China - J-11 Modernization program

[rcrmj]

Come out from your fantasy world

are you referring to LCA is a 'forth' gen fighter? if thats the case then it is fantasy...

arent there many threads going on on PDF that j-10B, J-15 and J-11B upgrade version is going to be AESA, or you have been speeding too much time indulging in DRDO's fantasy world?

 

[nomi007]

j-11b pictures

with j-10a

 

[houshanghai]

This kind of aircraft is out of date.
actually,SAC 5 gen Jxx is just shengyang's new aircraft now and it will make the first flight at the end of the year.
let us wait and see......

 

[Zabaniyah]

Come out from your fantasy world

No fantasy dear, I looked around here, and the Chinese members proved it with credible sources. AESA is not fully implemented on PLAAF aircraft yet, but will be soon on a mass basis. And I do look forward to them, especially since my country is considering procuring J-10s or maybe something else at some point in the future.

So, save your rants for later.

 

[desimorty]

For a small country like Bangladesh, purchasing the FC-1 or Mig-29 would be a better option. The engines allow it to take to the air a lot faster than the AL-31 engines. Which is why PAF opted for the FC-1 even though the J-10 was available sooner. The J--10 works for the PLAAF since they have more time on their side thanks the large area of China. Pakistan and Bangladesh have no such option. For them the J-10 would be a better strike,bombing aircraft thanks to its payload. Hence, even though India has the MKI, there is MMRCA.

 

[Akasa]

Your claim was that Chinese aircraft has surpassed the Europeans (Typhoon and Rafale). Without choosing sides lets take a look at your points.

Firstly, lets assume that both Europeans and Chinese aircraft use RAM and composites this tells us one thing--absolutely nothing. The DSI nonsense that Chinese aviation enthusiasts hyped to epic proportions needs to be toned down. You do not need DSI to reduce or hide compressor blades, the Rafale uses 'S ducts' and you knew that very well yet to awe your fellow Chinese enthusiasts or make Chinese aircraft look extraordinary you threw in 'DSI'.

And what exactly do the J-20's weapons bays have anything to do with the Typhoon or Rafale? You are comparing fully operational and matured platforms to a prototype.

The "DSI nonsense" has been adopted by the newest US fighter, the F-35. If you really think it doesn't make a difference then why are the Russians also incorporating them in the LMFS?

It directs boundary air flow eliminating the need for inlet ramps, which can and will increase its frontal RCS.

Did I ever mention the J-20's weapons bays? The Rafale and Eurofighter and J-20 are different leagues. I was referring to the F-15SE, on which extensive RCS reducing methods was used. Your claim that the Rafale and Eurofighter represent "two most sophisticated" aircraft is seriously flawed, and the advanced semi stealth design of the F-15SE is just and example.

What makes you think that an aircraft with AESA is automatically superior to one with PESA? A radar and aircraft can be broken down in to many parts in terms of systems avionics. Important features in a radar include range, resolution, A2A-A2G modes, targets tracked, targets engaged, yada, yada, yada.

AESA=better than PESA. AESA equipped aircraft does not necessarily mean it is better than PESA equipped aircraft. And the latest report was that it was not because of engines. Politics and needs certainly played a role but besides that the aircraft were very much judged on capability, I believe that all aircraft were judged on a 600 point scale? And although much of the point scale was likely technical data some of it was likely simple performance such as high altitude performance which was one of India's requirements. But cutting threw all the MRCA nonsense we know that the Indians evaluated all aircraft on a comprehensive scale that numbers in the hundreds.

Meaning they broke down the performance of individual parts in to many--the radars could have been judged on dozens of different functions.

AESA for the most part are generally (there are a few exceptions, but again, the Rafale would not have required the AESA upgrade if its situation was different) preferred, owing to its large number of T/R modules.

The "simple performance" you are talking about is only a small part of a plane's performance. For all we know India might have bought the Typhoon or Rafale due to only a single aspect which it excelled at. Different aircraft have different emphasis, so Super Hornet might simply not have emphasized on India's needs.

I assume you speak from experience? Or know something that most of us do not? The Typhoon for one has been know to dominate in A2A combat there is also a story some years back to one managed to achieve an F-22 lock, I do not know if it's true or not but even if we disregard that news you can not disregard the fact that the aircraft's systems as a whole is what achieves victories not just one system. You are completely ignoring systems such as data-links, passive systems and weapons, or even RWR's and their ability to acquire a threat.

Air exercises are very short range, meaning that the F-22 would have been easier to locked on. And if the F-22 was locked, was it shot down? Did the Eurofighter manager to keep that lock? Real air to air war is fought beyond visual range, where the radars would have trouble tracking a stealthy target. Then we have jamming and ECM, none of which are exhibited in such exercises.

And please stay on topic, the conversation is about you claiming that Chinese aircraft air superior to European ones, there is no need to branch off in to off topic subjects or compare US aircraft to the Europeans when the topic is not about US aircraft. If I didn't know better I would say that you are going in circles.

Then stop mentioning how Eurofighter and Rafale represent "two most sophisticated aircraft in the world".

A I mentioned the various parts and features of a radar, data-link, passive as well as active systems and weapons, ect, ect. For all you know the Spectra can deny a an AESA to see the Rafale, so again, what makes you think that that simply because an aircraft has AESA that it is a superior aircraft? And notice how a say aircraft (aircraft as a whole)--not radar.

The SPECTRA to some extent applies LPI to the Rafale's radar. Whether the AESA radar is blinded or not depends entirely on its ability to see stealthy targets, which I'm sure modern ones are capable of doing.

