J-10 vs J-11B
- Thread starter Londo Molari
- Start date
maglomanic
Junior Member
Just wondering where that 30% figure came from? Also if i am not wrong it was mentioned that J-11B has undergone some RCS treatment on intakes and may have an RCS of around 3 m^2. What are the numbers on J-10 RCS?
In any match up however i would expect both J-11B and J-10 to detect eachother beyond the range of their long range missiles.
From what we know the diameter of the J-10's radome is around 700mm. We know that by the size of the Zhemchug/Zhuk-ME radar Russians proposed to the J-10. We know that the Su-27's array is about 1m. That's public knowledge based on the N001E Myech radar. That's like 30% difference in array size.
However, its hard to conclude that will amount to 30% increase in detection range, because radar detection formulas don't work linearly. Not only RCS factors count (both J-10 and J-11B has RCS reduction measures) but the power of the emitter (TWT or traveling wave tube). There might also be differences in the electronics themselves and the radar design despite being siblings from the same company where I can expect much sharing of the internal components and software.
It is safe to say the J-11B may have a better detection range, but I won't give it a specific figure as to how much.
Once you're into a fight, and removing all ECM/EW factors, the J-10 has this for its advantage:
-Smaller size, harder to eyeball
-Nimbler
-has a faster roll rate (past 300 degs/sec vs. 220 degs/sec for the Su-27)
-faster instant turn rate (over 30 degs/sec vs. 28 degs/sec over the Su-27).
On the other hand the J-11B has
-IRST
-Greater TWR if the plane is 60% internal fuel and lower
-can sustain a fight longer due to having more fuel
As for hi-lo mix, I expect and in my opinion, that the J-11B might only be 1/3rd costing more than a J-10. There is a good sense of rationalization and commonality between the two aircraft that will lower the cost for both.
---Sharing similar avionics, ECM, radar sets, all reduce the cost of such
---Sharing the engines (AL-31, WS-10A). This rationalizes logistics, maintenance, lower initial purchasing costs with volume buys.
---Sharing similar weapons (PL-12, PL-8B)
However, its hard to conclude that will amount to 30% increase in detection range, because radar detection formulas don't work linearly. Not only RCS factors count (both J-10 and J-11B has RCS reduction measures) but the power of the emitter (TWT or traveling wave tube). There might also be differences in the electronics themselves and the radar design despite being siblings from the same company where I can expect much sharing of the internal components and software.
It is safe to say the J-11B may have a better detection range, but I won't give it a specific figure as to how much.
Once you're into a fight, and removing all ECM/EW factors, the J-10 has this for its advantage:
-Smaller size, harder to eyeball
-Nimbler
-has a faster roll rate (past 300 degs/sec vs. 220 degs/sec for the Su-27)
-faster instant turn rate (over 30 degs/sec vs. 28 degs/sec over the Su-27).
On the other hand the J-11B has
-IRST
-Greater TWR if the plane is 60% internal fuel and lower
-can sustain a fight longer due to having more fuel
As for hi-lo mix, I expect and in my opinion, that the J-11B might only be 1/3rd costing more than a J-10. There is a good sense of rationalization and commonality between the two aircraft that will lower the cost for both.
---Sharing similar avionics, ECM, radar sets, all reduce the cost of such
---Sharing the engines (AL-31, WS-10A). This rationalizes logistics, maintenance, lower initial purchasing costs with volume buys.
---Sharing similar weapons (PL-12, PL-8B)
Oh, the 30% was just a guess. I don't know what 30-40% larger in radar diameter will result for detection range. This was just what I guessed based on Zhuk-ME vs Zhuk-MSE:
I think it was 624 mm vs 960 mm
And the range was 120 km vs 180 km. So, the ratio seemed to be the same.
But I'd love to read some technical stuff on this.
I think it was 624 mm vs 960 mm
And the range was 120 km vs 180 km. So, the ratio seemed to be the same.
But I'd love to read some technical stuff on this.
Looking at the [sry, german text] (equations 10 and 12) I think the detection range increases linearily with antenna diameter.
Radius is quadratic in antenna area A, wich is linear in antenna gain G, wich is quadratic in the range R (12) that means radius is in the fourth dimension in R. But it's also in the fourth root. So that should be linear.?
Does that make sense, or is it even understandable ... ??
One point I like to mention is the important thing is not necessarily how J-11B and J-10 compare against each other, but again their common enemies. Most probably F-16s. But also -15, -18, ...
J-11B can detect them from farther away while J-10 can stay undetected for longer.
One thing that's also mentioned rather often is that Flankers could bring more kinetic energy. But I'm not sure if that's that important an advantage over the J-10.
Radius is quadratic in antenna area A, wich is linear in antenna gain G, wich is quadratic in the range R (12) that means radius is in the fourth dimension in R. But it's also in the fourth root. So that should be linear.?
Does that make sense, or is it even understandable ... ??
One point I like to mention is the important thing is not necessarily how J-11B and J-10 compare against each other, but again their common enemies. Most probably F-16s. But also -15, -18, ...
J-11B can detect them from farther away while J-10 can stay undetected for longer.
One thing that's also mentioned rather often is that Flankers could bring more kinetic energy. But I'm not sure if that's that important an advantage over the J-10.
thanks. that looks good to me (the range vs radius part).
although for the kinetic energy part, it should be the other way around, J-10 has better supersonic performance.
Then again, since the J-10 lacks an IRST, it's only sensor to detect other aircraft is it's radar, wich can be jamed and gives away the aircraft precense. (Though AESA tech will reduce those riscs somewhat)
The J-11B's IRST can be a helpfull part in finding other assets without radiating or being jamed.
The J-10 will also become multirole (as did the Flanker, wich started as an air superiority fighter), though perhaps doing "lighter" strike missions.
The J-10 is also a newer design.
BTW, are there signs that later J-11s will also get canards?
No, J-11BJ/J-15 is the end of Chinese Flanker development, which is the naval carrier variant w/o canards.