J-10 Thread IV

Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
plawolf said:
You guys are trying to read way too much from a single data point. J10Cs coming up on top this year by itself does not categorically prove it to be the best non-stealth fighter in the PLAAF.

In previous years golden helmets, there have been times when J10s dominated one year and J11s the next. It’s only if J10Cs dominate year after year for at least 2-3 years that we can start to draw any conclusions on the respective capacities of the aircrafts themselves.

What I do not see even considered is often cited as the most important direct factor in air combat outcomes - pilot skill.

People often seem to think of the PLAAF as some giant homogeneous clone factory where everyone does everything exactly the same across China, but the very fact that we have so much variation in results from Golden Helmets proves that lie.

I think PLAAF regiments gets a surprising amount of leeway to innovate and deviate from standard doctrine if that improves their combat effectiveness.

After each year’s Golden Helmets, the winners write up their winning formula, which is then made compulsory reading for all other PLAAF fighter units, and that then becomes a core part of next year’s training syllabus, and in turn may inspire new tactics and strategies in other units who then go on to win it the next year, so on and so forth to create a positive feedback loop on continuous improvement, which is imo, a, if not the core point of golden helmets.
Click to expand...

I think the confusion from some other people is the idea that J-10C could defeat J-16 in a domain like BVR, which reflects what their underlying belief surrounding J-10C and J-16's capabilities in BVR on a platform vs platform basis are.
I.e.: there may be some belief that J-16 somehow has some kind of inherent platform superiority in the BVR domain vs J-10C on a platform to platform basis. OTOH I don't think there is any meaningful difference between the two.

IMO the results of these sort of engagements/exercises can sometimes be "reflective" of inherent platform capability but often is not.
However, there are also some engagements/exercises as well as some "matchups" when some results can be quite easily predicted due to differences in inherent platform capability that are very difficult to be made up by pilot skill. For example, in the BVR domain I think it is a foregone conclusion that an aircraft like J-20 will be able to dominate pre 5th generation aircraft on an individual platform to platform basis just like how a 4+ generation aircraft like J-16 or J-10C will have notable advantages against J-11B or J-10A, or how aircraft like J-11B or J-10A (or Gripen C for that matter) would have notable advantages vs say, Su-27SK/J-11A in the BVR domain as well.


As far as J-10C and J-16 goes, I think on a platform vs platform level neither has any sort of inherent insurmountable advantage or disadvantage, and as I wrote above, "between J-10C and J-16 in particular, it is not unrealistic to imagine either of them being able to win a particular series of engagements. For all we know the results may be reversed next year" -- and that could reflect the tactics the pilots one year use versus another, etc.

And again, we do not know the margin of victory, which may have been small or large, which we don't have any information on.


On a tangent, if/when J-20 participates in Golden Helmet in the near future (if it does so at all), and if/when it likely wins versus the competition, I think people would quite reasonably attribute that significantly to the inherent platform advantages of J-20 vs its pre 5th generation counterparts, and I think most people would likely suspect that its margin of victory was quite high -- which IMO would not be unreasonable.
But with this news of J-10C "winning" Golden Helmet, some people seem to have believed that it has also enjoyed some kind of large margin of victory and that it was due to inherent platform advantage, which IMO is a bit of an overreach and not consistent with what we know about the comparison of J-10C vs its 4+ generation counterparts in the PLAAF.

I suppose this is my way of saying that sometimes we can speculate and extrapolate and take away some datapoints from limited information like the results of a Golden Helmet exercise, but sometimes we are unable to extrapolate much at all -- and however much we can extrapolate out is ultimately context and platform dependent.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Hyperwarp said:
So the J-10C beat the J-16 and Su-35SK in WVR and BVR? :eek: Beating the Su-35SK in WVR is quite a feat. This would show the pilot's skill as well as the effectiveness of the PL-10 missile. Beating the J-16 in BVR is also an impressive feat. Besides the pilot's skill, it looks like the J-10C has some hidden secrets. I always wondered whether the J-10C has some Rafale-like active cancellation? o_O
Click to expand...

I believe the J-10 has a better ITR than Flanker. Single engine configuration puts weight in the center of the bore, along with its centrifugal forces, and you have less weight on the peripheral, as you would with twin engine aircraft. So the plane goes into a roll quicker, and begins its turn earlier. This is also what makes aircraft like F-5, F-16 and MiG-21 do so well.

The Flanker on the other hand, has a better AoA with its wing configuration and should have better low speed handling, allowing the plane to go into a real tight turn, then use superior TWR to regain energy. In terms of sustained turn rates, the Flankers are more likely to win.

These things should be apparent the day and year J-10s started tangling with Su-27s in exercises long ago, and every year, the pilots are refining their tactics against each other, with the results going back and forth.

I like to see the PLAAF try a dissimilar flight unit, like its own aggressor squadron, this time using FC-1s. This plane should also have good ITR.

In terms of BVR, diverterless intake, angled array, likely helps reduce the RCS of the J-10C further. This may have tipped the favor against the more powerful radar on the J-16s or Su-35.
 
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
People tend to read to much into a single exercise. I remember that one time when the US and India did joint air training, US F-15 pilots bested by Indian Mig-21s on more than one occasion when realistically the only advantage the Mig-21 has is it's maneuverability and thrust. The entire Indian forums literally exploded.
Taking a deeper look into the script tells a different story, the F-15s were denied AWAC support and other measures, where the Mig-21s were piloted by experienced pilots on home turf.
In the end of the day that is what DACT is: To pit pilots against disadvantaged situations in order for them to overcome them. It may be that the Su-35 pilots have yet to be able to exploit the full potential of the Irbis-E and that the J-16 pilots are more used to strike missions than air to air combat given the nature of their aircrafts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
plawolf said:
You guys are trying to read way too much from a single data point. J10Cs coming up on top this year by itself does not categorically prove it to be the best non-stealth fighter in the PLAAF.

In previous years golden helmets, there have been times when J10s dominated one year and J11s the next. It’s only if J10Cs dominate year after year for at least 2-3 years that we can start to draw any conclusions on the respective capacities of the aircrafts themselves.

What I do not see even considered is often cited as the most important direct factor in air combat outcomes - pilot skill.

People often seem to think of the PLAAF as some giant homogeneous clone factory where everyone does everything exactly the same across China, but the very fact that we have so much variation in results from Golden Helmets proves that lie.

I think PLAAF regiments gets a surprising amount of leeway to innovate and deviate from standard doctrine if that improves their combat effectiveness.

After each year’s Golden Helmets, the winners write up their winning formula, which is then made compulsory reading for all other PLAAF fighter units, and that then becomes a core part of next year’s training syllabus, and in turn may inspire new tactics and strategies in other units who then go on to win it the next year, so on and so forth to create a positive feedback loop on continuous improvement, which is imo, a, if not the core point of golden helmets.
Click to expand...

That's right. J-11B started dominating the 4th gen category of Golden Helmets from 2016 onwards so if anything, Flankers with similar avionics should have an advantage over the J-10 since they have greater weapons load, higher thrust to weight, and superior electronics attack suite. I think people were surprised at how fast the J-10C was able to turn the table against the J-16 since they didn't make a separate group for 4.5th gen fighters in the Golden Helmets till 2018.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Have we seen non-primer J-10C with WS-10 before?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A4d0Chg.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top