Should China get su-35bm

[tphuang]

here is an article from http://en.rian.ru/world/20051017/41802608.html

MOSCOW, October 17 (RIA Novosti) - Russian aircraft manufacturer Sukhoi expects its cooperation with China to increase following the opening of its Beijing office Monday, the head of the company said.

"We intend to continue cooperation in supplying modernized Su-35 (Flanker) planes, in addition to other updated fourth-generation aircraft," Mikhail Pogosyan said at the opening ceremony.

He also said the maintenance and modernization of aircraft supplied to China would be conducted more efficiently now that the Beijing office was open.

Clearly, the Russians are trying to sell su-35s to China. It remains to be seen whether the su-35 mentionned is su-27m, basically similar to su-30mki with canard and bars radar and 12 hard points. Or maybe su-35bm, which has AL-41F engine (probably 3D tvc) with Zhuk-msf or irbis radar, but no canard.
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/12-24e-04.asp

Sukhoi is apparently examining the Su-35BM as the next development step, although this variant has little in common with the previous Su-35 and its airframe is closer to the Su-27 (without canards). The most visible signs of progress are in the systems area, with glass cockpit displays, an Irbis radar and the Knibny EW system The aircraft is to be powered by the Saturn AL-41F1, which produces just under 140kN of thrust. Its weapon systems, which were shown on a Su-35BM model at the Dubai Air Show in December 2003, include the Onyx/Yakhont 3M55A anti-ship missile and the Ks-172, an air-to-air guided missile with an extremely long-range.

It sounds quite lethal with the irbis radar and especially the anti-ship missile and the long range A2A missile. I guess this is what Kanwa meant in its article titled "SUKHOI REINFORCES SU35’S ATTACK CAPABILITY". According to Richard Fisher, this is a 300 Km long range AAM.

Personally, I think that if China can get su-35bm, it should go for it. It's definitely better than anything we have right now. Even with all the upgrades, J-11B is still probably only at the level of su-27smk.


more on su-35bm, this is taken from www.edefenseonline.com

Su-35BM

In December 2003, after the Su-27SM modernization program had been deemed a success, Russia announced that it would proceed with the so-called "big modernization" program. The modernized aircraft is called the Su-35BM (also T-10BM) by Sukhoi, but it is not yet known what name will be adopted by the Russian Air Force. The Su-35BM program is to be a deep modernization of existing airframes, not newly produced aircraft.

The main new feature of the aircraft is to be a new radar. It has not yet been decided whether it will be the Phazotron-NIIR N031 Sokol or the Tikhomirov NIIP Irbis. The first is actually the well-known Zhuk radar with a passively scanned phased array, while the Irbis is a version of the N011M Bars-M, also with a passively scanned phased array. In 2003 a new phased-array antenna was tested for Indian Su-30MKI aircraft, but it achieved only +/-45 degrees of horizontal field of view, instead of the planned +/-70 degrees. The remaining angle of 25 degrees was achieved mechanically via a hydraulic servo, which was an unsatisfactory solution. The Irbis is to differ from the Bars-M by having quick servos that are tightly synchronized with the radar electronics to achieve the 70 degrees of scan on either side of the fighter's axis. Sources says that NIIP's solution is preferred by the Russian Air Force, since NIIP radar sets were all proven in service. The radar is to have similar capabilities to the N011M Bars-M. The detection range of a fighter airplane (170 km) and a destroyer-sized naval target (300 km) more or less matches the N011M's performance.

The Su-35BM is also to receive a small radar in a tail "stinger" to monitor the rear hemisphere. It is to be a NIIR N012 Kopyo-DL with a passively scanned phased-array antenna with a range of about 50-70 km. The unique arrangement indicates that Russia does not plan to rely as heavily on data exchange networks to maintain situational awareness, although the Aist data-exchange system for the Air Force is under development.

The weapons set for the Su-35BM is to be the same as the Su-27SM. Among the new weapons in development is a long-range air-to-air missile with required range of 300 km. Since the range is beyond radar range, external information is required to prepare the missile for launch. Two or four such missiles are to be carried. The missile is to be developed from either the Novator KS-172 technology demonstrator or the Vympel R-37M missile, also proposed for the MiG-31. Sukhoi prefers the first solution, and one can say that it is part of Sukhoi's long-standing strategy to prompt the Air Force to "kill" the MiG-31s and replace them with the Su-27 family of aircraft.

The Su-35BM is also to receive a totally new self-protection system. It was developed by KNIRTI (Zhukov near Kaluga, Russia) and is designated the L-175M Khibiny-M. It has an integrated electronic-support-measures system of high accuracy, a separate display in the cockpit, a digital processor, and an integrated active radio-frequency jammer with pods on the wingtips. Probably in the future, the aircraft will also receive a missile-approach-warning system and a towed decoy (for example, the Lobushka). The aircraft will have RAM coatings and some internal changes to increase stealth features, such as a new windshield and canopy of slightly different shape covered with radar-absorbent material.

The modernized Su-27SM, together with the modernized Su-25SM and Su-24M, will form the core of the Russian Air Force for the next two decades, and this could lead to the complete withdrawal of MiG-29 aircraft, which are not going to be modernized. While the MiG-29SMT represents the ultimate modernization variant for this undervalued aircraft, without dividing the upgrade into phases, it could not be presently afforded by Russia. The Sukhoi approach, with "small" and "big" modernizations, was much more realistic and ultimately triumphant.

[Gauntlet]

Well, why not?

Buying modernized Flanker-Es from Russia would most probably cover Chinas need for advanced figthers fast. Having a mixed fleet of modern Flankers, J-11 and J-10 is a good mix if you ask me.

[Red not Dead]

here is an article from http://en.rian.ru/world/20051017/41802608.html

Clearly, the Russians are trying to sell su-35s to China. It remains to be seen whether the su-35 mentionned is su-27m, basically similar to su-30mki with canard and bars radar and 12 hard points. Or maybe su-35bm, which has AL-41F engine (probably 3D tvc) with Zhuk-msf or irbis radar, but no canard.
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/12-24e-04.asp

It sounds quite lethal with the irbis radar and especially the anti-ship missile and the long range A2A missile. I guess this is what Kanwa meant in its article titled "SUKHOI REINFORCES SU35’S ATTACK CAPABILITY". According to Richard Fisher, this is a 300 Km long range AAM.

Personally, I think that if China can get su-35bm, it should go for it. It's definitely better than anything we have right now. Even with all the upgrades, J-11B is still probably only at the level of su-27smk.


more on su-35bm, this is taken from www.edefenseonline.com

Su-35BM

In December 2003, after the Su-27SM modernization program had been deemed a success, Russia announced that it would proceed with the so-called "big modernization" program. The modernized aircraft is called the Su-35BM (also T-10BM) by Sukhoi, but it is not yet known what name will be adopted by the Russian Air Force. The Su-35BM program is to be a deep modernization of existing airframes, not newly produced aircraft.

The main new feature of the aircraft is to be a new radar. It has not yet been decided whether it will be the Phazotron-NIIR N031 Sokol or the Tikhomirov NIIP Irbis. The first is actually the well-known Zhuk radar with a passively scanned phased array, while the Irbis is a version of the N011M Bars-M, also with a passively scanned phased array. In 2003 a new phased-array antenna was tested for Indian Su-30MKI aircraft, but it achieved only +/-45 degrees of horizontal field of view, instead of the planned +/-70 degrees. The remaining angle of 25 degrees was achieved mechanically via a hydraulic servo, which was an unsatisfactory solution. The Irbis is to differ from the Bars-M by having quick servos that are tightly synchronized with the radar electronics to achieve the 70 degrees of scan on either side of the fighter's axis. Sources says that NIIP's solution is preferred by the Russian Air Force, since NIIP radar sets were all proven in service. The radar is to have similar capabilities to the N011M Bars-M. The detection range of a fighter airplane (170 km) and a destroyer-sized naval target (300 km) more or less matches the N011M's performance.

The Su-35BM is also to receive a small radar in a tail "stinger" to monitor the rear hemisphere. It is to be a NIIR N012 Kopyo-DL with a passively scanned phased-array antenna with a range of about 50-70 km. The unique arrangement indicates that Russia does not plan to rely as heavily on data exchange networks to maintain situational awareness, although the Aist data-exchange system for the Air Force is under development.

The weapons set for the Su-35BM is to be the same as the Su-27SM. Among the new weapons in development is a long-range air-to-air missile with required range of 300 km. Since the range is beyond radar range, external information is required to prepare the missile for launch. Two or four such missiles are to be carried. The missile is to be developed from either the Novator KS-172 technology demonstrator or the Vympel R-37M missile, also proposed for the MiG-31. Sukhoi prefers the first solution, and one can say that it is part of Sukhoi's long-standing strategy to prompt the Air Force to "kill" the MiG-31s and replace them with the Su-27 family of aircraft.

The Su-35BM is also to receive a totally new self-protection system. It was developed by KNIRTI (Zhukov near Kaluga, Russia) and is designated the L-175M Khibiny-M. It has an integrated electronic-support-measures system of high accuracy, a separate display in the cockpit, a digital processor, and an integrated active radio-frequency jammer with pods on the wingtips. Probably in the future, the aircraft will also receive a missile-approach-warning system and a towed decoy (for example, the Lobushka). The aircraft will have RAM coatings and some internal changes to increase stealth features, such as a new windshield and canopy of slightly different shape covered with radar-absorbent material.

The modernized Su-27SM, together with the modernized Su-25SM and Su-24M, will form the core of the Russian Air Force for the next two decades, and this could lead to the complete withdrawal of MiG-29 aircraft, which are not going to be modernized. While the MiG-29SMT represents the ultimate modernization variant for this undervalued aircraft, without dividing the upgrade into phases, it could not be presently afforded by Russia. The Sukhoi approach, with "small" and "big" modernizations, was much more realistic and ultimately triumphant.


Loool who wrote this? Mig not going to be modernized? They already have retrofitted 25 migs in krasnodar(sk)? And actually the mig 29 are the most prized by western sources. Dassault have expressed the desire to acquire the licence of the mig's airframe in order to incorporate it on a new low cost project. I'm suprized Russia doesn't want any "Point fighter" anymore since thr russian territory is so huge.

