JH-7/JH-7A Thread

[Superior China]

Big deal.

The V-750SM has the same guidance only isn't a2a!

Don't over estimate the israelies!

Its just a new way of doing it! It merely has a more advanced radar which sees more and so will hit the plane somewhere else, rather its strongest heat source (easist to counter.)
You can counter it, you know!
Sure they build it to counter everything at the enemies arsonal, but new things can be build!

I didn't we would switched to Lidar all of a sudden.

YOu can't lock-on on stealth.

Instead of using frequency signals you use light, it still depends on the light being reflected back to its source!
Maybe the bistatic will help, if you indeed have one instead of a Monostatic system which is prefered by sciencetists!

So were switching to LIDAR systems now?

[MIGleader]

Fractal Camo?
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...-Desert_lg.jpg


Then there's also optical camo:
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/sns-...m-main-utility

It's still quite primitive, but in the future it might be a necessity to defeat optical guided missiles that recongize targets by its shape, size, and apperance.

nice. ive seen the japanese one, but it requires a special orb projector camera to focus on the person. for camo, perhaps you could coast the plane with thousands of tiny lcd screens, and a camera. the screens would change color and outline depending on what terrain the camera saw. but nowadays, combat requires visual confirmation, so its kind of cheating.

[sumdud]

OK......... the stealth conversation need to stop. This is about the JH-7A. If you'd like to continue, go to the anti-stealth thread.

[Superior China]

Yes, MigL, that is exactly what you do. But not thousands, just a few.

Alright, summud, I'll change the "stealth" with "RCS reduction."

That phython relies on a big RCS too, so. And don't even start saying the UAV had a small RCS.

[sumdud]

No, this is a thread about the JH-7/A. There should be no off topic posts here. And that includes RCS!!!

And don't try to excuse yourself by morphing words. We know this well enough and we all know this forum does not allow for politics!!!

One more and you know what is to happen, so be warned!

[Superior China]

"we need a thread to discuss all things jh-7 related. like exactly what is the fate of the aircraft? will china build more jh-7as<b> or upgrade the fighter even more before production?</b> what new engine will an improved jh-7 fit?"

I was answering the question!

[WEN?]

i think that china will probaly focus more on the new FB-7.it is a twin-engine, all-weather, supersonic, medium-range fighter-bomber. it will probaly get bet avionics, weapons and radar. in the near future air forces probalywill focus on 4th genartion aircraft, FB-7 and upgrading the Su27 and Su30. the futrue might not have a bomber fleet but focus on fighter-bomber aircraft for their capbalities are better and have more uses as a bomber normally has one.

[renmin]

Correct me if im wrong but doesnt the JH-7 have the ability to carry nuclear free fall bombs? I heard it was a super sonic nuclear strike bomber.

[Sea Dog]

Correct me if im wrong but doesnt the JH-7 have the ability to carry nuclear free fall bombs? I heard it was a super sonic nuclear strike bomber.

I don't know about this, but I don't see why it couldn't carry 1 or more nuclear bombs. I heard it was more of a naval strike tactical aircraft which would negate this usage. But who knows?

Anybody heard any more JH-7 news? Any updates at all?

[crobato]

Anything has a theoritical capability to carry nuclear bombs, but for now the JH-7s and JH-7As are naval strike bombers and PGM using strike fighters.

No updates at all since 2004, when a PLAAF and a PLANAF regiment both employed the type, in addition to an upgraded JH-7 going to another PLANAF regiment.

Sometimes I wonder if there are any reservations the PLAAF or PLANAF have in deploying more of the type. It's likely the plane is in temporary hiatus because the same factory had to deliver 3 regiments worth of new H-6Hs capable of delivering the new standoff YJ-63 cruise missile. Assuming 20 planes per regiment, that would be 60 planes, and the factory is good for a production of 50 planes per year. This would have meant temporarily stopping JH-7A production just to fill the new H-6 orders.

I also wonder if any developments on the J-11s and J-10s can have adverse effects on the JH-7A's future deployments.

[wael]

hello to all
any one can tell me about the unit cost of JH-7
and i want to get some details about JL-10A radar that is used in JH-7 bombars
regards to u all

[simonov]

ctually how manny JH-7 and A in PLAN and PLAAF inventory. If they have much Su-30 or its copy in JH-8, r they still keep the JH-7 series?
Thx

[xihaoli]

The numbers i have gotten form CDF have been around ~50.

The main reason of the slow production is the poor airframe of the Jh-7, although the slot array radar does provide impressive scanning range agunist naval targets. (250km+) The other problem have been the sprey engines, the Plan either have to get an alternative, or scrap the project overall due to the fact that even the j-10 persumably can carry 6 tones+, and the fact that multi-role aircraft are the norms now days....

The Jh-7 would probrably become to the PLAN what the Backfires are to the Russians. They provide middle ranged, naval strike power using long ranged targets. Although i must admit that the backfire and by far a superior aircraft to the Jh-7. They should be grouped together due to the fact that they are both middle range naval strike aircrafts. Although the Kh-55/As-4/6 are superior to the Yj-83, the Jh-7 benefits due to its lower Rcs and lower cost. The range can also be compromised by a few tanks.

Overall the Jh-7 isnt bad, 4 yj-803s per-aircraft can provides a fair amount of firepower and deterancy agunist any naval force. Although the chances of using it offencely will be slim to none.

[crobato]

With four confirmed regiments, we are looking at 80-90 aircraft combined not including prototypes, which can add about 10 more.

[Sea Dog]

The numbers i have gotten form CDF have been around ~50.

Overall the Jh-7 isnt bad, 4 yj-803s per-aircraft can provides a fair amount of firepower and deterancy agunist any naval force. Although the chances of using it offencely will be slim to none.

Hi xihaoli. So the number is 50. Thanks for that number. I've been wondering what numbers of JH-7 are official myself. JH-7 does provide a good naval strike capability, IMO. But I have to ask you, why do you believe JH-7 cannot/will not be used in the offensive role? I thought it is a tactical naval strike aircraft. That by it's very nature designates it an offensive platform. I guess you may be arguing that it may be used to limit/deter movements of opposing naval units? If that's the case, then I agree.

Edited to add: So is it 80-90 or 50?