China Flanker Thread II

[Blitzo]

We've seen the J-10C carrying the KD-88 ASM as well.

The absence of images of J-16 carrying full air-to-ground load has led me to believe that it is not intended to be a dedicated strike fighter like the F-15E. It will probably fulfill a similar role as the Su-30s in the former VVS -- long range interception and air superiority.

I don't think that's very sensible, because as many others have written, we've seen J-16 prototypes flying with various other A2G munitions, presumably being integrated with those weapons.

I would suggest that pictures of J-16s carrying various loadouts -- and in fact, for all PLA fighter aircraft -- is carefully released, and that just because we do not see a certain loadout being photographed does not mean various loadouts or various munitions are not in service.

For example, we have yet to see any PLA flanker carrying a "full" air to air loadout in the air, but that doesn't mean they cannot. Chances are it just means that carrying such loadouts are a rare occurrence, plus that when such loadouts are carried they probably don't take photos of it for release.

 

[Deleted member 13312]

And what is the issue if China doesn't have a heavyweight strike fighter doing air to ground?

China's core interests lie in the Western Pacific, within 1500km of the Chinese mainland. That corresponds roughly with:
1. The range of tomahawk class cruise missiles like the CJ-10 which could be launched from TELs located on the Chinese mainland.
2. The range of the J-16 fighter.

Buying CJ-10 cruise missiles at approx $0.7M each is more cost effective than operating a J-16 for ground attack, given that the airspace is likely to be contested.

And given the air defences that would be encountered, it's better for Chinese fighter jets to focus on gaining air superiority than worrying about air-to-ground strikes.

Several reasons why:
1) Cruise missiles still cost a significant sum, while let's be generous and allow for the consideration that the CJ-10 is significantly cheaper than its Tomahawk counterpart. Considering that the Tomahawk itself cost 1.87million USD per unit already, 0.7 million is pushing the boundaries a bit to far. A J-16 fly per hour cost can be calculated in the 10s of thousands.
2) Cruise missiles are slow and are at risk of being shot down, and unlike manned fighters. Missiles are unable to do CAP and once fired are impossible to be recalled. There are still some situations that require a J-16 esque fighter with air to ground munitions to able to support ground troops on a moment's notice. And a YJ-12 fired from a J-16 will have a much higher top speed while still maintaining enough range to allow the J-16 the opportunity to escape retaliation SAMs.

 

[Hyperwarp]

We've seen the J-10C carrying the KD-88 ASM as well.

The absence of images of J-16 carrying full air-to-ground load has led me to believe that it is not intended to be a dedicated strike fighter like the F-15E. It will probably fulfill a similar role as the Su-30s in the former VVS -- long range interception and air superiority.

Or maybe it is not ready or still not cleared for many types A-to-G munitions. It could also be due to the delays of the J-11D. J-16 has to perform some of the A-to-A function that would have otherwise be done by the J-11D. Lack of the J-11D is leaving a gap in the PLAAF and the Su-35 does not have the avionics of the J-16/J-10C/J-11D.

It seems the J-16 is now YJ-91 ready -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Tests are underway for

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Time will tell.

 

[Blitzo]

Or maybe it is not ready or still not cleared for many types A-to-G munitions. It could also be due to the delays of the J-11D. J-16 has to perform some of the A-to-A function that would have otherwise be done by the J-11D. Lack of the J-11D is leaving a gap in the PLAAF and the Su-35 does not have the avionics of the J-16/J-10C/J-11D.

It seems the J-16 is now YJ-91 ready -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Tests are underway for

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Time will tell.

Those images of J-16 carrying KD-88 and past weapons on prototype aircraft are years old.

Personally, I believe that for PLA watching we should always assume that the photos and videos we see and what they show us is only a small percentage of what actually happens. That includes weapons integration. For all we know J-16 might be cleared to carry all of those weapons we've seen and more, but we simply have not seen it -- maybe the PLA have not shown it to us.
If I were the PLA I would probably take care to avoid that as well, in the same way that the PLA actively tries to hide the number of aircraft they have in service, and which units have which aircraft etc. For example, how many J-20s in service do we actually know there are? We can count that there are 11 unique serials between two units yes, but does anyone actually believe that those 11 aircraft are the only J-20s in service at present, or is that just the 11 aircraft the PLA feel comfortable showing us?


