China Flanker Thread II

Yes, between the J-16 and the Su-35S I'm struggling to see a niche for the J-11D in the PLAAF. It'll have somewhat better air combat performance than the J-16 which has similar avionics in a draggy stepped tandem cockpit config and heavy, strike-oriented structure, but the single-seat Su-35S has all the same advantages plus better engines and TVC. With both already in the fleet anyway, what would the J-11D bring to the table that increased numbers of the other two couldn't provide faster and cheaper? A slight RCS reduction? How much stealthier is the Flanker airframe going to get without major surgery (which the J-11D isn't, MiG-29K-style radome RAM not withstanding)?

If better stealth is desired and SAC is supposed to benefit, taking advantage of the J-31 platform does seem more sensible. Export (Pakistan? They're lacking a heavy long-range platform to date, something the J-10 couldn't provide...) perhaps, but unless the J-31 derivative is deemed too sensitive for some reason the same logic applies.

J-11D is commonly held to have superior avionics, weapons loadout and airframe materials. But it would seem that the J-16 has replaced it.

I think the next step would be to integrate more TVC to J-16 platforms. The extra cockpit doesn't impair air superiority performance as much as one would think. The Indian Su-30MKI has a similar philosophy and is widely considred to be the best air superiority platform in the IAF...

Tirdent said:

Yes, between the J-16 and the Su-35S I'm struggling to see a niche for the J-11D in the PLAAF. It'll have somewhat better air combat performance than the J-16 which has similar avionics in a draggy stepped tandem cockpit config and heavy, strike-oriented structure, but the single-seat Su-35S has all the same advantages plus better engines and TVC. With both already in the fleet anyway, what would the J-11D bring to the table that increased numbers of the other two couldn't provide faster and cheaper? A slight RCS reduction? How much stealthier is the Flanker airframe going to get without major surgery (which the J-11D isn't, MiG-29K-style radome RAM not withstanding)?

If better stealth is desired and SAC is supposed to benefit, taking advantage of the J-31 platform does seem more sensible. Export (Pakistan? They're lacking a heavy long-range platform to date, something the J-10 couldn't provide...) perhaps, but unless the J-31 derivative is deemed too sensitive for some reason the same logic applies.

Click to expand...

It won't be an easy task for J-11D to match Su-35's raw performance levels. However just going by the recently publicised Q&A, it appears that PLAAF considers J-16's avionics package to be superior to that of Su-35 (export). So ideally for PLAAF, they want their super flanker to have the raw performance of Su-35 with the radar/s, EW, passive sensors, comms, software, and weapons of the J-16. This is the space for an idealised J-11D to exist. Failing the performance aspect, they really may as well just buy more J-16s and Su-35s to match them. Problem with getting more Su-35s is weapons dependency and logistics.

Doubtful the WS-10 TVC has equal or more thrust than Al-41/ 117S so unless SAC manages to lighten the J-11D enough, and perfect the new flight controls, it won't be able to even match Su-35. So essentially no J-11D = either failure to achieve all the above within funding allowances or perceived to be not worth the trouble. SAC seems to still be finishing up EW versions of J-15 twin seat and J-16 while supposedly working on a "J-35" aka enlarged/ polished up FC-31. So maybe the whole program really just isn't worth it for another huge RCS flanker in the inventory. If they want to do a LO version a la Silent Eagle, they may as well just put that funding into a medium-heavy weight J-35.

The only future I see for J-11D is a test platform for radar/avionics/material for J-11B upgrades. Resources should be focused on 5th gen fighters at this point.

siegecrossbow said:

The only future I see for J-11D is a test platform for radar/avionics/material for J-11B upgrades. Resources should be focused on 5th gen fighters at this point.

Click to expand...

But then the test program would be known as X-11 (or equivalent) while the new J-11B upgraded would be the J-11D. Semantics I know

Confusing even more since why they bought Su35

asif iqbal said:

Confusing even more since why they bought Su35

Click to expand...

China has too much cash on hands. Liming cannot keep up the engines while China has so many old fighters that need to be replaced. It just few bucks, wasn’t it?

I somehow doubt that either SAC or the PLAAF is going to be giving much priority and funding towards developing the Flanker line much further, what with the J20 and J31/35 programmes.

The J15 and J16 are probably the last major Flanker variant China will work on. And the J16 is getting he green light is more likely due to it being strike oriented rather than air superiority.

The J11D is most likely being scaled back to an upgrade for existing planes rather than a new line to compete head to head with the Su35.

I agree with the above. If I were PLAAF/PLAN brass I would be pulling the plug on the J-11D program, unless for test purposes, and reappropriating those funds towards the J-35 and J-20 programs.

Problem is the flanker fleet is so vast it’s a programme in itself to keep the fleet upgraded