Chinese purchase of Su-35

Biscuits said:

True, the different radar would also be a point of struggle for the pilots. Many of the pilots might not even be old enough to have flown with PLAAF’s PESA aircraft.

Look forward to seeing more publicized exercise results. The acquisition provides a veritable goldmine of information. It would be cool to see it would do against J20 for example.

Click to expand...

Yep, I'd love to see the Su-35 go up against the J-20's,, WVR just for kicks, then we would see how agile the J-20 really is, it would have to be very good to hold its own against a well flown Su-35...

I'd love to see the Su-35 flown against the Su-57, Raptor, Typhoon, and all the F-35 variants, I guarantee you it will be very tough to beat WVR, I'd bet my last Ben Franklin that it will beat anything in most everyone's Air Force WVR.....

Now switch back to BVR, and all those same birds will do rather well in my opinion, even the Chinese Flankers and J-10s??

kwaigonegin said:

I believe the SU-35S are also plumbed for externals as well but I have to admit it is extremely rare to see a Flanker with tanks certainly not the older variant SU27s etc.

Click to expand...

I'm going to second Kwai's assertion with the admonition that if you were able to see the internal fuel load of "ANY" Flanker variant, they will almost never bill filled to capacity, not never, but almost never, and would give you a full paycheck stating that NO Su-33 or J-15 has "EVER" launched off the boat with full internal fuel, flying off that ramp at full gross weight is "VERBOTTEN"!

Air Force Brat said:

Yep, I'd love to see the Su-35 go up against the J-20's,, WVR just for kicks, then we would see how agile the J-20 really is, it would have to be very good to hold its own against a well flown Su-35...

I'd love to see the Su-35 flown against the Su-57, Raptor, Typhoon, and all the F-35 variants, I guarantee you it will be very tough to beat WVR, I'd bet my last Ben Franklin that it will beat anything in most everyone's Air Force WVR.....

Now switch back to BVR, and all those same birds will do rather well in my opinion, even the Chinese Flankers and J-10s??

Click to expand...

Agreed, everything I read about the 35 tells me it has world class kinematics and superior low speed handling characteristics not to mention world class acceleration.
In the hands of a well trained driver I wouldn't bet against it vs ANY current front line fighters in WVR
I would even say if armed with the latest R73 variants (R74?) on a pure CQC scenario, it would be difficult to find anything that can decisively beat it at present even F22. They would be evenly matched for the most part. It would eat F35 in WVR..

Viktor Jav said:

For the sake of better jam resistance, target tracking and resolution.

Click to expand...

Jamming something as powerful as Irbis is an issue with or without active array.
But:
1)AESA is more expensive.
2)Zhuk-AE is a weak installation for su-35-sized fighter. Enlsrgrment of the array is close to developing a new system, because cooling and processing, which is still more expensive.
3)PESA, especially Irbis-style pesa, is quite close in capability for a non-stealth fighter.. It has downsides(recoverable by, for example, irst), but it has strenghts, too(reliability, serviceability, raw power).
4)raw array power and range is important for russian fighter doctrine. And otherwise, some AESA advantages aren't as important in a specific situation of RuAF. For all intents or purposes, it has 2 AESA-equipped fighters on due, and there is no urgency with either of them.
On the contrary, both seem to suffer due to their pricetag.

Viktor Jav said:

To honest, I am still not completely sold on the radar issue, the Ibris-E has the stated range of 400km, whereas the closest AESA that is comparable to the one found on the J-10C would be the APG-81, which has a stated range of 150km. Without a doubt the AESA has the advantage in tracking and resolution and jam resistant. But when both planes are non-stealth and supported by equal levels of EW teams, the extra range of the IBRIS can surely help track the J-10C (which can be described as a non-stealth F-35). I can't comment on the J-16 because I can't find any comparable AESA radar of the same year and make.

Click to expand...

The 400 km for the Irbis-E is at full power and slower scanning rate. Irbis-E at full-power is a nice juicy target. It does not have LPI modes (At least the export version to China doesn't. The Chinese Su-35 lacks other stuff as well). It is not just about the radar. It is the whole package. The Chinese Su-35, avionics wise, is a downgraded package. Same applies if this Su-35 went against smaller planes like the Rafale and Eurofighter. In BVR, I will take the Indian Rafale over the Chinese Su-35 any day.

Even if we disregard all rumors about the J-16 and J-10C, simply put, the Su-35 is not in the top tier of the PLAAF when it come to BVR. It has some major advantages but not when it comes to BVR.

Hyperwarp said:

The 400 km for the Irbis-E is at full power and slower scanning rate. Irbis-E at full-power is a nice juicy target. It does not have LPI modes (At least the export version to China doesn't. The Chinese Su-35 lacks other stuff as well). It is not just about the radar. It is the whole package. The Chinese Su-35, avionics wise, is a downgraded package. Same applies if this Su-35 went against smaller planes like the Rafale and Eurofighter. In BVR, I will take the Indian Rafale over the Chinese Su-35 any day.