[adeptitus]

Probably in the future, the aircraft will also receive a missile-approach-warning system and a towed decoy (for example, the Lobushka). The aircraft will have RAM coatings and some internal changes to


Towed decoy on a fighter aircraft? @_@

[MIGleader]

i think sukoi realized that china was pretty displeased with the mkks strike power, so it built a new one.

well, this seems liek a great deal. now the only thing is, do you opt for canards or for tvc? the tvc gives u greater mnuverability, but are more expensive and difficult to maintian. the canrds also improve manuverability, and are easy to use.

perhaps china will opt for different varients of the plane. the su-35 verson with canards can be a naval straike fighter, and another version with tvc can be an air superiority fighter/ground attack.

china has been eyeing the al-41 for a while now
new radar!!!:D :D :nana:

[tphuang]

Towed decoy on a fighter aircraft? @_@
not sure, but it seemed like they are trying to make it more stealthy.

[tphuang]

more on this
http://jczs.sina.com.cn/2005-10-21/1740326049.html
　　苏霍伊境外第一个办事处设在中国，并向中国大力推介“苏-33â€�舰载战斗机和“四代半â€�战斗机“苏-35â€�，同时也希望进入中国民用航空市场

　　苏霍伊来华志向远大

　　国际先驱导报记者赵嘉麟报道 俄罗斯航空制造业巨头“苏霍伊â€�公司10月17日在北京
设立办事处。这是该公司在俄罗斯境外开设的第一个办事处。

　　“苏霍伊â€�总经理波戈相说，此举是公司迈出的“战略性的一步â€�，将有助于公司更加灵活 地解决产品生产、技术改进和售后服务等问题。

　　资料显示，2000～2005年苏霍伊公司作战飞机的产值占全世界作战飞机总产值的15%，其出口额占 世界的25%(包括在国外的特许生产)。

　　推介舰载战斗机和“苏-35â€�

　　波戈相对《国际先驱导报》表示，“苏霍伊â€�将参加明年的珠海国际航展，并推介†œ苏- 30MKKâ€�战斗机、“苏-27â€�战斗机、“苏-33â€�舰载战斗机和“苏-35â€�战斗机项目。“所有这些项目前景都不错，对中方来说也不陌生。因此，我们参展的目的在于进一 步开展合作â€�。

　　在上述机型中，他特别提到希望对华提供被业界认为是“四代半â€�战斗机的“苏- 35â€�。“我们不只满足提供‘苏-27’和‘苏-30’。对华提供第四代战机是很大的一步，但不是最后一步â€�。但波戈相没有透露具体合作项目，称â €œ将在双方达成协议后作详细说明，这样才有意义â€�。同时，他表示相信公司研制的第五代战机“也会 令中国伙伴感兴趣â€�。

　　波戈相说，与中方开展合作不仅是从公司的层面出发，更是从两国元首所倡导的俄中战略协作伙伴关系高度出 发。“这种战略协作高度也体现在发展军事合作和军事技术合作上。比如今年就举行了俄中首次联合军事演习 。与中国的军技合作机制是我们与所有伙伴军技合作机制中最高效的之一â€�。

　　进军中国民航业

　　波戈相对《国际先驱导报》透露，除军用航空领域外，“苏霍伊â€�还将计划开发中国的民用航空市场 ，“发展方向包括提供教练机、水上飞机、支线飞机等â€�。

　　其中，他特别提到了“别-103â€�六座水上飞机和“苏-80â€�支线飞机。“别-103â€�的其机动性很好，可在中国南部水域宽广地区使用。“苏-80â€�、支线飞机的飞行高度是8000米，最大航程可达2000公里，相信在中国能有需求，波戈相表示 。

　　据中国航空工业发展研究中心预测，未来20年中国支线飞机需求量为705架；巴西航空工业公司预测未来 20年中国支线飞机需求量为635架。而中国民航市场的大蛋糕，对于正着手进行航空业改革的俄罗斯不啻为难 得的机遇。俄罗斯媒体报道称，普京总统已下令组建大型航空制造集团，以增强俄罗斯在世界航空市 场的竞争力。

　　波戈相表示，在俄罗斯，航空业将不仅被作为单独的领域来对待，“而将成为带动整个俄罗斯工业发展的 火车头â€�。据他介绍，俄方采取的措施包括增加军用及民用航空项目的研发投资等。其中，2006年联邦预 算用于航空业发展的拨款比2005年增长了1.5倍。

　　他还高兴地对记者说，由苏霍伊参与的区域航线飞机(即中型干线飞机)项目被列入2006～2007年的 规划中，并自信地表示，“不论航空业结构如何变化，苏霍伊将始终处于领跑地位â€�。

　　副总经理负责中国业务

　　波戈相对《国际先驱导报》说，他已委派公司副总经理专门负责中国业务，公司将与中方讨论建立服务中心等 问题。“服务中心不仅仅是提供售后服务，还包括培训等等。我们希望缩短零件供应时间，降低生产成本，提 高产品可靠性，以满足客户需要â€�。

　　波戈相表示，目前公司的中国伙伴包括飞机制造商以及售后服务单位，“希望未来还能拥有在中国推广产 品的合作伙伴â€�。

　　他坦承，“苏霍伊â€�开发中国市场过程中，在缩短决策时间、采取更灵活的谈判原则，以及制定5～ 10年的长期规划等方面的还有待改进余地。

　　据波戈相介绍，“苏霍伊â€�与中方的合作已持续了15年多，最初从提供苏-27开始，之后是“苏-30MKKâ€�。“接下来的合作方向主要是对已提供的飞机进行现代化改进。我们与中方合作伙伴和客户 关系密切，而且这种合作具有战略高度â€�，波戈相说。

　　他表示，“苏霍伊â€�在中国积累了很好的合作经验，“这使我们能够乐观地看待发展前景â€� 。“我们尊重中国同事，彼此建立了相互理解，我们与中方大量科研专家如同一个团队那样工作 â€�。

　　链接：能杀“回马枪â€�的“苏-35â€�

　　西方国家空军飞行员中有这样一个逸闻：有人问“ ‘苏-27’和‘苏-35’有什么区别吗â€�，回答是“如果发生空战，在你看见它之后它把你击落了，那么它就是‘ 苏-27’。如果你还没有看见它，它就把你击落了，那它一定是‘苏-35’ â€�。

　　“苏-35â€�是在“苏-27â€�基础上改动较大的多用途战斗机。俄方称其与美国的“F -22â€�、欧洲的“台风â€�战斗机属于同一等级。“苏-35â€�与“苏-30â€�模拟空战表演中，前者以水平方向的“超眼镜蛇â€�机动，将机头对准后者“急射â€�而 取胜。“超眼镜蛇â€�机动的诞生说明，现代空战已经不是过去的从尾后攻击的传统战法，而是多方向攻击 。

　　“苏-35â€�装备新型机载电子设备，具有空空、空地双重功能抗干扰能力，对战斗机这类目标的发现距离为165 ～245公里，对轰炸机、预警机或大型运输机的发现距离可达400公里，可在200公里距离上发现地面目标 ，同时可跟踪20个空中目标，指挥导弹同时攻击8个目标。

　　“苏-35â€�战斗机首次采用了后视火控雷达技术。此类雷达装在飞机尾锥内，可引导俄专门研制的“Р-73Eâ€�后射型近距空空导弹。“苏-352â€�的机翼下装有能水平转动180度的转动发射装置。也就是说，它发射的导弹可以向后发射，“ 杀一个回马枪â€�——这是“苏-35â€�最为独特的设计。“苏-35â€�不仅能用于夺取制空优势，而且还可用于对地面、海上目标实施远距离、高精度的有效打击。

[PiSigma]

this systems on the plane sounds so sweet that i'm drooling.. figuratively. it's got good electronic stuff, and get a chance to look at the AL-41F1 will give a great boost to the chinese engine industry. i say buy a few of them, even just to study the electronics/radar/engine. it's well worth the price, and china need more modern planes fast for possible future taiwan operations. it's always faster to have 2 countries building stuff than just one. china can concentrate on J-10 and J-xx while getting stuff in between them from russia. also since the Su-35 is based on the Su-27, it will be a lot easier for china to operate and maintain them with experience from the 27/30s

[vincelee]

you did notice that the radar array is not totally inmobile, right? I wonder if it's a limitation of PAR in general or if it's the quality of Russian beam forming technique.

[MIGleader]

china relly nees this aircraft, so they havesomething to counter indias mki aircraft. the best thing is to buy an attack version wit canards and a fighter version wit tvc.

so how many should china buy? 100?

[Chairman Hu]

i said 12 for technical studying and license for 200 as the J-11A (Yea now the A version will be 27s and 35s) so this way, China will have everything balanced out and counter to India's friggin MKI

Itz not that scary, 2-D TVC isnt that great...

damn flaps

[tphuang]

stats on su-27m(su-35)
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/vvs/su35-01.htm


su2740.jpg (25754 bytes)TITLE:

SUKHOI Su-35 (Su-27M)

TYPE

Single-seat all-weather counter-air fighter and ground attack aircraft.

PROGRAMME:

Experimental version of Su-27 with foreplanes (T-10-24) flew May 1985; first of six prototypes (successively T-10S-70, Su-27M, Su-35) flew 28 June 1988; another was exhibited at 1992 Farnborough Air Show; in final stages of flight testing early 1993; 11 prototype and preseries aircraft ('701' to '711') built by September 1994, of which '711' modified for thrust-vectoring experiments; first flight at Zhukovsky (with nozzles fixed) 2 April 1996; two more aircraft ordered in late 1995 may indicate start of production of service development batch by KNAAPO at Komsomolsk-on-Amur.

