China Flanker Thread II


Totoro

Captain
VIP Professional
So J11D may still live on. Even if ends up not being called J11D and ends up having a regular nose instead of the redesigned nose that was characteristic of J11D.
 

Inst

Senior Member
So J11D may still live on. Even if ends up not being called J11D and ends up having a regular nose instead of the redesigned nose that was characteristic of J11D.
It's questionable as to whether the canted nose would go. The canted nose is emblematic of air superiority AESA, as it enhances effectiveness toward aerial targets, but a conventional nose might enhance the J-11D as a strike fighter, since 4th gen are no longer capable of air superiority and would be better off vs ground targets.

The use of TVC, however, suggests that:

-The Chinese are trying to refine TVC use for eventual placement on the J-20

and/or

-The Chinese are slating the J-11D/E upgrade as a 4th gen air superiority platform.

In the latter case, the J-11D/E would be slated for air superiority and retain the canted nose. In either case, the Chinese could make bank selling their AESAs to the RuAF.

The canted nose is also useful in that it allows the fighter to use a larger apertured AESA than a perpendicular nose, given the surface area of a slant is higher than a perpendicular aperture. Looking at the J-11D again, its slant is mild and could retain at least the Su-35's ground attack capability in terms of AESA.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
... but you surely know my impatience! :confused: :rolleyes:
I do indeed, the big Flanker loves OVT, and it brings so much more to the show for this airframe, like the Su-35, Su-57, and F-22, for these large fighters, OVT provide a greatly increased pitch rate, as well as Post Stall Maneuverability. Its a game changer for these beautiful capable airframes....
 

ougoah

Senior Member
Registered Member
J-11D/E project existing goes towards showing how costly and complex a J-20 is. Can't understand why spend the money developing and buying J-11D/E. Wouldn't going all in with J-20 and newer platforms be moving forward while controlling the costs? Maxing production efficiency for J-20 should be where AVIC spends the money. As sentimental as dwelling on beautiful flankers is, the west is moving towards 6th gen and novel air combat platforms and ideas. Can't help but feel playing with flankers at this age is slow progress even with TVC and neat new electronics.

Unless the whole thing is either a small side project for more junior engineers at SAC to incorporate a TVC and new flight controls into a J-11B, or a one off test like the J-10 TVC experiment that somehow benefits a SAC future platform's TVC system. The J-11BG updates are just quick and easy switches to AESA units to keep these 4th gens relevant today and capable of making use of PL-15 and whatnot.
 

Inst

Senior Member
J-11D/E project existing goes towards showing how costly and complex a J-20 is. Can't understand why spend the money developing and buying J-11D/E. Wouldn't going all in with J-20 and newer platforms be moving forward while controlling the costs? Maxing production efficiency for J-20 should be where AVIC spends the money. As sentimental as dwelling on beautiful flankers is, the west is moving towards 6th gen and novel air combat platforms and ideas. Can't help but feel playing with flankers at this age is slow progress even with TVC and neat new electronics.

Unless the whole thing is either a small side project for more junior engineers at SAC to incorporate a TVC and new flight controls into a J-11B, or a one off test like the J-10 TVC experiment that somehow benefits a SAC future platform's TVC system. The J-11BG updates are just quick and easy switches to AESA units to keep these 4th gens relevant today and capable of making use of PL-15 and whatnot.
The J-11 is just a much better strike package than the J-20. The J-20 is better at interception and air superiority, but it sacrifices strike ability as we see that the FC-31 has about the same internal payload. Unless the J-20 is eventually developed into a strike variant (redesigned weapons bays), and then you have the JH-XX competing for the same slot, the J-11 is more suitable for carrying large AShMs or even light hypersonic AShMs as with the Su-35.

===

Put another way, the PLAAF has a strike problem right now, The J-20 is strike-capable, but unable to carry large missiles stealthily, making it vulnerable to AEW&C and surface counter-stealth radar. The JH-XX could fill the gap with a tactical fighter-bomber that can do heavy interception and heavy-bombing, but the JH-XX is vaporware as far as we're aware. And of course you could do a JH-20, but the JH-20 is even more vaporware than the JH-XX. The J-11 platform, on the other hand, is mature and just needs some retrofits to enhance its strike ability. The J-11 can't carry anything stealthily, of course, but it's cheap relative to the J-20 and is thus a more cost-effective striker.
 

Top