S or J-11BS start appearing exclusively and solely in entire regiments, and start carrying YJ-83s or KD-88s, then you will know the days of the JH-7A is numbered.
For now at least, both the PLAAF and PLANAF seem to be happy about the plane. The seeds of its replacement is there, but it does not appear that the PLAAF/PLANAF is rushing to enact on it.
Biggest thing I would concentrate on improving are LGB accuracy and SD-10B variant allegedly comparable to AIM-120C. Improving the aircraft of doesnt really help other existing aircraft that much, but improving munition it can be installed on existing aircraft with slight modification.
JH-7A "absolute" max in which these planes should acquire is 200, cause these plane design still have that kick in it, it is never the less a Cold War airframe design. Its still got its purpose but in the future the frame doesnt have "much" upgrade potential as the Flankers. If procuring to much of these aircraft the PLAAF would be repeating history in yet again, finding a replacement for these aircraft. Flanker airframe still has many kicks in its frame and is likely to stay for a longer period.
Never the less JH-7A is better suited in the PLANAF so I assume that they will remain longer in service then the PLAAF.
Attack role does not demand as much kick in airframe design as A2A roles do. That's why a lot of attack aircraft are still around. Even something as dated as the Fantan can still do the job. Planes like the Su-25 or A-10 are not exactly the best flight performers either. Neither are Jaguars.
It should be noted that the aerodynamics for an aircraft required to fly low and fast isn't the same as the aerodynamic requirements for an aircraft to be maneuverable at medium altitudes. Planes made for maneuverbility at medium and high altitudes may find themselves seriously handicapped trying to catch low level interdictors. One such important requirement is to able to for the aircraft to ride smoothly at low altitudes which is prone to a lot of turbulence and rough ride. So you actually need a lot of stability, which is the opposite of what you need for maneuverbility.
The discarding of attack jet designs in other parts of the world lies not because the concept is useful, but because plane prices are getting so high now that theorists are putting the fact that in order to justify the increasing plane costs---hence fewer planes will be made---you need to be multirole. The same jet now has to do the job of two---even though air superiority fighters are basically not truly suited to that task. In essence there is nothing really wrong about the attack jet designs, they work extremely well, but the scales of economy is against them. Hence an entire class of aircraft is being phased out.
China is an anomaly because the PLAAF's size and requirements, along with a relatively large military budget, enable them to afford "dedicated" attack aircraft when such other types are being phased out in other parts of the world due to consolidation and rationalization.
Of course, this trend may not last long itself in China, because rising costs of aircraft manufacture, aligned with rising costs of labor to make and maintain them, are going to force the same rationalization issue on China as it did with other parts of the world. Like I said before, the current trends now is to maintain as few possible types of aircraft.
Let me add one thing too. The potential "market" inside the PLANAF and the PLAAF for replacement attack aircraft was never big in the first place. Fantans are only built in the hundreds when fighter types are built in the thousands. The list of PLAAF and PLANAF active Q-5 divisions and regiments is not a long one, and some of these divisions may have been deactivated without any replacement.
Probably after the fifth Division PLAAF, the only other Q-5 division I know is the 11th, but I'm not sure if that's still active.
Last edited by crobato; 09-10-2007 at 09:45 PM.
xian attempted to win back by offering JH-7A which has air to ground capability.
The J-11B and the J-11BS appears to be in production now, based on photographs on posters that were pasted on the PLA 80th Anniversary exhibit. Of course the PLA was not explicitly saying it and describing it so. All they did was trying to publicize AVIC and the intent was to show J-11s in assembly. But the plane in question in those pictures were ni fact, J-11Bs, and furthermore, the one of the airframes in the background was a two seater.