DESIGN FEATURES:

Advanced development of Su-27; airframe, power plant, avionics and armament all upgraded; quadruplex digital fly-by-wire controls under development by Avionika; longitudinal static instability; tandem 'triplane' layout, with foreplanes; double-slotted flaperons; taller, square-tip twin tailfins with integral fuel tanks; reprofiled front fuselage for larger-diameter radar antenna; enlarged tailcone for rearward-facing radar; twin-wheel nose landing gear; axisymmetric thrust vectoring nozzles under development for use on production aircraft (see Su-37 in Addenda). Tests with side-stick controller on starboard side of cockpit of Su-27 testbed LMK-2405 are unlikely to lead to change from conventional centre stick.

POWER PLANT:

Two Saturn/Lyulka AL-35F (AL-31FM) turbofans; each 137.3 kN (30,865 lb st) with afterburning. Retractable flight refuelling probe on port side of nose.

ACCOMMODATION:

Pilot only, on Zvezda K-36MD zero/zero ejection seat.

AVIONICS:

Radar: Phazotron N011 Zhuk 27 multimode low-altitude terrain-following/avoidance radar, search range 54 n miles (100 km; 62 miles) in forward sector, 30 n miles (55 km; 34 miles) rearward, able to track 10 targets and engage four simultaneously. Phazotron Zhuk-PH phased-array radar under development for later use, search range 89 to 132 n miles (165 to 245 km; 102 to 152 miles) in forward sector, 32 n miles (60 km; 37 miles) rearward, with simultaneous tracking of 24 air targets and ripple-fire engagement of six; N014 rearward-facing radar, range approximately 2 n miles (4 km; 2.5 miles), may enable firing of rearward-facing IR homing air-to-air missiles.

Flight: Fully automatic flight modes and armament control against ground, maritime and air targets, including automatic low-altitude flight and automatic target designation. RPKB nav system includes laser-gyro INS and Glonass GPS.

Instrumentation: EFIS, with three colour CRTs; HUD.

Mission: New-type IRST moved to starboard; small external TV pod; all combat flight phases computerised. Shown at Farnborough with GEC Ferranti TIALD (thermal imaging airborne laser designator) night/adverse visibility pod fitted for possible future use.

Self-defence: Enhanced ECM, including wingtip jammer pods; RWR.

ARMAMENT:

One 30 mm GSh-30 gun in starboard wingr00t extension, with 150 rounds. Mountings for up to 14 stores, including R-27 (AA-10 'Alamo-A/B/C/D'), R-40 (AA-6 'Acrid'), R-60 (AA-8 'Aphid'), R-73E (AA-11 'Archer') and RVV-AE (R-77; AA-12 'Adder') air-to-air missiles, Kh-25ML (AS-10 'Karen'), Kh-25MP (AS-12 'Kegler'), Kh-29T (AS-14 'Kedge'), Kh-31P (AS-17 'Krypton') and Kh-59 (AS-18 'Kaz00') air-to-surface missiles, S-25LD laser-guided rockets, S-25IRS IR-guided rockets, GBU-500L and GBU-1500L laser-guided bombs, GBU-500T and GBU-1500T TV-guided bombs, KMGU cluster weapons, KAB-500 bombs and rocket packs. Maximum weapon load 8,000 kg (17,635 lb).


More analysis of su-35 from its inception to the current su-35bm mode:

　　众所周知，SU-35最初叫SU-27M（实际上前几架也是在SU-27的机体上改装的）其来源于80年代苏霍伊对SU-27的改进，其目标是在90年代为前苏联空军提供一种可以与西方三代后期改型和三代半战机相对抗的武器装备 。主要改进是提高机动性能，采用了三翼面设计，采用性能更好的航电及座舱系统。包括采用NO11及NO14 后视雷达的RLSU-27火控雷达系统。前苏联在改进SU-27放弃原来的“单纯的空优战机‘概念而力图将其改进多用途战机，所在在其翼根增加了各增加一个可以负荷2 000公斤的挂架，苏联解体后缺乏银子的俄罗斯将SU-27M也外销，为了增加看点将其编号改变为SU-35，后来在711号装备AL-37FU推力矢量发动机，现将其编号增加为SU-37，也被称为SU-37MR（MR为多用途之意），不过后来由于喷口的到达使用期限后又将其编号改回。实际上后来的情况来看前 苏联在改进SU-27计划中有过其其他武器装备同样的”贪大求全“的老毛病，航电系统比其先进的多的西方国家在经过海湾战争 后也认为单座战机无法在”严重威胁环境执行多种作战任务“。俄罗斯人自己也承认SU-35的多用途改进不成功。尽管SU-35/37系列对外被说的天花乱坠，但在90年代苏霍伊的工作重点却是第五代战机和SU-27IB远程攻击机的研制，这从侧面说明许多问题。

　　从相关的介绍来这个新的SU-35没有SU-35的鸭翼，甚至招牌式的平顶垂尾也“改回“了尖削，其改进具体包括：“取消”了鸭翼、缩小了腹鳍和尾锥、 采用类似SU-33的全翼展后缘襟翼、发动机采用推力为140千牛级的AL-41F发动机、航电采用包括玻璃化座舱在内的综合航电系统、雷达更新为NO35并在尾锥采用后视雷达等等。 从介绍上看这个东东相比较于SU-27的改进和俺国J8B到J8C的改进似乎有异曲同工之处，当年顾诵芬总师接受采访就曾指出歼八B的改进方 向就是：采用自适应变弯度机翼，据说此举可以提高战机在“高亚音速的机动性能30-40%”，另外就是采用“体积、重量尽量不变，推力有较大提高的发动机”，还有就是采用包括计算机外挂管理 在内的综合航电系统。由于歼8C是在国产新机装备部队前为部队提供一种可以与周边三代机对抗的手段，那么似 乎可以这么说这个“新‘SU-35也是在俄罗斯第五代战机服役前为部队提供一种快速、廉价的机型，以平衡欧洲国家装备三代半的威 胁。

　　从以上小猪的拙见是这个所谓的SU-35还不如说是SU-27的改进型（其实都差不多，原来的SU-35也是SU-27M，实际上原来的改进还大点），再讲明白点这个东东可能就是以前传闻的所谓SU-27SM的第二阶段改进型，众所周知俄罗斯通过为SU-27装备SU-30MKK的综合航电系统完成SU-27SM第一阶段改进，在提高其空战能力亦添加了空地精确打击能力。但其仍旧采用原来的机翼，即翼下6个挂 架，机身4个，由于SU-27外侧机翼负荷能力较强，一般只挂载近距空空导弹，而机身挂架由于布局原因也难以挂载较大的空地武器尤其 是截面不规则形状的东东，所以SU-27SM第二阶段采用SU-35的机翼，也就是增加了翼根的可以负荷第四个挂架，以便挂较大的空地武器装备，由此需要对中机身进行加强 。俄罗斯人为什么要这样做哩？这应该与俄罗斯空军目前的现状有关，众所周知前前苏联战机分工比较专业，歼击 机就是歼击机，轰炸机就是轰炸机，这样东东就可以专注于某些性能而对其他进行取舍，但衍生的问题就是执行任 务时就需要较多的战机，维持较大规模的部队。其费用也很高，这个观点甚至影响现在的俄罗斯，如 SU-24的后继机SU-27IB战胜SU-30就是例子，但俄罗斯空军规模显然比不上前苏联，随着SU-24和SU-17大量退役，俄罗斯空军对地攻击能力直线下降，车臣之战不得不用SU-27挂载普通炸弹执行轰炸任务，结果被地方击落，在机队规模下降的情况提高现在战机的多用途能力以便用较少 的战机执行更多的作战任务就成了关键。这是为什么90年代俄罗斯战机改进计划非常强调多用途能力的原因，甚 至MIG-31这样的防空截击机也有MIG-31BM这样的多用途性能的出现并不是偶然的情况。这个东东对俄罗斯苏霍伊来说也有比较现实的意义，众所周 知其主要生产基地KNAAPO多年仅靠对外出口战机和帮助俄罗斯空军升级SU-27维持生产线的运转，随着俺国大规模引进俄罗斯战机时代的结束，而俄罗斯第五代战机又刚刚进入工程研制阶 段，最快可能也要2015年才能进入量产，所以这个东东可以帮助KNAAPO渡过这之前的过渡时期，保持现 有的技术力量。同时为下步的生产打好基础。

[MIGleader]

so does anyone know if china is actually interested?:confused:

[tphuang]

I can't think of a reason that they would not be. Especially since this flanker is that much better than the flankers we have. I guess the sticking point could be the pricing, whether or not ToT is part of the agreement and the radar/missiles offered as part of the deal.

[Chairman Hu]

uhhh the purchase shall be determined by...

1. What are the complete range of missiles will be offered

2. What kind of engine to be offered and their power and design blueprints

3. Can it be modified to fire Chinese made weapons

Umm... yea a license production should solve #3's problem

[MIGleader]

I can't think of a reason that they would not be. Especially since this flanker is that much better than the flankers we have. I guess the sticking point could be the pricing, whether or not ToT is part of the agreement and the radar/missiles offered as part of the deal.

off course radar is part of the deal. are u saying the russians would not put a radar on the su-35?

missles are definilty part of every aircraft deal. pricing...24 for 1 billion. thats standard

modified to fit chinese missles? lmao

[tphuang]

No, I'm saying which specific radar gets offered. Zhuk-mfe is obviously better than N-011M. I'm not sure whether it is better than Irbis or not.

The Russians don't want to let us use SD-10 and China would not want to give the launch code for it.

[trkl]

I guess the sticking point could be the pricing, whether or not ToT is part of the agreement and the radar/missiles offered as part of the deal.

I don't think that ToT would actually be all that useful in this case. Partly this is because much of the ToT would be redundant since the technology is pretty similar to what was already aquired through the J-11 deal. In addition, it takes years to sucsessfully absorb and copy a new system. Even in areas where the Russian systems are superior to the Chinese systems, they may no longer be the best by the time China is able to duplicate them.

[MIGleader]

I don't think that ToT would actually be all that useful in this case. Partly this is because much of the ToT would be redundant since the technology is pretty similar to what was already aquired through the J-11 deal. In addition, it takes years to sucsessfully absorb and copy a new system. Even in areas where the Russian systems are superior to the Chinese systems, they may no longer be the best by the time China is able to duplicate them.

i hate it when people think all china can do is copy russian gear. china faily experienced in radars and can improve any russian design. lets not forget the chinese also have the israelis, the best at making radars.

