China All Su-35 news

[Akasa]

No one in J20 project could assure what Leio just wished.

That why Su 35 coming to China

24 Su-35s would barely make a difference. There is no reason to assume that the PLAAF is interested due to a delay or inability in its other fighters.

 

[cnleio]

No one in J20 project could assure what Leio just wished.

That why Su 35 coming to China

LOL ... Su-35 China will get, J-20A China also mass production, J-10B/C mass production, J-11D also will mass production, J-15 mass production, J-16 will mass production, J-31 also has the chance and i knew they had built new assembly lines for them ... it's not Leio's simple wish, Did u ever hear what called 'Schedules' in Vietnam ? Next years the job of AVIC Group just producing above fighters in China as many as we can ... i ever said many times in PDF 'the winter is coming', it's true China need more modern fighters to protect us and to face future challenges from foreign. One thing i can sure 2017~2018 J-20A serving in PLAAF.

Each time the world economy get crashed, the more chance world get into a big war ... Obviously Chinese have foresight longer than others, and prepare well.

 

[BoQ77]

24 Su-35s would barely make a difference. There is no reason to assume that the PLAAF is interested due to a delay or inability in its other fighters.

24 Su 35 is comparable to Liaoning in optimum config operating in near sea, focus on Su35 longer range.

Of course Su 35 squadrons are stronger than any other squadrons China has before 2021. new weapons with Su35 is significant

 

[Akasa]

Of course Su 35 squadrons are stronger than any other squadrons China has before 2021.

PLAAF squadrons have the same number of aircraft, so no single squadron is "stronger".

 

[BoQ77]

PLAAF squadrons have the same number of aircraft, so no single squadron is "stronger".

Dont catch what you mean? Squadron with J8 vs Squadron with Su 30?

LOL ... Su-35 China will get, J-20A China also mass production, J-10B/C mass production, J-11D also will mass production, J-15 mass production, J-16 will mass production, J-31 also has the chance and i knew they had built new assembly lines for them ... it's not Leio's simple wish, Did u ever hear what called 'Schedules' in Vietnam ? Next years the job of AVIC Group just producing above fighters in China as many as we can ... i ever said many times in PDF 'the winter is coming', it's true China need more modern fighters to protect us and to face future challenges from foreign. One thing i can sure 2017~2018 J-20A serving in PLAAF.

Each time the world economy get crashed, the more chance world get into a big war ... Obviously Chinese have foresight longer than others, and prepare well.

Optimistic is good for health.

24 Su-35s would barely make a difference. There is no reason to assume that the PLAAF is interested due to a delay or inability in its other fighters.

The problem is the strongest ones could fight now must be Su 30mk2 may unable to catch up new appearance in ECS and SCS.
Like Indonesia Su 35, US Marine F35B, Japan F35A, Vietnam Su 30SM

The purchase is good for China, I admit.
We dont worry about any Jxx but Su35.

 

[Akasa]

Dont catch what you mean? Squadron with J8 vs Squadron with Su 30?

What do you mean?

The problem is the strongest ones could fight now must be Su 30mk2 may unable to catch up new appearance in ECS and SCS.
Like Indonesia Su 35, US Marine F35B, Japan F35A, Vietnam Su 30SM

The purchase is good for China, I admit.
We dont worry about any Jxx but Su35.

Uh, no, the "strongest" aircraft within the PLANAF are the J-11B and J-15.

 

[cnleio]

Optimistic is good for health.

Schedule is the schedule, China won't delay it ... i won't waste my time in the thread, what i mentioned here soon come true in 2017, just get my point and don't forget see photos in my thread.

 

[victor07]

Are J-10 and J-20 not Chinese developed airframes? Is there anything similar to J-20? Has Russia walked away far beyond Su-27 airframe?
Chinese already mastered techs like signal processing algorithms, detection and recognition of targets, weapons control, and so on.
I think China wants to have a close look on those 117s engines to see if we could make a better WS-10 or the WS-15 for J-20.

I used the term "scheme", which refers to a broad trend in subsystems upgrades. For example, both Su-35 and the J-11D feature avionics upgrades, extensive airframe enhancements, upgraded EW/ECM suites, and engine upgrades. This in no way implies that the subsystems themselves are the same or even that the spectrum of upgrades are exactly equal, but rather that the two aircraft focus on the same areas of improvements.
The Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years now; there is no reason to doubt their familiarity with the Flanker airframe.
Fair enough, but my point was that the J-11D should be very similar to the Su-35 in this regard, thus ruling out the possibility that the Chinese are buying the Su-35 (again, assuming that rumors are true) due to a gap in capability. My post was specifically referring to the subsystems aboard J-11D/Su-35, not necessarily the maintenance requirements for them, which depends on a host of factors beyond R&D and manufacturing.
I'm not sure what you mean by "verification" or "validation", but I agree, the Chinese enginers and PLAAF brass are probably very eager to compare notes with their Russian counterparts, especially when they plan to operate domestic fighters that are very similar to the Su-35 such as the J-11D/J-16.

Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D. At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident. 35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2). What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?

 

[Akasa]

Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D.

That is because most of the upgrades are all internal; even the Su-35 shares a common airframe with the T-10-1 prototype. Internal upgrades account for almost all Flanker variants.

At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident.

The Chinese have also developed the J-11B/D, J-15, J-15S, and J-16/11BS, every single one of which uses a different type of airframe.

35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2).

