PLA Air Force news, pics and videos

[Blitzo]

4. Well, they do know that PGM usage does exist in the PLA, but similar to Blitzo, they only assert what can be demonstrably shown. I myself only assert otherwise because of what I've seen in my career on the less-than-public side of things, discussion and disclosing of which is a very fine line for me to tread as a result lol. It's a bit similar to how - despite there being very very limited coverage and public writing thereof - the PLA conducted ~300 ballistic missile launches in 2021 alone as part of exercises/training (far more than most would have expected), and this was only revealed in a State Dept press conference. There are just some capabilities that you don't or won't see if you're only working with unclass intelligence product.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1542400480961511424

I posted this video a little while back, and the sheer randomness in terms of where it came from, and the content that it depicts, does lend some meaningful credence to the idea that the PLA are likely still hiding significant bits of capability that they don't want widely circulated.

Ignoring the drum and bass background music, the video clearly depicts a weapons range with many weapons that appear to be air launched in size/trajectory, hitting targets with relative precision, in a way that only PGMs can.
And when checking by frames, at least some of the weapons (if not most of the weapons) appear to have a different profile to the 500kg LT-2 pattern PGM that we all know to be in widespread PLA use as its only "outwardly confirmed in service PGM".
And this is only one of a handful of shortform videos depicting "unidentified PLA PGMs," just the most recent.

Then, when we consider that we know the J-16 is equipped with a targeting pod (with a FLIR hardpoint associated with it), yet we've never seen it carrying an actual A2G weapon that would require a targeting pod to begin with... well, there are a few bits missing from the picture as a whole, but unless one has actual proper intelligence acquired by espionage, at this stage it's difficult to quantify how big those missing bits are.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

When I get out of hospital, I'll ask if I can send you guys some lovely hiking/vacation photos from a few years ago. Guilin's just so beautiful, I'd hate for it to go unappreciated. On a surely unrelated note, have you guys seen the kind of zoom a P1000 can achieve? Even a mile and a half is like nothing to that lens!

If I wasn't sure China was doing this sort of thing to the US ten times over, I'd be a bit upset.

 

[vincent]

Since that's the case, could Su-35 act like munition trucks, i..e F-15EXs? Staying out of range and lob missiles in BVR mode, while trying not getting into WVR battles as best as possible.

But, considering that the PLAAF only has 24 Su-35s, so it likely doesn't matter much.

I think you got it backwards, Su-35 sucks in BVR

 

[siegecrossbow]

Since that's the case, could Su-35 act like munition trucks, i..e F-15EXs? Staying out of range and lob missiles in BVR mode, while trying not getting into WVR battles as best as possible.

But, considering that the PLAAF only has 24 Su-35s, so it likely doesn't matter much.

Lob what, R-77s? Su-35 is a knife fighter.

 

[Blitzo]

Since that's the case, could Su-35 act like munition trucks, i..e F-15EXs? Staying out of range and lob missiles in BVR mode, while trying not getting into WVR battles as best as possible.

But, considering that the PLAAF only has 24 Su-35s, so it likely doesn't matter much.

The words are the same, I think you're misinterpreting the comma.

"Su-35 in BVR: 谁，都打不过, WVR: 谁都打不过"

What it means is:
"Su-35 can beat no one in BVR" and "No one can beat Su-35 in WVR".


In the sense that the Su-35 has some of the most unique airframe kinematic performance in the PLAAF, it would certainly be true.
But once you had HOBS SRAAM and HMD, I suspect the practical difference becomes much smaller if worth anything at all.

In the real world, Su-35's poor BVR capabilities relative to the rest of the PLA's modern fighter aircraft, of course means that its value in a proper high end air war as a frontline combat aircraft is quite dubious.

 

[vincent]

The words are the same, I think you're misinterpreting the comma.

"Su-35 in BVR: 谁，都打不过, WVR: 谁都打不过"

What it means is:
"Su-35 can beat no one in BVR" and "No one can beat Su-35 in WVR".


In the sense that the Su-35 has some of the most unique airframe kinematic performance in the PLAAF, it would certainly be true.
But once you had HOBS SRAAM and HMD, I suspect the practical difference becomes much smaller if worth anything at all.

In the real world, Su-35's poor BVR capabilities relative to the rest of the PLA's modern fighter aircraft, of course means that its value in a proper high end air war as a frontline combat aircraft is quite dubious.

Su-35 is great for emulating F-22 in aggressor training, in WVR of course.

 

[latenlazy]

He seems like one of those unpleasantly awkward people who try too hard to be funny. Enough about him, anyway; I had some questions about the content I'd like to run by you:

1. Anytime someone puts "China" and "demographics" in the same sentence, I know it's going to be a broke take - but the topic did actually touch on something interesting, namely the skill level required to participate in the modern PLAAF. I'm sure it doesn't take a college degree to apply a coating to a J-20 (in fact, that could have the opposite effect as anyone sufficiently educated would want to stay the hell away from anything applied to stealth aircraft), but I wondered if the requisite skill level could be reduced with the use of augmented reality and AI. To give an example, I remember seeing a nifty laser gizmo that projected assembly instructions on F-35 parts - something like "pick up tool ABC123 and tighten the illuminated bolts." I foresee that and more advanced iterations like "put on the glasses and do what they tell you" lowering the qualification bar throughout the supporting cast of the PLAAF (and other air forces adopting them). Thoughts?

Anytime China and population enter the picture of a conversation I have to remind people that the same time that China's labor force is shrinking younger entrants into the labor pool are becoming more skilled and well educated. The old and less skilled are who's leaving. Besides, there are still more people than good jobs in China. The military isn't going to need an eligible pool of 500 million people to be able to get what it needs for personnel.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The words are the same, I think you're misinterpreting the comma.

"Su-35 in BVR: 谁，都打不过, WVR: 谁都打不过"

What it means is:
"Su-35 can beat no one in BVR" and "No one can beat Su-35 in WVR".


In the sense that the Su-35 has some of the most unique airframe kinematic performance in the PLAAF, it would certainly be true.
But once you had HOBS SRAAM and HMD, I suspect the practical difference becomes much smaller if worth anything at all.

In the real world, Su-35's poor BVR capabilities relative to the rest of the PLA's modern fighter aircraft, of course means that its value in a proper high end air war as a frontline combat aircraft is quite dubious.

Su-35 had its chance when China asked for permission to incorporate domestic missile/avionics but Russia never gave the go ahead.

 

[zszczhyx]

I posted this video a little while back, and the sheer randomness in terms of where it came from, and the content that it depicts, does lend some meaningful credence to the idea that the PLA are likely still hiding significant bits of capability that they don't want widely circulated.

Well, Yankee once mentioned that within the PLAAF there is a rule against photographing precision-guided munitions. Judging from the public photos and videos we can see are always rockets, I feel his statement has high authenticity.

 

[latenlazy]

Well, Yankee once mentioned that within the PLAAF there is a rule against photographing precision-guided munitions. Judging from the public photos and videos we can see are always rockets, I feel his statement has high authenticity.

Normally for every weapons system we see in China's weapons trade shows there's some corresponding weapons system adopted within the PLA (if not from the same tech tree, then at least filling similar roles and capabilities), whether that's revealed to public or not. We have seen a *lot* of very diverse PGM models at those trade shows over the years. That would suggest at least that the PLA's PGMs suite ought to be decently comprehensive. What's less clear is the extent of integration of the weapons into standard operations.