[tphuang]

i hate it when people think all china can do is copy russian gear. china faily experienced in radars and can improve any russian design. lets not forget the chinese also have the israelis, the best at making radars.
Hopefully, we are getting help from the Europeans too. The advantage China has over the Russians is that our electronics technology is much better, so I think we will get AESA radars before the Russians.

Licensed production of su-35 might not be such a bad thing.

[trkl]

China has the ability to develop new equipment without help from Russia or Israel or Europe. China now has more scientist and engineers graduating from collage each year than any other country. With all that local talent, there is no reason for them to go looking for foreign help on every project.

I agree that China will probably get AESA before Russia. AESA technology is closely related to cell-phone and wireless technology, and China is the worlds largest producer/consumer of cellphones and wireless devices.

[Chairman Hu]

yea too bad China doesnt have any companies that develops and markets these tech as good or as much as other companies in other countries...

AESA? China is gonna get that, and it IS gonna be before Russia, with their economy, they are stuck in a craphole, they REALLY needa improve their economy...

[MIGleader]

China has the ability to develop new equipment without help from Russia or Israel or Europe. China now has more scientist and engineers graduating from collage each year than any other country. With all that local talent, there is no reason for them to go looking for foreign help on every project.

I agree that China will probably get AESA before Russia. AESA technology is closely related to cell-phone and wireless technology, and China is the worlds largest producer/consumer of cellphones and wireless devices.

i hate to admit it, but china is actually pretty incapable of making any complete weapons system without at least a small amount of foreign imput.:mad:

[adeptitus]

i hate to admit it, but china is actually pretty incapable of making any complete weapons system without at least a small amount of foreign imput.:mad:

It's cheaper to purchase or license the technology, rather than reinventing the wheel. Notice a lot of military contracts include technology transfers and local assembly/production. In the recent arms sale from China to Malaysia, for an example, China agreed to transfer manufacturing technology of surface to air missiles to Malaysia,

[trkl]

i hate to admit it, but china is actually pretty incapable of making any complete weapons system without at least a small amount of foreign imput.:mad:

Well, China was pretty incapable of of designing complete weapon systems without foreign help. However, China is going through a scientific and technological revolution and has advanced much further than most people realise. If you look at R&D expendiature, number of students enroled in higher education, or the number of scientific papers published, all three measurements are doubling every 4 years. China's current R&D spending and scientific output are now close to the level of Japan's.

So I think that because people underestimate China's progress, they also tend to overestimate foriegn contributions to China's weapons projects. You will see people claim that pl-12 uses the seekser of R-77(though both Russia and China deny it), that the air defense system on 052C is somehow based off stolen AEGIS technology, that type 730 CWIS is based off Goalkeeper or SATAN or SAMOS (though there is debate over which one and no one can explain how China could have obtained any of them), and that J-10 is just a Chinese copy of Isreals cancelled LAVI project(despite the many obvious differences between Lavi and J-10). While it is true that Chinese weapons are based off foreign designs, I don't agree with the idea that all Chinese weapons are simply clones of foreign systems or that China is incable of independent development.

[MIGleader]

Well, China was pretty incapable of of designing complete weapon systems without foreign help. However, China is going through a scientific and technological revolution and has advanced much further than most people realise. If you look at R&D expendiature, number of students enroled in higher education, or the number of scientific papers published, all three measurements are doubling every 4 years. China's current R&D spending and scientific output are now close to the level of Japan's.

So I think that because people underestimate China's progress, they also tend to overestimate foriegn contributions to China's weapons projects. You will see people claim that pl-12 uses the seekser of R-77(though both Russia and China deny it), that the air defense system on 052C is somehow based off stolen AEGIS technology, that type 730 CWIS is based off Goalkeeper or SATAN or SAMOS (though there is debate over which one and no one can explain how China could have obtained any of them), and that J-10 is just a Chinese copy of Isreals cancelled LAVI project(despite the many obvious differences between Lavi and J-10). While it is true that Chinese weapons are based off foreign designs, I don't agree with the idea that all Chinese weapons are simply clones of foreign systems or that China is incable of independent development.

i said soem imput. the j-10s airframe was based of the lavi, though far from a copy. its original engine was russian.

the pl-12 indeed does use r-77 seeker tech, thoug definitly not copied.

the hq-9 on the 52cs were designed off of the s-300, though much improved.
and all chinese ships feature foreign engines.

but in the future, china will be able to make its own quality equipment, and become self dependent.

[tphuang]

Well, China was pretty incapable of of designing complete weapon systems without foreign help. However, China is going through a scientific and technological revolution and has advanced much further than most people realise. If you look at R&D expendiature, number of students enroled in higher education, or the number of scientific papers published, all three measurements are doubling every 4 years. China's current R&D spending and scientific output are now close to the level of Japan's.

So I think that because people underestimate China's progress, they also tend to overestimate foriegn contributions to China's weapons projects. You will see people claim that pl-12 uses the seekser of R-77(though both Russia and China deny it), that the air defense system on 052C is somehow based off stolen AEGIS technology, that type 730 CWIS is based off Goalkeeper or SATAN or SAMOS (though there is debate over which one and no one can explain how China could have obtained any of them), and that J-10 is just a Chinese copy of Isreals cancelled LAVI project(despite the many obvious differences between Lavi and J-10). While it is true that Chinese weapons are based off foreign designs, I don't agree with the idea that all Chinese weapons are simply clones of foreign systems or that China is incable of independent development.
If you haven't noticed, 052C uses pretty much all Russian sensors. WS-10A was in a limbo until we thoroughly studied AL-31F and got help from the Russians. It doesn't hurt to have foreign help at all.

As for Malaysia, what's this about China selling SAM to Malaysia? When did this happen?

[Chairman Hu]

Russian Tech has helped China get China on the right road, I mean, by the time it was 1950 and China was still in the feudal ages with 1% as the rich population, China had her head in the ground pretty deep, only through Russian help China is prosperous as she is today (military speaking)

The AL-41F can help China on TVC design, and there might be something China can pick up from the radar and other systems on the 35BM

[trkl]

If you haven't noticed, 052C uses pretty much all Russian sensors. WS-10A was in a limbo until we thoroughly studied AL-31F and got help from the Russians.

The sensors on 052C, according to sinodefence:
SENSORS

The ship is fitted with four multifunction phased array radar antenna. The radar is reportedly developed by Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology (also known as 14 Institute). There is also a Type 517H-1 (NATO codename: Knife Rest) long-range 2D air search radar; a Russian Band Stand fire-control radar (for anti-ship missile and main gun); and two Type 327G (EFR-1, NATO codename: Rice Lamp) fire control radar for the CIWS.


The sensors seem more Chinese than Russian.

WS-10A was not based on AL-31F. It's specs are a lot more similar to western engines than to Al-31F.

[MIGleader]

If you haven't noticed, 052C uses pretty much all Russian sensors. WS-10A was in a limbo until we thoroughly studied AL-31F and got help from the Russians. It doesn't hurt to have foreign help at all.

As for Malaysia, what's this about China selling SAM to Malaysia? When did this happen?

incorrect. the ws-10a was a project to develop a western style engine. the ws-10 was the parrelel project to reverse engineer the al-31. the engines were competing. the radar on the 52c may have been developed from the kvant, but no one knows for sure.

[tphuang]

incorrect. the ws-10a was a project to develop a western style engine. the ws-10 was the parrelel project to reverse engineer the al-31. the engines were competing. the radar on the 52c may have been developed from the kvant, but no one knows for sure.
I do wish people would read my posts more carefully. I didn't mean that WS-10A was developed based on AL-31F, but rather WS-10A would not have completed this fast without studying AL-31F. This is a known fact.

[adeptitus]

As for Malaysia, what's this about China selling SAM to Malaysia? When did this happen?

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040720115308.mjyqr50c.html
"Malaysia to buy Chinese missiles for technology transfer"

[maddogy4645]

Buying a few to study their tech is always a good idea, but Su37/35s are USELESS against PLAF's real killers, the F22s. China has enough expertise and resources to attempt to upgrade her Flanker and J10 fleets now, however, getting another major procurement of Russian fighters is redundant and wasteful.

[MIGleader]

Buying a few to study their tech is always a good idea, but Su37/35s are USELESS against PLAF's real killers, the F22s. China has enough expertise and resources to attempt to upgrade her Flanker and J10 fleets now, however, getting another major procurement of Russian fighters is redundant and wasteful.

i dont think the plaf has f-22's.

u mean usaaf?

[tphuang]

Buying a few to study their tech is always a good idea, but Su37/35s are USELESS against PLAF's real killers, the F22s. China has enough expertise and resources to attempt to upgrade her Flanker and J10 fleets now, however, getting another major procurement of Russian fighters is redundant and wasteful.
right, I'm sure sukhoi will just let China by a squadron and be okay with that. If China buys, it will be at least for 1 regiment as in the case of su-30mkk2. I'd like to see China get at least 2 regiments of 30. As for F-22, which plane can go against F-22? Honestly, su-35bm will give us superiority against the mkis and super hornets and that's good enough as far as I'm concerned.

