PLA Air Force General News Thread:

Shenyang J-16 Fighters in the 3rd Aviation Brigade of the PLA Air Force

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1219382.shtml

A PLAAF pilot talking to state Chinese TV, CCTV, about the performans of the J-16. The aircraft is probably one of the better fighter in China but the answers seems a little one sided

China's J-16 multi-role fighter jet is flawless and is much superior to other similar aircraft including, the Su-30, revealed a pilot who has experience flying it as well as other types of aircraft....

In terms of performance, the J-16 is a superior to all types of aircraft I have flown. Speaking of the control capacity of the aircraft, the J-16 is a 3.5 generation plane with huge breakthroughs in radar and fire control systems in comparison with previous aircraft, said Wang Songxi, a flying instructor at the People's Liberation Army Northern Theater Command Air Force...

The J-16 has no flaws, because it is equipped with many types of weapons and can operate under all weather conditions, Wang said....

^ In other words , China's literal Flanker copies are far better than the J-10 or anything that China itself has designed. No surprise there.

The J-16 has no flaws, because it is equipped with many types of weapons and can operate under all weather conditions, Wang said....

Always an advantage of using a proven design as a basis... no hidden vices... it is a very sensible way to move forward... and people who criticise it for just being copying should realise that designing something completely from scratch is difficult and expensive and time consuming and might not even lead to a better product in the end.

When the job is to protect your airspace you don't want to gamble too much.

That drone looks very American, but its design is optimised for specific speeds and altitudes and endurances... it makes sense to use a similar shape if your requirements are even just similar because it makes design and testing quicker and easier and cheaper.

Obviously just copying something you don't need just because America has them is not so smart, but both these drones and this fighter will be very useful for China going forward...

The J-11B and onwards I would say is a real threat for any western fourth generation fighter. Being able to produce the aircraft from scratch without Russias help any more they can produce it in large numbers, with over 400 produced so far.

China must be the largest Flanker user today.

~400 J-11s
75 Su-30MKK
~100 J-16s
~50 J-15s
24 Su-35

= ~650 planes.

China buzing Taiwan waters.

https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3127218/taiwan-reports-largest-ever-incursion-chinese-air

The presence of so many Chinese combat aircraft on Friday’s mission – Taiwan said it was made up of four nuclear-capable H-6K bombers and 10 J-16 fighter planes, among others – was unusual and came as the island’s air force suspended all training missions after two fighter crashes this week.

GarryB wrote:

The J-16 has no flaws, because it is equipped with many types of weapons and can operate under all weather conditions, Wang said....

Always an advantage of using a proven design as a basis... no hidden vices... it is a very sensible way to move forward... and people who criticise it for just being copying should realise that designing something completely from scratch is difficult and expensive and time consuming and might not even lead to a better product in the end.

When the job is to protect your airspace you don't want to gamble too much.

That drone looks very American, but its design is optimised for specific speeds and altitudes and endurances... it makes sense to use a similar shape if your requirements are even just similar because it makes design and testing quicker and easier and cheaper.

Obviously just copying something you don't need just because America has them is not so smart, but both these drones and this fighter will be very useful for China going forward...

Always an advantage of using a proven design as a basis... no hidden vices.

True. Its an intelligent thing to do. But speaking of vices, Russia was entitled to a production license for Chinese Flankers. But they didn't get one.
\

people who criticise it for just being copying should realise that designing something completely from scratch is difficult and expensive and time consuming and might not even lead to a better product in the end.

The Chinese Flankers is a unique case. They are geometrically the exact same. And its a mainline heavy fighter. It would be like India making exact copies of the F-15 unlicensed.

It was a dirty deal that Russia was a good sport about. And it is just in bad taste for China to shill out in the open that their unlicensed Flankers are better than legal Flankers in India or Russia.

