China Flanker Thread II

[Tam]

^"P" in Cyrillic is actually "R"

The Latin "P" is "П" in Russian

edit: I see the Kh-31P is listed as "П" in Russian so all clear. But I believe the "A" stands for "active," not "antiship."

Labeling is for export consumption.

A for active is correct. Kh-31A containers an active radar seeker while Kh-31P contains a passive radar seeker.

For the plane to use passive radar missiles, it needs to come with a built in ESM that will detect radar sources, classify and ID them as threats or not, then copy the signal to the missile's warhead. This and the TV guidance channel for the Kh-59 and KAB-500 are the biggest additions to the MKK in addition to the R-77 support.

For the MK2 and its Kh-31A and antiship capability, the same radar has to be modified further to counter sea clutter, and needs to have MTI or Moving Target Indicator to be able to detect the movement of slow objects at sea. Antiship missiles are generally active radar guided even the earliest ones like Seersucker or Silkworm.

 

[Tam]

Soviet radar design heavily relies on inverse cassegrain.



This is ground based radar for Osa SAMs. This shows you better how it looks like compared to pictures of the N001.




Slotted planar uses a different system of guiding radar waves through slotted wave guides.




It has much greater flexibility in terms of mechanical control, and it is capable of beam steering electronically in one direction. Slotted planar gives a remarkable FOV.






N011M Bars actually uses a slotted planar for its antenna in addition to being a PESA.




Su-27, Su-30MKK and MK2 does have one advantage over the J-10A and that is the IRST and the HMD.

On the other hand, along with the slotted planar, the J-10A's radar might have generally better microelectronics, given the level of electronics China already had at that time. Another advantage the J-10A is the MAWS situated all over the aircraft that gives all around warning. Still another advantage is that I believe PL-12 > R-77 and R-27 as the superior Fox 3 missile. With regards to Fox 1, R-73 and PL-8 might be roughly even and both are very good. The J-10A's radar, along with the JH-7A's radar has support for the YJ-91 (Kh-31P and Kh-31A equivalents), the YJ-83K and KD-88 support in one go. This means multirole, with MTI ground and sea surface tracking, with ARM and ASM support right off.

 

[ougoah]

Soviet radar design heavily relies on inverse cassegrain.

View attachment 66642

This is ground based radar for Osa SAMs. This shows you better how it looks like compared to pictures of the N001.

View attachment 66643


Slotted planar uses a different system of guiding radar waves through slotted wave guides.

View attachment 66644


It has much greater flexibility in terms of mechanical control, and it is capable of beam steering electronically in one direction. Slotted planar gives a remarkable FOV.


View attachment 66645

View attachment 66646

N011M Bars actually uses a slotted planar for its antenna in addition to being a PESA.

View attachment 66647


Su-27, Su-30MKK and MK2 does have one advantage over the J-10A and that is the IRST and the HMD.

On the other hand, along with the slotted planar, the J-10A's radar might have generally better microelectronics, given the level of electronics China already had at that time. Another advantage the J-10A is the MAWS situated all over the aircraft that gives all around warning. Still another advantage is that I believe PL-12 > R-77 and R-27 as the superior Fox 3 missile. With regards to Fox 1, R-73 and PL-8 might be roughly even and both are very good. The J-10A's radar, along with the JH-7A's radar has support for the YJ-91 (Kh-31P and Kh-31A equivalents), the YJ-83K and KD-88 support in one go. This means multirole, with MTI ground and sea surface tracking, with ARM and ASM support right off.

Those flankers have HMD? I thought HMD were a relatively new development unless you're talking about the missile cuing system (I guess also HMD) but which I recall the J-10A having. In fact when the J-10A was officially disclosed, its missile cuing HMD had a much greater engagement angles (or something of that nature) than the earlier first generation Russian ones that were developed for the flanker and fulcrum with archers.

 

[Tam]

China appears to have multiple slotted planar designs but I'm not sure what these are. I believe the first is the Type 1471, and this was a retrofit for the J-8II and used on the J-8F. As such this was a tremendous technical achievement in the 90s for China. This led to the 1473 on the J-10A and the 1475 on the J-11B and J-15. I am not sure what the bottom one is for, but it can be for the JH-7A. Not sure what the H-6 uses on its nose. The "14" on the 1471 means Institute 14, which is NRIET.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Alright the radar discussions don't belong here. Please return to topic.

 

[Tam]

Those flankers have HMD? I thought HMD were a relatively new development unless you're talking about the missile cuing system (I guess also HMD) but which I recall the J-10A having. In fact when the J-10A was officially disclosed, its missile cuing HMD had a much greater engagement angles (or something of that nature) than the earlier first generation Russian ones that were developed for the flanker and fulcrum with archers.

Flankers, or going back further, Fulcrums, pioneered IRST and HMD use. The earliest PLAAF HMDs are copied off from those use with the Su-27 or the PLAAF may have used the same helmets interchangeably with the J-10.

J-10A does not have an IRST as I remember but they can be cuing off from the PL-8's seeker.

 

[gelgoog]

So what is the chance we will see a J-11D with TVC? Nil?

Given the investment into J-20 I think it is more likely we will see upgrades of existing airframes for air force fighters. With only J-16 and maybe J-15 Flankers remaining in production.

 

[The Observer]

So what is the chance we will see a J-11D with TVC? Nil?

Given the investment into J-20 I think it is more likely we will see upgrades of existing airframes for air force fighters. With only J-16 and maybe J-15 Flankers remaining in production.

J-11D? I think not very likely anymore. J-16 and J-20 can do the same job but better, whether it's EW (in case the D means Dian = mandarin for electronic) or regular fighter/ interceptor job. Bits and pieces of the improvement learned in its development will most likely make their way to the future production J-16/ J-15. but as a whole plane? nope.

 

[Tam]

So what is the chance we will see a J-11D with TVC? Nil?

Given the investment into J-20 I think it is more likely we will see upgrades of existing airframes for air force fighters. With only J-16 and maybe J-15 Flankers remaining in production.

Would require retraining pilots and reprogramming the FCS. Both are going to take a bit of time to accomplish which can be better spent on something else. The advent of better and better AAMs makes it less attractive to me. AAMs can have TVC too. I would rather see upgrades to make existing J-11 to use PL-15 and PL-10, adding AESA as a refit. Next batches of J-11 should focus on RCS reduction along with electronic improvements such as the AESA. But for the most part I would like to see more effort invested on J-20, J-31, J-16 and future batch J-15, then finally sixth generation stealth drone warfare.

 

[siegecrossbow]

J-11D? I think not very likely anymore. J-16 and J-20 can do the same job but better, whether it's EW (in case the D means Dian = mandarin for electronic) or regular fighter/ interceptor job. Bits and pieces of the improvement learned in its development will most likely make their way to the future production J-16/ J-15. but as a whole plane? nope.

In the case of J-11D (if it still exists) it doesn’t mean EW warfare, but just improved version.