[Chairman Hu]

Both the Su-35BM and the Raptor has TVC built in them, the battle is really up to the pilot, if they both can manuver out each other's missiles, then this plane is WORTH China's money, this thing can carry 12 and with TVC, the Raptor is with 8 and TVC, the Raptors will be sen to destroy the BM, since it can nail the Super Hornet, if the MKI can manuver a R-77 and another R-73 as it pulls itz famous escape tactic. so can the Su-35BM, maybe China can test this plane and use to to stall F-22s

If it can stall F-22s, then It can do the same with the MKI, this can give China the levege that she needs. Plane to purchase and study is one thing, but if it can do something like this (MAYBE), then itz a double for the PLAAF

[MIGleader]

Both the Su-35BM and the Raptor has TVC built in them, the battle is really up to the pilot, if they both can manuver out each other's missiles, then this plane is WORTH China's money, this thing can carry 12 and with TVC, the Raptor is with 8 and TVC, the Raptors will be sen to destroy the BM, since it can nail the Super Hornet, if the MKI can manuver a R-77 and another R-73 as it pulls itz famous escape tactic. so can the Su-35BM, maybe China can test this plane and use to to stall F-22s

If it can stall F-22s, then It can do the same with the MKI, this can give China the levege that she needs. Plane to purchase and study is one thing, but if it can do something like this (MAYBE), then itz a double for the PLAAF

if an su-35 bm and f-22 actually met in a dogfight, much of the f-22s advantage is gone. tech such as tvc, helmet sight were all pioneered on russian planes years ago. the su-35bm is undeniably more manuverable than an f-22.
i do not se the u.s usiing f-22s on china in the near future, souse the bms to fight mki or f-15/f-18. j-xx can be used on the f-22 if they actually fight.

so weve decided the su-35bm is a good buy. so how many should china buy, and at what price?
i say buy a first batch of 36, then 40, then 24, ...like the mkk and su-27s deals. 30 million per plane wouldnt be that bad.

[tphuang]

if an su-35 bm and f-22 actually met in a dogfight, much of the f-22s advantage is gone. tech such as tvc, helmet sight were all pioneered on russian planes years ago. the su-35bm is undeniably more manuverable than an f-22.
i do not se the u.s usiing f-22s on china in the near future, souse the bms to fight mki or f-15/f-18. j-xx can be used on the f-22 if they actually fight.

so weve decided the su-35bm is a good buy. so how many should china buy, and at what price?
i say buy a first batch of 36, then 40, then 24, ...like the mkk and su-27s deals. 30 million per plane wouldnt be that bad.
yeah, that's why I agree bm is needed. It may not be able to take on F-22/35 or EF-2000, but it can kick F-18s and probably be at least equal to F-15K. I say get 50 at least, 100 max. 2 to 3 regiments sounds pretty good.

[FreeAsia2000]

Hmm will stealth technology make BVR irrelevant in the future ? If so the
F-22 advantages are useless in a dogfight.

I think Malaysia and the other asian states have learnt the lesson of Iraq

Buy Missiles and Sniper gear !

[MIGleader]

yeah, that's why I agree bm is needed. It may not be able to take on F-22/35 or EF-2000, but it can kick F-18s and probably be at least equal to F-15K. I say get 50 at least, 100 max. 2 to 3 regiments sounds pretty good.

i dont see a problem with taking on a eurofighter. i dont know hwy peoplt keep believing russian planes are less capable than europes. a bm is certainly more manuverable than a ef2000, and the new radars not bad either. plus it hold 4 more weapons!!! (damn, germarks going to be all over me!)

nothing except the mig 1.44 has chance against the f-22. so dont try.

[Chairman Hu]

uhh lets see, ppl being idiots!

I really dont think just because Russia has less money = Russian planes suck

THAT is NOT LAW

I say like 120 ish, if ma regiment is 24 in this case, 5 is excellent, since the EF-2000, Raptor and the MKI has been mentioned...

50 Raptor <- 120 Su-35BM
140 MKI =? 120 Su-35BM

uhh and how much Tyhoons does Europe have o.0?

Just because 2 Raptors can beat 7 Eagles, that doesnt mean 5 Raptors can beat 12 35BMs, why? HMS and TVC is equal on both sides, unless the Su-35BM includes 3-D TVC, plus the it carry 4 extra missiles, giving it extra chance to nail the raptor than vice-versa

IF I remember correctly... MKI has engine problems, if the Su-35BM has THAT, China of coursely wont but it, itz Russia's problem... MKI seems to have near the same capability as the Su-35BM, except the engines on the 35 is better, and it holds 6? missiles. (I think im wrong on this)

well anyways, like the Raptor, the planes loses their TVC and HMS advantage, so it will end up as the plane with flexiblity, good pilot, and most missiles

[tphuang]

uhh lets see, ppl being idiots!

I really dont think just because Russia has less money = Russian planes suck

THAT is NOT LAW

I say like 120 ish, if ma regiment is 24 in this case, 5 is excellent, since the EF-2000, Raptor and the MKI has been mentioned...

50 Raptor <- 120 Su-35BM
140 MKI =? 120 Su-35BM

uhh and how much Tyhoons does Europe have o.0?

Just because 2 Raptors can beat 7 Eagles, that doesnt mean 5 Raptors can beat 12 35BMs, why? HMS and TVC is equal on both sides, unless the Su-35BM includes 3-D TVC, plus the it carry 4 extra missiles, giving it extra chance to nail the raptor than vice-versa

IF I remember correctly... MKI has engine problems, if the Su-35BM has THAT, China of coursely wont but it, itz Russia's problem... MKI seems to have near the same capability as the Su-35BM, except the engines on the 35 is better, and it holds 6? missiles. (I think im wrong on this)

well anyways, like the Raptor, the planes loses their TVC and HMS advantage, so it will end up as the plane with flexiblity, good pilot, and most missiles
The radar and missile selection on bm is also better, but it does not canard. Can 5 raptors beat 12 bms? I personally think so. The reason is just that bm would never detect raptor. Whereas the raptor would be able to easily lock on bm.

Let's compare EF to BM:
1. engine:
EJ-200: http://www.eurojet.de/default2.php?p=4&cid=6
important stats are: thrust: 90kN and T/W ratio: 10.1 (note, this is T/W ratio for a 5th generation fighter). TVC has yet been added, but a 2-D TVC will probably be added in the future. It also allows for supercruise without using afterburners.

AL-41F1: thrust mentionned to be at least 140kN, probably up to 150kN. Let's say 150kN, that would be 1.2 times the thrust of AL-31F using probably the same size. So, the T/W ratio will be up from 7.1 to 8.5. It will probably be equipped with 3-D TVC.

I would say the huge gap in T/W ratio would make EF-200 the better one.

2. RCS
Not sure about this one. I do know that EF-2000 has some stealth features, so its RCS is probably smaller than 1. It also helps that it is a much smaller plane than bm.
As for bm, the word is that some stealth feature will probably be on there compared to earlier versions of the flanker, so it will probably be less than 10, but I doubt it will be as small as EF-2000.

3. AAM
We can argue all day about AMRAAM vs AA-12 and ASRAAM vs AA-11. I'd say AMRAAM is better than AA-12. The short ranged AAM, I'm not sure. In the future, it will likely be the Meteor vs R-77M1, I'd take Meteor.

4. Avionics.
EF-2000 has HOTAS, DVI, 3 MFHDD, HMSS, HUD,
bm probably has similar systems. Although, I'd say the processor on EF is probably better, since the Russian electronics industry is pretty weak.

As for radar, EF-2000 currently uses Captor PD radar and will likely use AMSAR in the future. bm will probably use Bars until Irbis or Zhuk-Mfe becomes available.

In general, I think EF-2000 just kills bm due to its superior engine with much better T/W ratio and supercruise capability.

[MIGleader]

The radar and missile selection on bm is also better, but it does not canard. Can 5 raptors beat 12 bms? I personally think so. The reason is just that bm would never detect raptor. Whereas the raptor would be able to easily lock on bm.

Let's compare EF to BM:
1. engine:
EJ-200: http://www.eurojet.de/default2.php?p=4&cid=6
important stats are: thrust: 90kN and T/W ratio: 10.1 (note, this is T/W ratio for a 5th generation fighter). TVC has yet been added, but a 2-D TVC will probably be added in the future. It also allows for supercruise without using afterburners.

AL-41F1: thrust mentionned to be at least 140kN, probably up to 150kN. Let's say 150kN, that would be 1.2 times the thrust of AL-31F using probably the same size. So, the T/W ratio will be up from 7.1 to 8.5. It will probably be equipped with 3-D TVC.

I would say the huge gap in T/W ratio would make EF-200 the better one.

2. RCS
Not sure about this one. I do know that EF-2000 has some stealth features, so its RCS is probably smaller than 1. It also helps that it is a much smaller plane than bm.
As for bm, the word is that some stealth feature will probably be on there compared to earlier versions of the flanker, so it will probably be less than 10, but I doubt it will be as small as EF-2000.

3. AAM
We can argue all day about AMRAAM vs AA-12 and ASRAAM vs AA-11. I'd say AMRAAM is better than AA-12. The short ranged AAM, I'm not sure. In the future, it will likely be the Meteor vs R-77M1, I'd take Meteor.

4. Avionics.
EF-2000 has HOTAS, DVI, 3 MFHDD, HMSS, HUD,
bm probably has similar systems. Although, I'd say the processor on EF is probably better, since the Russian electronics industry is pretty weak.

As for radar, EF-2000 currently uses Captor PD radar and will likely use AMSAR in the future. bm will probably use Bars until Irbis or Zhuk-Mfe becomes available.

In general, I think EF-2000 just kills bm due to its superior engine with much better T/W ratio and supercruise capability.

very nice comparison. in a study by the british, the eurofighter scored a 4:1 kill ration on the su-35, which may be a bit over blown, but still fairly accurate. but the su-does not represent russias best of fighter tech, its simply the best russia can field. if u compare a eurofighter to a 1.44, the eurofighter would lose.

i dont see china fighting europe in the near future, so best concentrate on the f-16s of taiwan and mkis of india. thats when the bm comes in.

[tphuang]

Some interesting info on Eurofighter
http://www.edefenseonline.com/default.asp?func=article&aref=09_15_2005_IF_01

This article claims that it has an RCS of 1 m^2. Just for reference, F-16 has RCS of 1.5 m^2, F-15 has RCS of 25 m^2 (maybe less?), Mig-21 has RCS of 3 m^2, Mig-29 has RCS of 5 m^2 and flankers has RCS of 8 m^2 (even this sounds a little low to me). F-22 has RCS of 0.05 m^2 according to this article.

Interesting bit on captor:
The Captor is a multimode radar, working in the I/J-band frequency range (8-12 GHz). It has a mechanically steered, grooved, flat (planar) metal antenna, with a diameter of 70 cm. Four electrical servos are used for quick antenna movements horizontally and vertically. The selection of a mechanical scan over a passive electronically scanned antenna was made, because it was assessed that such a solution was proven, and an advanced mechanically scanned antenna could offer better performance than an early electronically scanned antenna. It is now expected that, in the future, the radar will receive an active electronically scanning array (AESA).