How would you know that the J-11 cannot achieve a decent angle of attack? The J-11B/D have also reduced their RCS values by applying radar-absorbent material and composites.

What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?

The J-10 and J-20 have nothing to do with the Lavi and MiG, respectively..

 

[Sanchez]

Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D. At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident. 35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2). What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?

Can you tell the difference of J-16 from J-11D? You should also know that Chinese modified J-11B that is one metric ton less heavy than Su-27. J-11B/D, J-15 and J-16 all have reduced RCS known for years. Just look for more details of change.

Russian help on J-20 may have been through your meddling with MiG?

 

[Beast]

Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D. At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident. 35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2). What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?

Official comfirmation of J-11B over Su-27SK improvement. 10000hrs lifespan airframe. 700kg lighter, can track 20 targets and attack 6 targets at the same time. Increase air to ground attack cpabilities which is absent from Su-27SK version.

MiG denies stealth technology transfer to China for J-20 fighter | Russia & India Report

Official statement from MiG deny any role for J-20. J-20 is a 100% Chinese independently develop program.

 

[victor07]

That is because most of the upgrades are all internal; even the Su-35 shares a common airframe with the T-10-1 prototype. Internal upgrades account for almost all Flanker variants.



The Chinese have also developed the J-11B/D, J-15, J-15S, and J-16/11BS, every single one of which uses a different type of airframe.



How would you know that the J-11 cannot achieve a decent angle of attack? The J-11B/D have also reduced their RCS values by applying radar-absorbent material and composites.



The J-10 and J-20 have nothing to do with the Lavi and MiG, respectively..

Good, let it be your way. Then it is not clear why China buy combat aircraft, if own is not worse. And then what about very strange fact. China is (by your words) is able to develop the most advanced modern combat aircrafts but somehow decides to buy documentation of Yak-130 and produce a copy instead of develop own one. I mean Hongdu L-15.

In addition can you link me to any clear video of aerobatic display of Chinese Flankers close to these videos of Su-34 frontline bomber (with and without armament):

 

[Beast]

Good, let it be your way. Then it is not clear why China buy combat aircraft, if own is not worse. And then what about very strange fact. China is (by your words) is able to develop the most advanced modern combat aircrafts but somehow decides to buy documentation of Yak-130 and produce a copy instead of develop own one. I mean Hongdu L-15.

Hongdu paid consultation fee to Yakolev. Of cos , if Yakolev advised Hongdu to design L-15 like their Yak-130 , its not the fault of the Chinese since Yakolev already received the fee.

 

[Akasa]

Good, let it be your way. Then it is not clear why China buy combat aircraft, if own is not worse. And then what about very strange fact.

There are a lot of reasons why the Chinese might want to buy Russian jets even with their domestic analogues:
- help out the crumbling Russian economy
- show solidarity with Russia
- aggressor training and/or evaluation
- 117S engines

China is (by your words) is able to develop the most advanced modern combat aircrafts but somehow decides to buy documentation of Yak-130 and produce a copy instead of develop own one. I mean Hongdu L-15.

Firstly, the L-15 design exhibits numerous differences vis-a-vis the Yak-130; the two are in no way copies by any definition of the term. Secondly, we do not know the extent to which Yakolev helped with the design, if at all, so it is far too premature to draw any connections between the Yak-130 and L-15. The fact that the Chinese were able to export the L-15 without any Russian objection also suggests that the supposed relationship between the two are a lot less significant than previously imagined.

In addition can you link me to any clear video of aerobatic display of Chinese Flankers close to these videos of Su-34 frontline bomber (with and without armament):

What would aerobatic maneuvers, especially when confined to the flight envelopes of airshows, prove?

 

[victor07]

There are a lot of reasons why the Chinese might want to buy Russian jets even with their domestic analogues:
- help out the crumbling Russian economy
- show solidarity with Russia
- aggressor training and/or evaluation
- 117S engines
Firstly, the L-15 design exhibits numerous differences vis-a-vis the Yak-130; the two are in no way copies by any definition of the term. Secondly, we do not know the extent to which Yakolev helped with the design, if at all, so it is far too premature to draw any connections between the Yak-130 and L-15. The fact that the Chinese were able to export the L-15 without any Russian objection also suggests that the supposed relationship between the two are a lot less significant than previously imagined.
What would aerobatic maneuvers, especially when confined to the flight envelopes of airshows, prove?

Please do not show your incompetence. In order to help a country is usually given a long-term loan for a small percentage. China refused to give Russia a loan, furthermore China at all UN resolutions related to the interests of Russia, voted for own Chinese interests. Thus, there is nothing to do with "helping Russia" in our relations. Relations between Russia and China are determined only by their own interests and nothing else.
The contract value for the Russian economy is insignificant. At the same time, this contract together with other contracts allow the manufacturer to continue new projects like fifth-generation fighter and others in comfortable conditions. As for China's interest, I've expressed my opinion, you do not agree with it, but with no convincing arguments. Currently I see only one fully completed 100% Chinese project of military aircraft. It is the one that is produced in cooperation with Pakistan.
The changes in airframe to Chinese clone of Yak-130 affect only the addition of afterburners and appropriate account of this fact in the settings of the electronic control system (FBWCS). Is it possible that these changes are reflected in the performance of the aircraft for the worse? May be, but we do not know because we have not seen its aerobatics, as well as aerobatics of Chinese "Flankers" even with current engines.
"extent to which Yakolev helped with the design" of L-15 is a production documentation, which is openly stated in Russian Wiki.