 

[desimorty]

The "DSI nonsense" has been adopted by the newest US fighter, the F-35. If you really think it doesn't make a difference then why are the Russians also incorporating them in the LMFS?

It directs boundary air flow eliminating the need for inlet ramps, which can and will increase its frontal RCS.

Did I ever mention the J-20's weapons bays? The Rafale and Eurofighter and J-20 are different leagues. I was referring to the F-15SE, on which extensive RCS reducing methods was used. Your claim that the Rafale and Eurofighter represent "two most sophisticated" aircraft is seriously flawed, and the advanced semi stealth design of the F-15SE is just and example.

Your obviously not informed. The F-22 doesnt use DSI. The DSI used on the F-32 are different from the ones used on the JF-17, being that its shaped to deflect the radar waves not just a round bump. Neither the T-50 or Eurofighter use DSI inlets. Because other options are available. Take for instance the shape of the inlets. If they are round, its not gonna do much, but if shaped properly with angles it will deflect the radar. The F-15SE doesn't use DSI? Reason?

Also did you also think that perhaps the Typhoon and Rafale are more swing role than either the F-22 and F-35? Large payload allowing both ground strike and air to air roles in the same flight.

 

[臺灣省委書記蔡英文]

just for a look

 

[DrSomnath999]

Your obviously not informed. The F-22 doesnt use DSI. The DSI used on the F-32 are different from the ones used on the JF-17, being that its shaped to deflect the radar waves not just a round bump. Neither the T-50 or Eurofighter use DSI inlets. Because other options are available. Take for instance the shape of the inlets. If they are round, its not gonna do much, but if shaped properly with angles it will deflect the radar. The F-15SE doesn't use DSI? Reason?

Also did you also think that perhaps the Typhoon and Rafale are more swing role than either the F-22 and F-35? Large payload allowing both ground strike and air to air roles in the same flight.

very good analysis mate really appreciated that

 

[Zabaniyah]

The F-22 doesn't use DSI intakes.

J-20 has DSI intakes.

F-22 has standard intakes.

Comparison:
LPI Radar- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Opaque Radome- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Chined Nose- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Frameless Cockpit Canopy- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Opaque Cockpit Canopy- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Serpentine Intakes- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Canted Vertical Stabilizers- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Internal Weapons Bay- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Blended Fuselage/Wings- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Smooth Skin Lacking Significant Protrusions- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Serrations on Weapons Bay/Landing Gear Doors- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No

By the way, the F-35 does use DSI. The key benefits are less complexity, less weight, lower production costs and lower maintenance costs compared to traditional inlets.

 

[jardbearx]

Im no expert, but this is one mighty-looking-beast.

 

[gambit]

The SPECTRA to some extent applies LPI to the Rafale's radar. Whether the AESA radar is blinded or not depends entirely on its ability to see stealthy targets, which I'm sure modern ones are capable of doing.

I strongly suspect you do not know how the SPECTRA system works.

 

[desimorty]

Comparison:
LPI Radar- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Opaque Radome- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Chined Nose- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Frameless Cockpit Canopy- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Opaque Cockpit Canopy- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Serpentine Intakes- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Canted Vertical Stabilizers- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Internal Weapons Bay- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=Yes
Blended Fuselage/Wings- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Smooth Skin Lacking Significant Protrusions- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No
Serrations on Weapons Bay/Landing Gear Doors- F-22=Yes, J-20=Yes, T-50=No

By the way, the F-35 does use DSI. The key benefits are less complexity, less weight, lower production costs and lower maintenance costs compared to traditional inlets.

Is the above for me? I know the F-35 uses DSI, but the benefits of DSI should not be placed on a pedestal. The US has known of DSI for a long time. But I was referring to the RCS. DSI doesn't reduce to the extent some have claimed. Its about the inlet shape. Take a look at the pictures above. Notice the angled shape of the inlets.
PS if the above was to make a statement that the J-20 is somehow stealthier than the T-50 than you should really take it up with the Russians.

 

[Akasa]

Your obviously not informed. The F-22 doesnt use DSI. The DSI used on the F-32 are different from the ones used on the JF-17, being that its shaped to deflect the radar waves not just a round bump. Neither the T-50 or Eurofighter use DSI inlets. Because other options are available. Take for instance the shape of the inlets. If they are round, its not gonna do much, but if shaped properly with angles it will deflect the radar. The F-15SE doesn't use DSI? Reason?

Also did you also think that perhaps the Typhoon and Rafale are more swing role than either the F-22 and F-35? Large payload allowing both ground strike and air to air roles in the same flight.

I never talked about the F-22. I was talking about the F-35. The one on F-35 is exactly like the one on JF-17.

The other options include ramps, which are non stealthy, as we see on the Eurofighter.

Lack of stealthy airframes has nothing to do with its role.

---------- Post added at 06:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:20 PM ----------

I strongly suspect you do not know how the SPECTRA system works.

Needless to. I know that it lowers RCS.

 

[desimorty]

It directs boundary air flow eliminating the need for inlet ramps, which can and will increase its frontal RCS.

Your saying the DSI reduces RCS? I say DSI has a different function. DSI can be angled to reduce RCS but a normal DSI like the one on the JF-17 won't do much for the RCS. I hope your not making claims at knowing how to reduce RCS, if so i recommend you work for lockhead.

Needless to. I know that it lowers RCS.

Spectra is active. It attacks a radar that has locked on by bombarding the target with the same radar waves in order loose the lock. Theoretically it should be effective against missiles with active seekers.