The 193-kg Captor is a modular design with 61 shop-replaceable units (SPUs) and six line-replaceable units (LRUs). The LRUs are the two receivers, two transmitters, the antenna, and the processor. The radar processor can perform three-billion operations per second and works with the use of ADA software compatible with MIL-STD 2167A. Three separate data-processing channels are used to enable the radar to perform various modes simultaneously. The radar can observe 60 degrees to the left and right horizontally (some sources claim 70 degrees), and the radar range is at least 160 km for targets with an RCS of 5 sq m. Large targets, such as transport aircraft, can be detected at distances of up to 300 km. The radar has several air-to-air modes in which high-, medium-, and low-pulse-repetition-frequency regimes are used. The available range of pulse-repetition-frequencies (PRFs) is from 1 to 20 KHz. Among the air-to-air modes are range-while-scan (RWS), track-while-scan (TWS), and velocity search (VS). All of the modes are used for BVR engagement with the use of AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles or, in the future, with the use of Meteors. In track-while-scan mode, 20 targets can be simultaneously tracked, and up to six (some sources says eight) can be simultaneously engaged. Range-while-scan is used for initial target detection, with the radar emitting at low PRF and high power. Velocity scan is used for prioritization of the targets detected, and the radar switches to medium PRF. Track-while-scan is the basic mode for air combat and engagement of enemy aircraft. Also, a single-target-track mode is available for engagement of a remote target at the edge of the missile's range. Additionally, the radar has a raid-assessment function that distinguishes individual targets within a group of targets, along with a non-cooperative recognition mode that evaluates target characteristics (counting engine-compressor blades, RCS measurement, etc.) to identify a type of aircraft. The Captor radar also has look-down/shoot-down capabilities. A unique radar feature is the ability to present returns on two multifunction displays in the cockpit, in the vertical and horizontal view, giving the pilot a three-dimensional situational picture.

The MIDS is also extensively used for BVR engagement. It enables the exchange of information between eight Typhoons in formation and with an Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft, as well as with a ground-based station, such as the nearest air-operations center (AOC). The aircraft typically attack in pairs, with the leading aircraft well forward and having its radar switched off and the trailing aircraft with the radar turned on. When targets are detected, the lead aircraft silently approaches with its radar in stand-by mode but not emitting. The attack is conducted silently, and, according to some sources, even the mid-course update can be accomplished based on information from the trailing aircraft. In the case of enemy attack, the leading aircraft can perform a break maneuver, and the second aircraft accelerates to engage.

The Captor also has several dogfight modes. For the search and track of maneuvering targets, the vertical-search mode conducts scans in vertical surface sweeps rather than horizontally in descending or ascending bars. There is also a boresight mode for designating a target visible on the head-up display (HUD) and a slaved mode for designating an air target with the use of helmet-mounted cueing system.

The Captor radar will also have some air-to-ground modes, which will be introduced in Tranche 2 aircraft (see below). A Doppler beam-sharpening (DBS) mode will provide a ground picture of one-meter resolution. A synthetic-aperture-radar (SAR) mode with 0.3-meter resolution is to be available, as well as ground-moving-target-indication/track (GMTI/T) and fixed-ground-target-track (FTT) modes. The range of the SAR is to be 80 km. A sea-surface-search-and-track mode is to have a range of 130 km. As for other modes, a ground-target rangefinding (GR) mode and a terrain-avoidance mode are to be introduced in Tranche 2. All the above modes are to support various weapons types that could be used against ground or naval targets.

In 1992, the EuroFIRST consortium was selected to develop and deliver the forward-looking-infrared/infrared-search-and-track (FLIR/IRST) unit for Eurofighter. The consortium consisted of FIAR (Milano, Italy) as a leading company, Pilkington Optronics (Glasgow, UK, now Thales Optronics LTd), and Tecnobit (Madrid, Spain). The Passive Infrared Airborne Tracking Equipment (PIRATE) system is to be introduced in a basic version for Tranch 1/Block 5 aircraft and in a full version from Block 8. Full integration with other aircraft systems will be achieved on Tranche 2/Block 10 aircraft, except for German aircraft. The system will use a CCD-type FLIR camera with dual wavebands (3-5 and 8-11 microns). The processing speed of the PIRATE is to be up to 24-million pixels per second. The system will have a long range and a wide sector of search (detailed figures are classified) and will also be able to track multiple targets. Unofficial figures say the maximum range will be about 145 km in favorable conditions, with a 40-km identification range. Up to 200 targets will be able to be observed at a time, with tracking of several in a selected sector. The maximum observation sector, again according to unconfirmed information, is to be 75 degrees horizontally. Despite its name, the full version of PIRATE will also be able to track a designated ground target and present its picture on the helmet-mounted display. It will also be used as a navigation and landing aid. Air-to-air modes will include multiple-target track (MTT), single-target track (STT), and single-target identification (STI).

[Chairman Hu]

whats the RCS of Eurofighter, Su-35BM and the MFI 1.44?

but VERY NICE, fine article!

If China have something half as good thats indigious built, one of China's problem would be gone, the systems are excellent on paper, well at least to me.

Too bad China cant get Eurofighters...

If it can search for targets of RCS 5m^2 from 160 km, it gives it an advantage to fighters like the Su-35BM, missiles like the meteor can nail it with ease

but how does the EF supercruise without TVCs?

The Su-35BM gets a score of 4-1 favoring the EF... thats still not bad, if China gets this, China might find out the weaknesses of the plane, and this can ALL contribute to the Jian-XX in the future, China of coursely will get this, I really dont think China will built something and get it up and running in 10 years and use another 14 years for trial and error

[tphuang]

it can supercruise, because it's T/W ratio is over 10!
All the 4th generation planes use engines with T/W ratio of 7 to 8.

it said, RCS for EF is 1 m^2, for su-35bm probably 8m^2 (although, this might be reduced, since it supposedly adopts some stealth features) and MFI (no idea, it's a huge plane though).

[walter]

but how does the EF supercruise without TVCs?


As tphuang stated, the T/W of the EJ200 is over 10 and the overall T/W of the EF is over 1 plus aerodynamically it is a sound design--all these factors allow the EF to supercruise. TVC has nothing to do with an aircraft's ability to supercruise. If anything, the TVC adds weight and would ultimately hinder acceleration performance, but not by much. I have to add, I doubt the EF's ability to supercruise with a full weapon's load due to the added drag. With internal stores, the F-22 does not have this problem.

[Chairman Hu]

errr NOW i feel dumb, yea but thanks for the explaination

EF with a RCS of 1m^2, and a T/W of 10...

How much weight does TVC add to planes like the 35BM? are 2-D TVC lighter or 3-D?

[MIGleader]

errr NOW i feel dumb, yea but thanks for the explaination

EF with a RCS of 1m^2, and a T/W of 10...

How much weight does TVC add to planes like the 35BM? are 2-D TVC lighter or 3-D?

the tvc added about one ton of weight to the mki more then ther mkk. but thats ok, consideraing india wants to use the aircraft as a fighter, not an attacker. 2-d and 3-d engines is too broad. there are many types of engines. thye all have different weights.

[Chairman Hu]

errr sry lemme clearify...

2-D engine like the one from the F-22
3-D engine like the one from the MFI 1.44

WHOA A ton on the MKI?! is that... 35.5 tonnes total? thats actually not bad, isnt some of the MKK to be... 38.5 tonnes according to sinodefence?

[MIGleader]

errr sry lemme clearify...

2-D engine like the one from the F-22
3-D engine like the one from the MFI 1.44

WHOA A ton on the MKI?! is that... 35.5 tonnes total? thats actually not bad, isnt some of the MKK to be... 38.5 tonnes according to sinodefence?

no, thats take off weight, that means the total weight the plane can hold, including fuel and weapons. the chinese had mkk specially stenghthenged to be able to execute its attack missions.

[tphuang]

alright, from one of the Chinese sites on AL-41F1 on su-35bm:
It looks like the thrust of the engine is 14.5 kN
http://mil.news.sohu.com/20051114/n240714663.shtml
　　中新网11月14日电 据俄罗斯航空新闻网13日报道，由俄罗斯“苏霍伊”飞机设计局研制的新型苏-35多功能歼击机将装备代号为117C的新型航空发动机。

　　俄罗斯“土星”科学生产联合体科学技术中心副主任叶甫盖尼·马尔秋科夫11日表示，苏-35多功能歼击机将装备117C型发动机，该发动机为第五代航空发动机原型机，牵引力可达14.5吨，能够 更好的支持苏-35的优秀气动布局。他表示，目前该型发动机已完成所有地面试验，第一阶段飞行试验也于日前成功完成，期间 共进行了30次飞行试验。

　　马尔秋克指出，今年8月在莫斯科举行的“MAKS-2005”国际航空展览会上，俄“土星”科学生产联合体与“苏霍伊”飞机设计局以及乌法航空发动机科学联合 体就研制新型发动机达成协议。根据计划，俄“苏霍伊”设计局将为C117项目投入40%的资金，而“土星” 科学生产联合体与乌法发动机科学联合体每家将承担30%的资金。

　　俄“土星”科学生产联合体第一副总经理维克托·切普金表示，截止目前，安装第五代发动机原 型的苏-27M型机已完成约30次飞行。切普金指出，最初时飞机上只安装了一台新型发动机和一台原始发动机，而后安 装两台第五代航空发动机原型机，目前第一阶段试验计划已完全结束，取得了良好的结果，飞机将准备下一阶段飞 行试验。

　　切普金指出，第五代航空发动机原型在设计上与安装在苏-27歼击上的AL-31F发动机非常相似，但事实上其是一种新型发动机，在建造过程中使用了AL-31F发动机的传动装置，同时借鉴了AL-41型发动机上的所有空气动力、强度、金属方面的成果。据称，AL-41发动机是为装备多功能前线歼击机。

　　俄航空专家表示，俄雷宾斯克“土星”科学生产联合体的第五代航空发动机将用于装备俄第五代 战机。 据悉，新型发动机与现役苏式飞机上装备的发动机的主要差异是：装备有高压和低压涡轮机和新型风扇，使飞机具 有更大的牵引力。

　　俄罗斯将于2006年开始生产试验型苏-35多功能歼击机。苏-35是俄罗斯“苏霍伊”飞机设计局在苏-27基础上发展的单座全天候战斗/ 攻击机，主要用于制空和对地攻击。该机为苏-27的高级发展型，改进了机体、发动机、机载设备和武器系统，可以根据攻击目标的不同完全自动地进行飞行模 式和武器的控制，电传操纵系统由模拟式换成数字式，增加了前翼，采用三翼面气动布局。

　　苏-35型机上配备的相阵控雷达可发现和跟踪20个目标，同时攻击其中的8个目标。该机的最大武器外挂载荷为8 000千克，可配备多种类型的机载武器，其中包括：1门30毫米GSH-30机炮(备弹150发)，R-27、R-40、R-60、R-73A和R-77空空导弹，KH-25ML、KH -25MP、KH-29T、KH-31和KH-59导弹等。(章田/雅龙)

[supertran]

Can one of you guys clear something up for me. So China is getting the su-35 or is it just gossip? Has China or Russian sources confirm any orders of the SU-35, or is it still in talks between both nations.

