J-10 Thread IV

[Schwerter_]

Golden helmet to my knowledge focuses on WVR capabilities which IMO is a good to have but BVR capabilities is much more important as seen in recent conflicts. If you read Yankee's post on PLAAF tactics you'll see that early J-16s smoked J-10Cs in BVR combat excerises.

Recent years it’s more of a holistic aerial engagement, covering everything from BVR to WVR. There have been examples of J10C surviving the BVR stage, dragging J16 into WVR and winning but that doesn’t mean it’s all WVR.

yankee and shilao covered about this more than once, J-16 win more gold helmets than J-10C

basically, J-16 has better situation awareness with one additional pilot,
and the heavy fighter has more options to engage the opponent

I’ll need to relisten their podcasts, if in recent golden helmets J16 won more the I’m mistaken and I apologize. But like I said the J16 and J10C are basically toe to toe in terms of A2A so either winning a bit more doesn’t detract from the point.

 

[Schwerter_]

Golden helmet to my knowledge focuses on WVR capabilities which IMO is a good to have but BVR capabilities is much more important as seen in recent conflicts. If you read Yankee's post on PLAAF tactics you'll see that early J-16s smoked J-10Cs in BVR combat excerises.

Yes I read it beforehand, assuming we’re talking about the same article Yankee was referring to trainings when both jets have just entered service so Circa 2018, which like I mentioned was a year when J16 got the golden helmet. After that in the subsequent years we have had several news articles from PLAAF about new tactics and stuff being developed by the J10C units to better deal with J16.
With that in mind, I wouldn’t say that the J16 is just flat out a better A2A platform in every single way than the J10C, instead it seems more likely that when J16 first was introduced it was a huge headache for everyone facing off against it because nobody had an idea on how to deal with it effectively. Once dedicated tactics were developed the odds were much more even.

 

[stannislas]

2000s*
J-16 is a more or less normal su-30ski airframe with classic Chinese additions to win weight (i.e. composit tails, unstressed skin and lighter electronics where appropriate), plus of course digital FbW. There's reason non-professionals can't even tell them apart.

Aerodynamics and so on haven't significantly changed - i.e. it's still the airframe built to the limits from the 1970s. All flankers are, even the more outstanding ones(triplanes and su-35).

Flanker airframe, by the way, is basically the symbol of it - it's... an piece of art in a way, very complicated aerodynamic and structural design, that just a few years later became completely redundant.
Digital fcs allowed normal (simpler and much more rigid configurations) bricks with wings to do the exact same.

Countries keep older 4th gen airframes not because they're magical, but because there's no point changing it. It's good enough, and there's ample power and volume to upgrade that really matters: electronics.

let me put this way,
early J-11A can only reach 8G,
later version of J-11B can reach 9G but with some limitations.
J-16 doesn't have any of these limitations

it's not just weight reduction, SAC spent quite long time to fix the structurally fragile airframe of flankers....

on the other side, despite J-10 is later appeared, aerodynamic design is still at the level of the 80s, with no significant difference compared to the Flanker series.

don't forget that at the end of 20th century, China's tech level was far behind where it is now. The introduction of the Su-27 in 1992 was a major technological shock for both SAC and CAC.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Golden helmet to my knowledge focuses on WVR capabilities which IMO is a good to have but BVR capabilities is much more important as seen in recent conflicts. If you read Yankee's post on PLAAF tactics you'll see that early J-16s smoked J-10Cs in BVR combat excerises.

People have to understand the difference between Golden Helmet and Red Sword.

Golden Helmet is about pilot competency. It is a competition to see who is the best pilot when operating aircraft with similar capabilities. It is to gauge how well someone masters the handling of aircraft.

Red Sword is like Red Flag exercise and a test of system on system. It is a measure of who triumphs when hundreds of aircraft are going against each other and ground based air defense.

One other thing to note is that the winner is not the one with most aerial kills. The winner for both exercises is the one that can achieve the mission objective, regardless of losses.

 

[Blitzo]

I mostly meaning distinction between things you can add and things you can't.
Upgrading electronics within original boundaries is totally fine, and they'll do their job(you get radar return on your radar calculated though ew? fire, splinters of modern missile pierce all generations all the same).

Traditional case here is F-15c - retrograde, stable, mechanical flier from 1960s without any fusions ... which still can outbrute most competitors through sheer thrust, power, wing area and so on. Of course, huge AESA, link-16, aim-120d/aim-9x and hmd help.
J-16 is more advanced, of course, but it's still a 1970s airframe at the core. Drawn on paper, for (very ambitious back then!) partial analog fbw on Soviet macroelectronics.

J-10 is a millennial. Yes, millenial born in still poor 1990s China, yes, millennial who went to school not seeing opposite side of the street in horrible smog. But still, she's a modern girl in her 20s. Yes, she is at most 168, not a 6 feet milf.
But,fully digital from the very inception. You can't make flanker into that.

If F-15EX or F-16V can be considered "4.5th generation" then J-16 can also be considered "4.5th generation".

 

[Schwerter_]

People have to understand the difference between Golden Helmet and Red Sword.

Golden Helmet is about pilot competency. It is a competition to see who is the best pilot when operating aircraft with similar capabilities. It is to gauge how well someone masters the handling of aircraft.

Red Sword is like Red Flag exercise and a test of system on system. It is a measure of who triumphs when hundreds of aircraft are going against each other and ground based air defense.

One other thing to note is that the winner is not the one with most aerial kills. The winner for both exercises is the one that can achieve the mission objective, regardless of losses.

True, just to add to this a little bit, if I’m not very much mistake the Golden Helmet also switched to a objective-based scenario a few years ago to better simulate real combat, instead of just boxing off an airspace and let the boys have at it.

That said, if we’re just purely talking about capabilities of the J16 vs that of the J10C then the Golden Helmet is probably a better judge of that: since both entered service they have been facing off in the Golden Helmet and both have had wins and losses, which would indicate that they have mostly comparable A2A capabilities “in a vacuum”, so to speak. If you add in things like OCA vs DCA, long-range missions, interception and other stuff found in large-scale exercises a la red sword then the balance would tilt one way or the other depending on the specific mission.

 

[Gloire_bb]

If F-15EX or F-16V can be considered "4.5th generation" then J-16 can also be considered "4.5th generation".

IMHO they can't and shouldn't. Especially F-16V, which is later, more advanced, but also less ambitious upgrade compared to the previous F-16 blk.60. Should it be downgraded？
Difference between pluses and .5 is purely mine (since there are two parallel systems, why not use them) - otherwise, they're used interchangeably.

on the other side, despite J-10 is later appeared, aerodynamic design is still at the level of the 80s, with no significant difference compared to the Flanker series.

J-10 is unstable canard delta(not relaxed): withoud digital fbw it can't exist.

 

[stannislas]

J-10 is unstable canard delta(not relaxed). Withoud digital fbw it can't exist.

the very early su-27 is FBW ...

 

[siegecrossbow]

the very early su-27 is FBW ...

It is analog instead of digital FBW though. Even J-11B continued the trend.

 

[stannislas]

It is analog instead of digital FBW though. Even J-11B continued the trend.

yes, i just don't get what exactly the point he want to make....
flanker is aerodynamic unstable as well...