Even if we disregard all rumors about the J-16 and J-10C, simply put, the Su-35 is not in the top tier of the PLAAF when it come to BVR. It has some major advantages but not when it comes to BVR.

Click to expand...

Eh the Su35 is kinematically well performing. That is really the main reason why it is generally considered good in BVR, and it is arguably plenty of reason on it’s own.

The J-16 has top tier avionics but suffers from being a two seater, so it’s a bit slower. I’d say it takes the fight 8/10 times with neutral conditions, but if it ever came down to a knife fight, guns only, I’d rather be in the Su35.

We know less about the J20 but according to a pilot interview, it makes the previous gen aircrafts look plain bad maneuverability wise, especially in supersonic combat. The Su35 probably approaches it as a so called 4.5 gen. A conservative estimate would be roughly on par in subsonic and worse, but still somewhat competitive in supersonic?

But the Su35 doesn’t have to be a top tier BVR since it’s primary purpose would be to simulate rival flankers, in particular India’s.

Hyperwarp said:

The 400 km for the Irbis-E is at full power and slower scanning rate. Irbis-E at full-power is a nice juicy target. It does not have LPI modes (At least the export version to China doesn't. The Chinese Su-35 lacks other stuff as well). It is not just about the radar. It is the whole package. The Chinese Su-35, avionics wise, is a downgraded package.

Click to expand...

1, Being juicy target (as a fighter) at 400 kms, while relying on your own radar coverage field, is fairly safe. Heck, even at half this range it's still safe and secure. We are talking about mach 2.35-class fighter here.
2, LPI is THAT beneficial only to stealth platforms. For others it's as useful as full power mode for PESA. Question of preference and tactical situations.
3, i am not sure if avionics were downgraded, it's debatable at best.
What's more interesting is what recent interview essentially claimed what all new generation russian a2a missiles aren't present.(otherwise there would be no interoperability with older flankers).

kwaigonegin said:

It would eat F35 in WVR..

Click to expand...

Your language seems to suggest long odds against the F-35. I would take that bet any day. I remember reading an article where some US pilots were asked their preference between the F-35 and F-22 in WVR and they surprisingly selected the F-35 because of its helmet cueing and the F-22 did not have one. I am questioning how much of a meaningful advantage kinematics bring in a world when you are pitted against helmet cueing, high boresight shots and LOAL. The comparison is between getting a lock onto an airframe with VLO features, IR suppression and the AN/ASQ 239 defensive suite against the big bird like a SU-35. I reserve judgement as to whom is actually being served on a plate but I favor a bet when the odds are in my favor.

Additionally WVR is not post merge and my bet is that the F-35 will still get first look and first kill.

Hyperwarp said:

The 400 km for the Irbis-E is at full power and slower scanning rate.

Click to expand...

The 400km detection is over rated because the facts behind are seldom mentioned. As you stated it was a cued search but that would translate typically to only 200 km in normal search. It was based on a 3 m2 RCS target. I believe a F/A-18 has a RCS of 1 m2 and so is a J-10 if I am not mistaken and so the detection range would further reduce. The worst part is that the S/N mode was set at 50 % probability unlike Western radar quotes which typically use 80 to 90 % probability. A 50 % probability detection would mathematically not set up a track because a track requires 3 successive detections at a minimum. In other words a single detection is rather meaningless.

Gloire_bb said:

1, Being juicy target (as a fighter) at 400 kms, while relying on your own radar coverage field, is fairly safe. Heck, even at half this range it's still safe and secure. We are talking about mach 2.35-class fighter here.
2, LPI is THAT beneficial only to stealth platforms. For others it's as useful as full power mode for PESA. Question of preference and tactical situations.
3, i am not sure if avionics were downgraded, it's debatable at best.
What's more interesting is what recent interview essentially claimed what all new generation russian a2a missiles aren't present.(otherwise there would be no interoperability with older flankers).

Click to expand...

Off-course it is! This isn't the 90's or early 2000's. Russia would never sell their best version even to India let alone China. There is always a downgrade or complete omission of sensitive equipment or operations. This isn't something unique to Russia either. When exporting, many countries do this. The best version of the Su-35 is with the RuAF. The PLAAF version is a dumbed-down version. There was joke going around that even the L-band arrays were replaced with wood . Not just avionics, but weapons. Even the J-10C can be armed with a PL-15. Who gets the 1st shot even if the Su-35 initially gets the 1st look. J-10B on the other hand does not carry the PL-15.

Again, understand that as a package (not just avionics), the RuAF Su-35 and the PLAAF Su-35 are not in the same league.

Regarding the Mach 2.35 max speed, that is as useful as the 400 km value for the radar (For the Su-35 it is slightly less at Mach 2.25 due to heavy intake modifications). A big potential advantage the Su-35 have over all other PLAAF fighters (maybe barring the J-20) is supercruise. I used 'potential' because we don't know the payload when supercruising. If it is in a clean config then that's not going to help. But if it is with the wingtip ECM pods and a few R-77, then that is a big plus.