[MIGleader]

Can one of you guys clear something up for me. So China is getting the su-35 or is it just gossip? Has China or Russian sources confirm any orders of the SU-35, or is it still in talks between both nations.

the su-35 is only being offered by russia as of now. the chinese airforce might want to conserve its money, since it just bought the il-76s. so i dont see a major deal for a while. after a while, j-xx might be out.

[GreatYuran]

the su-35 is only being offered by russia as of now. the chinese airforce might want to conserve its money, since it just bought the il-76s. so i dont see a major deal for a while. after a while, j-xx might be out.

Thats all depending on which stage the development of the J-xx is at. if the J-xx is not expected to enter service until 2015 or 2020 then the PLAAF needs to consider if their current fleet of Su-27s,J-10s,J-11s,and Su-30s are capable of handling threats for 1 - 2 more decades. If that is the case it is possible that the PLAAF will aquire the Su-35.

[tphuang]

Thats all depending on which stage the development of the J-xx is at. if the J-xx is not expected to enter service until 2015 or 2020 then the PLAAF needs to consider if their current fleet of Su-27s,J-10s,J-11s,and Su-30s are capable of handling threats for 1 - 2 more decades. If that is the case it is possible that the PLAAF will aquire the Su-35.
If you read some of the posts on Chinese military forums, it seems like the more knowledgeable ones do not want China to by any more flanker. I guess they feel optimistic about improvements in Chinese avionics that can be put on our 4th generation planes.

[MIGleader]

Thats all depending on which stage the development of the J-xx is at. if the J-xx is not expected to enter service until 2015 or 2020 then the PLAAF needs to consider if their current fleet of Su-27s,J-10s,J-11s,and Su-30s are capable of handling threats for 1 - 2 more decades. If that is the case it is possible that the PLAAF will aquire the Su-35.

of course they can. chinas not faced by immediate threat, and as far as defence is concerned, no one is going to attack china in the near future. taiwan doesnt seem to want or be able to buy new fighters, and any fighters it buys wont be very advanced, only older planes with some mid-life upgrades and so on. as chinas built an effective fighter fleet over the 90s, its best for the plaaf to concentrate on awacs, elint, and strategic bomber and dedicated attackers, where china's is not particularly adept. j-xx should be comming out around 2015 using a timetable based on j-10 and f-22. until then, china can keep upgrading its flankers and j-10s. the j-10s current potential is huge. already, radar and engine upgrades are on the way. as for the j-11s, we all know about their upgrades too. so i guess china doesnt really need to keep buying russian planes anyways. they have a nasty habit of being below plaaf standards.

[GreatYuran]

of course they can. chinas not faced by immediate threat, and as far as defence is concerned, no one is going to attack china in the near future. taiwan doesnt seem to want or be able to buy new fighters, and any fighters it buys wont be very advanced, only older planes with some mid-life upgrades and so on. as chinas built an effective fighter fleet over the 90s, its best for the plaaf to concentrate on awacs, elint, and strategic bomber and dedicated attackers, where china's is not particularly adept. j-xx should be comming out around 2015 using a timetable based on j-10 and f-22. until then, china can keep upgrading its flankers and j-10s. the j-10s current potential is huge. already, radar and engine upgrades are on the way. as for the j-11s, we all know about their upgrades too. so i guess china doesnt really need to keep buying russian planes anyways. they have a nasty habit of being below plaaf standards.

Below PLAAF standards? But havent the PLAAF been relying almsot exclusivly on Russian technology? From the early days of the first generation Migs to the Sukoi fighters now employed, the standards are being set BY the Russian planes. The Indigenous designs of China so far has no been able to match Russian designs. Before we go on to praise the J-10, it needes to be said that many components of the J-10 comes from Russia, including its engine. All other chinese planes have been basically come from Russian designs. The Russian planes are not below PLAAF standards, they simply set the standard.

As for the point of attaining the Su-35s, it all depends on the risk assesment of the Taiwanese. Although the Taiwan airforce is not capable of completely obliviating the PLAAF, consideration should be taken in about the United States and Japanese. As far as the PLAAF has advanced (quite remarkably i might add) the USAF is still the strongest air force in the world. By far. If the United States is to enter the Taiwan conflict, then the PLAAF will need to consider boasting their force considerably before the introduction of the J-XX.

[tphuang]

Below PLAAF standards? But havent the PLAAF been relying almsot exclusivly on Russian technology? From the early days of the first generation Migs to the Sukoi fighters now employed, the standards are being set BY the Russian planes. The Indigenous designs of China so far has no been able to match Russian designs. Before we go on to praise the J-10, it needes to be said that many components of the J-10 comes from Russia, including its engine. All other chinese planes have been basically come from Russian designs. The Russian planes are not below PLAAF standards, they simply set the standard.

As for the point of attaining the Su-35s, it all depends on the risk assesment of the Taiwanese. Although the Taiwan airforce is not capable of completely obliviating the PLAAF, consideration should be taken in about the United States and Japanese. As far as the PLAAF has advanced (quite remarkably i might add) the USAF is still the strongest air force in the world. By far. If the United States is to enter the Taiwan conflict, then the PLAAF will need to consider boasting their force considerably before the introduction of the J-XX.
They are below plaaf standards, that's why they suspended importing parts from Russia for the J-11 contract. J-10 uses its engine from Russia right now. What else does it use? Once WS-10A starts mass production, it will be fully indigenous. Or maybe you know something I don't? Even J-11B is using all indigenous components now. Well, the airfram is Russian design obviously, but everything else is developed by China and even the airframe is made totally in China.

As for su-35, the reason why many people in China are not so excited about it is because of J-10's air combat abilities. Mnay people doubt that su-35 is actually better J-10 in air combat.

As for USAF, it doesn't matter what plane we buy from the Russians, it won't help if we have to face F-22 or F-35. So, that's why we are waiting for the next generation plane.

[Longaxe]

The ONLY reason that China suspended imports of the su-27 is because China has a nasty habit of copying a foreign design and then saying it’s their own. China prefers buggy domestic planes to mediocre Russian aircraft. I don’t think China is going to war any time so, and feels that it can afford to purchase domestic in order to build its aircraft industry which is still not able to completely build a modern aircraft with out foreign help. The fact that they are still making j-8II and other mig-21 derivatives shows just how far behind they are. Those aircraft should have been nearing retirement in the late 1970’s. It is funny to hear how great j-8II is when the only thing the plane has going for it over a Boeing 747 is its speed. It is doubtful that the j-10 is the next best thing since sliced bread some people say “it won 5 vs 0 against the su-27�; however the statement is without any context made by extreme nationalist trying to push their aircraft. How many fights did it take to get that result? It doesn’t seem logical, that the j-10 should have a consistent advantage over the su-27 even the downgraded crap version.:rofl:

[MIGleader]

The ONLY reason that China suspended imports of the su-27 is because China has a nasty habit of copying a foreign design and then saying it’s their own. China prefers buggy domestic planes to mediocre Russian aircraft. I don’t think China is going to war any time so, and feels that it can afford to purchase domestic in order to build its aircraft industry which is still not able to completely build a modern aircraft with out foreign help. The fact that they are still making j-8II and other mig-21 derivatives shows just how far behind they are. Those aircraft should have been nearing retirement in the late 1970’s. It is funny to hear how great j-8II is when the only thing the plane has going for it over a Boeing 747 is its speed. It is doubtful that the j-10 is the next best thing since sliced bread some people say “it won 5 vs 0 against the su-27�; however the statement is without any context made by extreme nationalist trying to push their aircraft. How many fights did it take to get that result? It doesn’t seem logical, that the j-10 should have a consistent advantage over the su-27 even the downgraded crap version.:rofl:

are u begging for a ban? one more "trash china's military" post like that and ur going to gollevainens office. since your post rather resembles one by vincelee, ill go ahead and ignore it.

in the early nineties, china's indegeous aviation industry was not that great. so to speed up modernization, they took the easy way ouyt and bought the su-27, which was one of the most capable and feared aircraft in 1992. to russh things more, they signes a contract for the j-11, su-27sk. but the sk was not multirole, and thus fell below plaaf standards.

the j-11 deal didnt go much better. the russian imported parts were crap(mediocre streghth and not easy to handle. and this coupled with china's lack of advanced aircraft assembly knowledge led to serious quality problems on early j-11s. plus they wernt multirole either.

the su-30 was a plaaf hope to obtain a good multirole aircraft. the mkk and mkk2 were good aircraft, but ultimately did not have the extensive A2g abilites promised by the russians.

and thus began a period for the plaaf of laying off of russian planes entirely, chosing to focus on indegedous designs. the j-10 had finally come out by then, but the chinese still weren experienced enough to completly sperate from russia(al-31, arsenal hms). of course, now by 2005, the chiense have developed their own advanced avionic equipment, weapons, and engines. immensly advanced upgrades made on the j-7 and j-8 allowed them to near the performance of early f-16/f-15 models. fc-1 was another example of chinas ability to develop advanced fighters, coupled with a growing ambition.

so who knows what j-xx holds? but we can sure china's quit doing russian drugs and instead turning to itself for help.