Also, I am also not convinced that J-11D has much to do with J-16 at this stage either in terms of development or in terms of operational usage. J-11D by all accounts will not be proceeding to become a mass produced aircraft it seems.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Those images of J-16 carrying KD-88 and past weapons on prototype aircraft are years old.

Personally, I believe that for PLA watching we should always assume that the photos and videos we see and what they show us is only a small percentage of what actually happens. That includes weapons integration. For all we know J-16 might be cleared to carry all of those weapons we've seen and more, but we simply have not seen it -- maybe the PLA have not shown it to us.
If I were the PLA I would probably take care to avoid that as well, in the same way that the PLA actively tries to hide the number of aircraft they have in service, and which units have which aircraft etc. For example, how many J-20s in service do we actually know there are? We can count that there are 11 unique serials between two units yes, but does anyone actually believe that those 11 aircraft are the only J-20s in service at present, or is that just the 11 aircraft the PLA feel comfortable showing us?


Also, I am also not convinced that J-11D has much to do with J-16 at this stage either in terms of development or in terms of operational usage. J-11D by all accounts will not be proceeding to become a mass produced aircraft it seems.

Very interesting questions, and while I concur on the J-11D, on the matter of J-20 numbers, many knowledgeable posters believe actual J-20 in service are 20 or less...

there's really not much anecdotal evidence to support more than 20 or so, and yes I do believe that number could be as low as 11?? I would have guessed that J-20 numbers would have been much higher by now?? the truth is that those who know the actual number, no doubt wish to conceal the number, so all we have to go on are actual numbers, and presupposition of how many more there could be??

 

[antiterror13]

Very interesting questions, and while I concur on the J-11D, on the matter of J-20 numbers, many knowledgeable posters believe actual J-20 in service are 20 or less...

there's really not much anecdotal evidence to support more than 20 or so, and yes I do believe that number could be as low as 11?? I would have guessed that J-20 numbers would have been much higher by now?? the truth is that those who know the actual number, no doubt wish to conceal the number, so all we have to go on are actual numbers, and presupposition of how many more there could be??

kind enough to provide the links that you considered from knowledgeable posters ?

 

[latenlazy]

Very interesting questions, and while I concur on the J-11D, on the matter of J-20 numbers, many knowledgeable posters believe actual J-20 in service are 20 or less...

there's really not much anecdotal evidence to support more than 20 or so, and yes I do believe that number could be as low as 11?? I would have guessed that J-20 numbers would have been much higher by now?? the truth is that those who know the actual number, no doubt wish to conceal the number, so all we have to go on are actual numbers, and presupposition of how many more there could be??

If we’re going to talk J-20 count, that 4 J-20s whose serial numbers we have never seen before were the ones performing at the air show should tell us a lot about whether we should believe the only J-20s out there are the ones we have serial numbers for. At this point saying that there are only 11 J-20s because those are the number of unique serial numbers we have in pictures is like saying there are only 10 Tesla model 3s in the world because that’s the number I’ve seen in my neighborhood. This argument of course also applies to the J-16 and the J-10C. The rules of PLA watching got changed on us when the officials started tightening the screws on leaks, so how we assess and draw conclusions with the information we still get should probably change too.

 

[Blitzo]

Very interesting questions, and while I concur on the J-11D, on the matter of J-20 numbers, many knowledgeable posters believe actual J-20 in service are 20 or less...

there's really not much anecdotal evidence to support more than 20 or so, and yes I do believe that number could be as low as 11?? I would have guessed that J-20 numbers would have been much higher by now?? the truth is that those who know the actual number, no doubt wish to conceal the number, so all we have to go on are actual numbers, and presupposition of how many more there could be??

I see no convincing logic to suggest that we should believe that there are only 11 J-20s in service -- i.e.: I do not believe that we have been able to identify every single J-20 in service at present based merely on serials alone.

That, plus the fact that the PLA undoubtedly is keeping J-20 numbers a secret, means I believe that the 11 J-20 serials that we've positively identified is a firm floor for how many J-20s are currently in service, and the true number of aircraft is almost certainly higher.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Photos of the recent J-16 performance at a Chinese airshow:

(1/2)







Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[SinoSoldier]

Continued from above:





Source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!