China Flanker Thread II

[Deino]

I just had a bit of free-time ... even if surely not the best job, I 'cleaned' the J-11D-image a bit !

 

[Jeff Head]

I just had a bit of free-time ... even if surely not the best job, I 'cleaned' the J-11D-image a bit !

Nicely done.

I took your photo, enlarged it, and enhanced the contrast and other parameters.

​

The more I look at it, the more I believe that the potential faceting near the nose is in fact an optical allusion caused by the lighting/glint along the top edge of the fuselage and the off-color section/panel adjacent to the nose.

Those lines may make it appear faceted, but I still believe that it is not.

When you look closely at the curvature of the nose, particularly along those lines, you do not see the supposed faceting extending into it.

 

[FORBIN]

Why do a J-11D then J-16 is on the way ?
J-16 for PLAN maybe ?

 

[Jeff Head]

Why do a J-11D then J-16 is on the way ?
J-16 for PLAN maybe ?

I asked this same type of question above a few posts (maybe a couple of pages ago, LOL).

Apparently, the J-11D will be an upgraded air superiority fighter, incorporating a lot of the new J-16 features.

J-16 will be more directed towards strike missions.

Sp the J-11D and the J-16 become kind of the equivalent to the F-15C and F-15E in the USAF.

Now, the PLAN already has those SU-30MKKs...but not too many. Perhaps a PLAN J-16 will be in the works...or...hehehe...why not a J-15S that is the equivalent?

That would make the J-15 and J-15S kind of equivalent to the F/A-18E and F/A-18Fs in the USN.

 

[b787]

Nicely done.

I took you photo, enlarged it, and enhanced the contrast and other parameters.

View attachment 13433
​

The more I look at it, the more I believe that the potential faceting near the nose is in fact an optical allusion caused by the lighting/glint along the top edge of the fuselage and the off-color section/panel adjacent to the nose.

Those lines may make it appear faceted, but I still believe that it is not.

When you look closely at the curvature of the nose, particularly along those line, you do not see the supposed faceting extending into it.

i totally agree with you, there is no faceting, first because the radome cone has a round frontal cross section, the lighter colored panels look flat but if that would be the case, there is going a shape contradiction since already flankers have a huge noses, that does not make sense at all, the radome has been painted like J-10s but the dark paint is in fact creating an optical illusion with the lighter panels

It might have a Su-35 larger nose though

 

[Quickie]

It looks to me, even if there are no faceting on the bottom side of the radome, the overall shape of the front section looks to be more oval now, cross- sectionally. And then there seem to be 2 chime on both sides of the front section that I don't recall seeing on earlier flanker types. We'll have to wait for more pictures to come in to see if this is just the angle and lighting effect.

 

[Blitzo]

I asked this same type of question above a few posts (maybe a couple of pages ago, LOL).

Apparently, the J-11D will be an upgraded air superiority fighter, incorporating a lot of the new J-16 features.

J-16 will be more directed towards strike missions.

Sp the J-11D and the J-16 become kind of the equivalent to the F-15C and F-15E in the USAF.

Now, the PLAN already has those SU-30MKKs...but not too many. Perhaps a PLAN J-16 will be in the works...or...hehehe...why not a J-15S that is the equivalent?

That would make the J-15 and J-15S kind of equivalent to the F/A-18E and F/A-18Fs in the USN.

The role of J-11D vs J-16 was being discussed over on CDF too, this is what I wrote:

They have masses of J-7s, J-8s, Q-5s, and even early JH-7s and J-11s to replace in coming years. Something like 500 J-7s, 200 J-8s, 120 Q-5s, a currently small number of JH-7s that will grow as the fleet becomes older, and about 100 legacy J-11s.
That is something like 300 long range fighters, 500 medium weight shorter range fighters, and 120-150 strike aircraft.

-J-20 is obviously a necessary plane for the future, but even then its numbers will be limited. 200-300 at most for a full production run, if even that.

