China Flanker Thread II

[SinoSoldier]

Note the wingtop pods, reminiscent of the ALQ-218 ESM/ELINT/RWR pods on EA-18G (compared with on the last picture), and are likely similar in role.

It may take a little while until we see "J-16G" (though huitong is calling it J-16D) to fly with its actual jamming pods.

I would expect the jamming pods to be tested on a more mature platform (i.e. J-11BS) first, although pod integration shouldn't take that long if we assume that they have already been developed.

On a different note, the "J-16D" designation makes more sense since the "D" could denote "dianzi", which translates to "electronic" in pinyin.

 

[Blitzo]

I would expect the pods to be tested on a more mature platform (i.e. J-11BS) first, although pod integration shouldn't take that long if we assume that they have already been developed.

Jamming pods could be tested on any sort of platform, even a small commercial jet could do. For instance, Raytheon is currently doing flight tests of NGJ pod on a gulfstream business jet.

Integration of the intended jamming pod onto the intended platform (J-16D in this case) could also occur simultaneously as tests of the jamming pod on other platforms, in the same way that prototype fighter aircraft may have dedicated avionics testbeds flying for integration/simulation roles.

The reason I say the jamming pods may take a little while to appear on the actual J-16D, is because the large jamming pods are not typically part of the "standard carriage" of a jamming jet, whereas smaller pods such as the ESM/ELINT pods of EA-18G and here on J-16D are far lower profile and also (more importantly) they seem to be part of the aircraft's standard fit during virtually all missions. Therefore it may take a little while for us to see the J-16D fly with actual jamming pods because it will take some time for flight testing to reach verification of that payload.

Though when I say "some time," I mean maybe six months, a year tops, probably.

 

[Deino]

Interesting ... there are a few more changes to the standard striker like the missing gun/cannon, a shorter radome, several dielectric / EW aerials ....

 

[Blitzo]

Interesting ... there are a few more changes to the standard striker like the missing gun/cannon, a shorter radome, several dielectric / EW aerials ....

View attachment 22911

Interesting, the smaller radome in particular.

It seems like the smaller radome of the nose of the J-16D is consistent with the size, geometry and relative position of the radome (the "grey" part only) of the AESA J-11B demonstrator. Therefore I suspect the J-16D may be using the same or a similar design radar as what was tested on the J-11B AESA testbed.

That could have interesting implications for the kind of radar J-16D is using compared to the standard J-16...
It could mean the J-16D may be using the same or similar radar to the J-11D (which is also expected to use the same AESA from the J-11B demonstrator), or it may also mean J-16 and J-11D and J-16D may all share a common AESA design, but that J-16's radome was not modified like J-11D's and J-16D's were for their respective radars -- J-11D and J-16D both have smaller radomes in an absolute sense relative to J-16's radome, meaning the maximum size of their AESAs would be smaller than what could be mounted on J-16.
That in turn could imply the standard J-16 may be using a slightly larger AESA compared to J-11D and J-16D, or that all three aircraft have a similarly sized AESA of a similar or even same design, but that J-16 simply did not reduce its radome geometry to accommodate a slightly smaller array versus the maximum

... or it could be that J-16D and J-11D both use the same radar design (possibly a more recent AESA design) and that the standard J-16 may use a slightly older and thus larger AESA design.
...or the standard J-16 may simply have a larger and more powerful array versus that of the J-16D and J-11D given it is more oriented for A2G strike, and a more powerful array would allow for more detailed SAR mapping, GMTI, and generally more powerful A2G detection and tracking.

... or J-16, J-11D and J-16D may all use completely separate and unrelated AESA designs from each other, but I find that less likely, and I believe that at least two of the aircraft of those three share a common radar design.

 

[Deino]

Two more ....

 

[Blitzo]

Two more ....

View attachment 22914 View attachment 22915

Looks like the IRST is definitely confirmed to be gone.
That picture also shows the wingtip pods appears to have a row of vertically facing antennae. They definitely look the part of ESM/ELINT pods.

J-16D also appears to have a dorsal antenna posterior to the cockpit which the standard J-16 does not have.

 

[Deino]

... and the radar/radome is strange too ???

 

[SinoSoldier]

According to some rumors, there will also be an EW variant of the J-15S.

 

[Blitzo]

According to some rumors, there will also be an EW variant of the J-15S.

Those rumours were present since last year when those RF simulations of a J-15 with three EW pods emerged.

I wouldn't be surprised if an EW variant of J-15S adopted virtually the same subsystems as J-16D.

 

[FORBIN]

Possible they want do as Russians with Su-34 with some capacities but he is not a true EW/Wild Weasel aircraft as F-4G, EF-111, EA-18G with much more jamming/electronic systems really capable enter in a ennemy anti-air defence