[tphuang]

The ONLY reason that China suspended imports of the su-27 is because China has a nasty habit of copying a foreign design and then saying it’s their own. China prefers buggy domestic planes to mediocre Russian aircraft. I don’t think China is going to war any time so, and feels that it can afford to purchase domestic in order to build its aircraft industry which is still not able to completely build a modern aircraft with out foreign help. The fact that they are still making j-8II and other mig-21 derivatives shows just how far behind they are. Those aircraft should have been nearing retirement in the late 1970’s. It is funny to hear how great j-8II is when the only thing the plane has going for it over a Boeing 747 is its speed. It is doubtful that the j-10 is the next best thing since sliced bread some people say “it won 5 vs 0 against the su-27”; however the statement is without any context made by extreme nationalist trying to push their aircraft. How many fights did it take to get that result? It doesn’t seem logical, that the j-10 should have a consistent advantage over the su-27 even the downgraded crap version.:rofl:
China already paid for parts to the 200 su-27sk planes, but it stopped using the Russian ones. It replaced them with all domestic parts. Make a note of this. They have to pay more financially to build J-11B, because they are essentailly paying for the Russian parts and the Chinese parts that replaced them. As for buggy domestic planes, it's funny that you said that. Do you realize China has been providing parts for Boeing or Airbus for the last few years? The equipments it uses are actually superior to the ones used in the original su-27 assembley line that got transferred over. If there is one thing that pla has been complaining about, it would be the quality of the parts coming from Russia. The Russians seemed to put even less effort into producing the parts for J-11s than for their own su-27.

Don't believe me, check what sukhoi said:
http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2000_2003/reports/mair1.htm
"J-11 “Indigenization” This Sukhoi official was also willing to talk about the PLA’s desire to “indigenize” the J-11 with substantial new Chinese-made components, like radar, engines and avionics. He said that the PLA was capable of doing all these things but that it would take the PLA “ten years” to realize an indigenized J-11. But when they did so, he expected that the PLA would also sell this fighter. This new J-11 is expected to carry PLA-made weapons like the SD-10 active-guided AAM, precision attack weapons, radar and a new “glass” cockpit of digitized avionics. The main goal of the program is to make a fighter capable of both fighter and attack missions—something the baseline Su-27SK/J-11 cannot do. This individual also confirmed comments by a Sukhoi official at the 2002 Zhuhai show that Shenyang J-11s have a better production finish than those made at the KnAAPO factory in Komsomolsk."



J-8II is based on Mig-23. It also has modern avionics, BVR capability + refueling probe now, so you really can't compare it to Mig-21s. Then again, I'm not saying it's a good plane. It's unfortunate SAC is still producing it.

As for J-10 beating su-27, it's very well stated. In fact, J-10 has not lost any air combat to flankers in general. What advantage do you think su-27 has over J-10? Weapons? J-10 actually has a BVR missile, which is not present on su-27. Btw, SD-10 has superior motor than R-77 equipped on su-30. avionics? su-27 has an all mechanical cockpit. It didn't even have a modern cockpit until the smk upgrade. radar? com'on now, J-10 has much better multi-tracking and engagement capability. RCS? su-27's RCS is huge. manuverability? stated in two Chinese military magazines that J-10 has better manuverability. Otherwise, how can it beat su-27 over and over again in WVR?

[Longaxe]

Take of your green CCP tinted eye shades, I think the jury is still out on the j-10, at least till more information about its flight envelope comes out. All we know for sure is that it probably has a better roll rate then the su-27, since it has a single engine. The j-10 is a 1980’s design. It has a canard, and studies have proven in the late 1980’s that canards are not worth while, which is why aircraft designed after the 1980’s for the most part lack canards. Little hard data exist on the j-10; however there are issues with its intake. A su-30 is a way better aircraft, bigger radar more multi-role.

[tphuang]

Take of your green CCP tinted eye shades, I think the jury is still out on the j-10, at least till more information about its flight envelope comes out. All we know for sure is that it probably has a better roll rate then the su-27, since it has a single engine. The j-10 is a 1980’s design. It has a canard, and studies have proven in the late 1980’s that canards are not worth while, which is why aircraft designed after the 1980’s for the most part lack canards. Little hard data exist on the j-10; however there are issues with its intake. A su-30 is a way better aircraft, bigger radar more multi-role.
my ccp tainted eye shade? do you think I work for the communist?

Anyhow, do a little research on the confrontations between j-10 and su-27 on your own. Even the Western sites have documented J-10 winning dogfights against su-27

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/obrien.html
"The PLAAF expects to have 50 J-10s by 2005. The J-10, displayed at an air show in May, has received rave reviews from the pilots flying them. Wing Commander Wang Yunhui, a special-grade Su-27 pilot, praised J-10 aircraft and admitted, "During three rounds of "dog fight" in the mid-air, his Su-27 had lost to a J-10 fighter" (Hong Kong Sing Tao Jih Pao 29 May)."

if you are going to discount canard, are you also going to discount its variable intake, it's delta-wing and most importantly, the TVC engine it just got?

As for J-10 vs su-30mkk, they both have their roles in plaaf. Su-30 and future J-11B are likely to be more multi-role planes, due to their greater payload, hardpoints and operation range. However, J-10 has proved itself within China already as the air superiority fighter, so that's why it's getting much more orders from PLA (50 as opposed to like 20 for J-11B).

As for radar, I've already posted enough articles to show that J-10's radar has better tracking and engagement numbers. It's detection range is about equal to su-30mkk despite having much smaller nose and a much lower RCS.

[Longaxe]

The intake sucks it has vibration problems; because the gun is located in it, which is why they had to add those braces. Really dumb design if you ask me, if that isn’t a bug I don’t know what is. A larger radar is always better if they are equal tech. A plane with a bigger nose is more upgradeable. There is nothing stealthy about the j-10 look at its intake, I am sure those braces really help its RCS.:D I doubt its RCS is all that much lower then the su-27’s. The j-10 is really Chinas first semi-modern mostly indigenous fighter design; you really think that it is going to be the best thing ever? I wouldn’t put to much stock in what a PLAAF pilot or the media says about the capabilities of the j-10. The j-10 is Chinas new one trick pony; even if it sucks they are going to brag about it, because that is what militaries do when they get new hardware. Look at how the US brags about the f-22… Stop living in fantasy land.

[tphuang]

The intake sucks it has vibration problems; because the gun is located in it, which is why they had to add those braces. Really dumb design if you ask me, if that isn’t a bug I don’t know what is. A larger radar is always better if they are equal tech. A plane with a bigger nose is more upgradeable. There is nothing stealthy about the j-10 look at its intake, I am sure those braces really help its RCS.:D I doubt its RCS is all that much lower then the su-27’s. The j-10 is really Chinas first semi-modern mostly indigenous fighter design; you really think that it is going to be the best thing ever? I wouldn’t put to much stock in what a PLAAF pilot or the media says about the capabilities of the j-10. The j-10 is Chinas new one trick pony; even if it sucks they are going to brag about it, because that is what militaries do when they get new hardware. Look at how the US brags about the f-22… Stop living in fantasy land.
Is this a joke? Su-27 class fighters are heavy fighters, so they are supposed to have bigger nose, larger payload and huge RCS. F-15's RCS is like 25 m^2. Su-27's claimed RCS is 10, but I think it probably is higher than that, since it's like F-15. Whereas F-16's RCS is generally listed as 1 or 1.5 and J-10's shape is generally compared to F-16, so it should be 1 (it has RAM coating and such). By my calculation, the RCS of su-27 is probably 10 times that of J-10. That reduces the effective detection range of its radar significantly. 10^0.25 = 1.8 times. The nose diameter of J-10 vs flankers is about 700 mm vs 960 mm. 960/700 = 1.37. 1.37^2 times the number antenna. I'm not 100% sure on this, but the increase in range would be either (1.37^2)^0.5 =1.37 or (1.37^2)^0.25 = 1.17

Overall, J-10 is just a better airframe. Although, I'm still wishing for a even bigger nose in the next design. They already increased the nose for JF-17, doing the same for J-10 shouldn't be too hard.

As for the intake, it's a variable intake. It seems to work pretty well at fast speed, since J-10 flies circles around su-27. Besides, the next variant of J-10 is getting DSI.

Yes, it is a one trick pony for now. If it was intended for attacks, then it would get the JH-7A avionics package.

[Longaxe]

The F16 has better RAM and gold in its canopy, its intake and body shape is stealthier too. A lot of the j-10 looks like it is medal as well. Maybe later versions of the j10 will be better but its RCS is likely between 2 and 7.

[tphuang]

The F16 has better RAM and gold in its canopy, its intake and body shape is stealthier too. A lot of the j-10 looks like it is medal as well. Maybe later versions of the j10 will be better but its RCS is likely between 2 and 7.
The earlier F-16's definitely do not have better RAM coating than J-10 and its RCS was still 1 to 1.5. As for J-10, most of its exterior is composite. You know I'm using a good comparison here between J-10 and F-16, but you are too afraid of admitting it, so you just keep on insulting J-10's intake and such. J-10's airframe is based on Lavi, which is supposed to advance from F-16's earlier blocks. Do you really think they'd make it less stealthy? Or maybe you are an stealth expert and know more about planes than the developers of Lavi and J-10? As for 2-7 for RCS, Mig-29's RCS is 5 and it is a twin-engined plane with no stealth feature at all. How can J-10's RCS be higher than 5? Do you need me to give you a diagram of the size of J-10 compared to some of the other fighters in plaaf?

[Longaxe]

First of all a RCS around 1 is for new block F16’s, I remember in the 1980’s people saying the RCS was a lot higher. Some major changes to the front on RCS of the F16 have been made, like putting a gold coating in the canopy. That Change alone reduces RCS a lot. Not all radar absorbent materials are the same. The j-10 does not have a RCS of 1.