-J-10B/C still obviously has a role in PLA as a lighter, shorter range fighter, so we can't cut J-10s out of production anytime soon given the number of short range J-7s that still need to be replaced. I'm not saying J-10s will replace all J-7s given how many J-7s there are -- I expect an FC-31 derived fighter to eventually supercede J-10 production in the medium weight fighter role.

-Then there is the question of what will replace long range air to air (J-8s and early J-11s) as well as strike (held by Q-5s and early JH-7s). J-20s can make a dent into the long range air to air component of the fleet which need to be replaced, but it'll probably be post 2030 for its full 200-300 production run to end, and by then other flankers like J-11Bs may start to be replaced by J-20 too not counting the earlier J-8s and J-11s.
So there will be a deficit in long range air to air that will be felt earlier rather than later, and that is what J-11D is meant to alleviate imo. I can foresee a production run of 200 J-11Ds, with accompanying upgrades for older J-11Bs which will all occur during the first four or five years of J-20 production, all to be set for both PLAAF and land based PLANAF. J-16 on the other hand will look to replace the JH-7s and Q-5s, with a final production run of maybe 150 aircraft. Of course, it might be possible for them to buy only J-16s or only J-11Ds to replace the J-8s, J-11s, JH-7s and Q-5s with a single aircraft, But that would mean over 300 of only one type of either J-16 or J-11D, and if the two aircraft are inevitably more suited to strike and air to air, then PLA might end up with overcapacity in one role and undercapacity in another -- it is where multirole may not be cost effective, especially say if J-16s are more expensive with its additional cockpit, more strengthened structure, more A2G oriented avionics, compared to J-11D, with that same cost distributed for all 300+ spaces to be filled. But separating the roles, while using a common but less structurally reinforced airframe for J-11D, with J-16 derived avionics and radar oriented for A2A and removing some of the fancier A2G functions, and removing the second cockpit, may allow better specialization of roles while reducing the extra cost of having to pay for the added bits and pieces on all 300+ spaces, but also retaining as many common components to both aircraft as possible making the lifetime cost of both aircraft lesser than if they were fielding two completely different unrelated airframes with unrelated avionics.

J-11B/BS and J-11D will be PLAAF's version of F-15C/D in role, although in terms of capability J-11B/BS may be more similar to unupgraded F-15C/Ds lacking AESA, while upgraded J-11B/BS will be similar to F-15C/Ds with their AESA upgrade. J-11D (making the reasonable assumption that there will be no J-11DS) will be equivalent to a F-15C upgraded with AESA, and a newer avionics set, and with some degree of A2G capability.
J-16 of course can be fairly compared to F-15E, with associated avionics and radar upgrades

 

[Ultra]

I thought J-16 is going to model after the Russian Su-34:

....since they are already using the Flanker airframe. But the pictures seems to indicate they like the front-and-back sitting arrangement better (instead of the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[SinoSoldier]

My take on the Flankers' roles within the PLAAF:

- J-11D will serve as an air superiority fighter (single seat, composites, and rumored upgraded engines are implicit of this); it should be China's equivalent of the Su-35 in terms of role and capability somewhat.
- J-11B/S will also serve as air superiority fighters (training for J-11BS), but with much less capability than the J-11D variant; their roles would be akin to that of the F-15C/D. When they get retrofitted with AESA radar they will be comparable to the F-15C Golden Eagle in terms of role.
- J-16 will serve as strike fighters within their air force, much like the F-15E does in the USAF; the jet should approach the F-15SG in terms of capability.
- PLAN air superiority fighters will consist of the J-15 while their strikers will be the J-15S / JH-7B.

I don't see an overlap anywhere.

 

[Blitzo]

I thought J-16 is going to model after the Russian Su-34:

....since they are already using the Flanker airframe. But the pictures seems to indicate they like the front-and-back sitting arrangement better (instead of the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-16 was always meant to be a tandem seating cockpit, and we've had pictures of J-16 for years so im not sure what source made you believe it would be like Su-34