PLA Air Force General News Thread:

Would be interesting to find out what their impressions of the aircraft and its performance is... it is pretty much basically a MiG-19 but adapted for the ground attack role with more hard points and a radar.

The Soviets found early on that the faster planes were less and less effective in the CAS role, yet short and medium range strike aircraft were still designed to be fast.

The MiG-15 was found to be better at ground attack than the MiG-17 and MiG-19 and MiG-21.

Based on this they developed the Su-25, which was very successful, but continued with the Su-7/17/22 and MiG-27 families of faster light strike aircraft, but their targets were different and generally further from the front line.

Then of course there was the medium strike Su-24 and now Su-34, and heavy strike... originally Tu-16 and then Tu-22m.

Now with the chance in policy the Tu-160 and Tu-95 are technically heavy strike as well.

I think there will remain a need for an armoured straight winged aircraft with bombs and rockets and guns to deal with targets near friendly troops on the battlefield... the question really is... will it be manned...

miketheterrible wrote:Alright, this is funny

https://vpk.name/news/234678_odolzhili_kitai_sozdal_oruzhie_protiv_f22_i_f35_rossii_otvetit_nechem.html

So the Chinese claim they surpassed Russia in terms of Radar capabilities, and their proof of it was a 600t/r module front and side view radars to be used on JF-17.

Here is the kicker in all of this.

https://defense-update.com/20181106_lfk601e.html

So this radar, which China is hailing as advanced, more so than Russia's, has a 170km tracking range of fighter sized targets.  This is the ranges Russia got with its MiG-35D tested in India back in 2007, with same amount of modules.  So this gives full indication that they are using GaAS modules of roughly 5W each for such radar.

Zhuk-A of earlier use was about as advanced as this over glorified by Chinese media, radar.  They showed a radar stating it has 450km detection range and more advanced than Russia's. Yet Nebo-M, in production much longer, has longer range (600km).

The Chinese are terrible in ther news.  they do not even try with their lies.

Most of the radars they showed in Zuhai air show are soviet copies. Not even russian but really soviet analogues.

To be fair, they rarely make exact copies, and sometimes their improvements do make the copies better in some respects... but their main problem is that over the same time period the Soviets/Russians have moved on with even newer technology and have often made their own upgrades so the improvements are lost in terms of them being not the best to begin with.

It would be like getting your hands on a CD and improving the material it is made from so it is more resistant to scratches... but producing it at a time when others are using flash memory devices with no moving parts and ever increasing capacity.

BTW anybody developing anything is not going to admit it is worse than what is being copied.

The Israeli copy of the Grad rockets could be described as inferior to the original because they modified the design and it has a slightly shorter range.

The Israelis adapted the design by making the warhead heavier and more effective with the result that the range is shorter, so those people fixated with range would say it is inferior... those on the receiving end would likely disagree of course because the purpose of artillery rockets is to kill and do damage, not reach as far as possible.

The Israelis adapted the design by making the warhead heavier and more effective with the result that the range is shorter, so those people fixated with range would say it is inferior... those on the receiving end would likely disagree of course because the purpose of artillery rockets is to kill and do damage, not reach as far as possible.

Before, more range meant less accuracy. Today it is not the case anymore. Most big armies have new howitzers wither more than 40km range and goes up to 70km for last versions and they are much more precise than any grad. With Krasnopol type round they can even hit moving targets so reducing range is not smart.

More range means also you can deal with more targets. And high value targets are always further behind enemy lines. Command post, refueling bases, munition depots on the ground and AWACS, tankers in the air.

Before, more range meant less accuracy. Today it is not the case anymore. Most big armies have new howitzers wither more than 40km range and goes up to 70km for last versions and they are much more precise than any grad. With Krasnopol type round they can even hit moving targets so reducing range is not smart.

More range means also you can deal with more targets. And high value targets are always further behind enemy lines. Command post, refueling bases, munition depots on the ground and AWACS, tankers in the air.

You are missing the point... what if you don't know where the enemy is but you know he has a significant force and it is moving to attack a friendly force.

What if it is an infantry attack on a friendly base and hundreds of enemy fighters are coming in from one side of the base but are not all standing together so you can hit them with one artillery shell?

The purpose of Grad rockets is not to hit this vehicle or that room of a building... it is to rapidly deliver HE and fragments in high concentrations... an enemy force hiding in a forest next to a base... a 152mm gun waiting for target coordinates with its shells... a Grad unit sets 6 aimpoints for its 6 vehicles and then launches a salvo of rockets to cover the forest in fragments and kill or injure as many enemy combatants as possible as quickly as possible... to deliver the same amount of HE the 152mm gun would be firing for days but only the first few rounds would have any effect because when the rest of them arrive the enemy troops will have already found cover so only a direct hit would be effective...

Sometimes some people focus too much on accuracy... when duck shooting you need a scatter gun because that suits the target... no level of accurate rifle would be as good.

I think a lot of people don't appreciate how complicated and high tech modern engines of all types actually are...

Aircraft engines even more so.

Not only are they complex, but require sophisticated manufacturing techniques and some expensive and exotic materials too.

Lots of countries make aircraft... not nearly as many make good engines.

A bit like telescopic sights... only a few countries can make decent quality optics... pretty much anyone can set up a factory to assemble them...

Chinese army doesn't seem to fully trust its industry.