The actual J-11 comes from 1987, when China bought 200 Su-27s through Rosoboronexport for US$2.7 billion under a co-production scheme. By the agreement, SAC would assemble aircraft from kits manufactured by Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Plant (KnAPPO), and fit them with Russian subsystems (avionics, radars and engines) which would not be coproduced. Production began in 1989. The first two were poorly assembled and required Russian assistance to rebuild. Five were built by 1990, and another 20 by 2003, by which time production was of high quality and incorporated local airframe parts; Russia did not object to local airframe parts, which allowed KnAPPO to reduce the contents of the kits. By late-2004, KnAPPO delivered 105 kits, and 95 J-11s were delivered to the PLAAF. Coproduction of the Su-27s ended in 2004 because China was discovered to have developed the J-11B - a similar plane with domestic subsystems and designs - in violation of the coproduction agreement.[4][5] China's official reason for violating the agreement was that the J-11 no longer satisfied PLAAF requirements. From 2008 through 2011, China engaged in smuggling Su-27 parts from Russia.[4]

True. Its an intelligent thing to do. But speaking of vices, Russia was entitled to a production license for Chinese Flankers. But they didn't get one.

Indeed, and as a consequence of that is that Russia will be rather selective as to what products it is prepared to sell to China and how much China will have to pay if it wants it.

It was a dirty deal that Russia was a good sport about. And it is just in bad taste for China to shill out in the open that their unlicensed Flankers are better than legal Flankers in India or Russia.

Well China isn't saying that... presumably a Chinese pilot is saying their copy of an old model Flanker is superior to the version they copied... which is to be expected... especially after they have bought newer better models too.

He is not saying the J-16 is better than the Su-35.

China again uses its airforces close to Taiwan. Second time in a few days this has happend.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202103/1219869.shtml

Some 10 PLA aircraft - four J-16 and four J-10 fighter jets, a KJ-500 early warning aircraft and a Y-8 anti-submarine warfare aircraft - entered Taiwan's self-proclaimed southwest air defense identification zone on Monday, with the Y-8 anti-submarine warfare aircraft flying across the Bashi Channel to the southeast to the island before returning, the island's defense authorities said.

And if you put the incidents of China flying near Taiwan next to the incidents of US aircraft flying near other countries borders it would be like a grain of sand next to a mid sized mountain... but lets talk about that grain of sand shall we?

GarryB wrote:And if you put the incidents of China flying near Taiwan next to the incidents of US aircraft flying near other countries borders it would be like a grain of sand next to a mid sized mountain... but lets talk about that grain of sand shall we?  

Well it is the China thread so....

Very true... I am just putting the complaints into perspective.

People always complaine that China is copying F-35 with the J-31, well check out the new South Korean KF-21 fighter....

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/40113/meet-south-koreas-new-kf-21-hawk-indigenous-fighter

China keeps pushing Taiwan. 25 fighters and bombers this time.
Third time in less then a month.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/12/largest-chinese-breach-of-taiwan-air-zone-in-a-year-after-us-warning

Chinese Early Warning radars

walle83 wrote:China keeps pushing Taiwan. 25 fighters and bombers this time.
Third time in less then a month.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/12/largest-chinese-breach-of-taiwan-air-zone-in-a-year-after-us-warning

They can send a lot of the Wing Loong drones to Taiwan. These are numerous and cheap to operate. Plus, if they shoot down a drone that means war, giving China the carte blanche to take Taiwan which China lays claim to.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1367123688924053506

American propagandists Alert 5 claim that its China's air force that is being ground down by these incursions and not Taiwans lol. They also say that the engines in the Chinese fighters last 1/4th as long as US engines. I'm not even sure if these are Russian or Chinese engines but it won't matter to them. They will still say that the US's last 4x as long either way.

They say China's mission capable rate is only 60%. I wonder how they would know this.

https://twitter.com/alert5/status/1381976585746538499?s=19

They will say anything. Question has to be asked about the validity of claims.

Backman wrote:American propagandists Alert 5 claim that its China's air force that is being ground down by these incursions and not Taiwans lol. They also say that the engines in the Chinese fighters last 1/4th as long as US engines. I'm not even sure if these are Russian or Chinese engines but it won't matter to them. They will still say that the US's last 4x as long either way.

They say China's mission capable rate is only 60%. I wonder how they would know this.

https://twitter.com/alert5/status/1381976585746538499?s=19

Propaganda.

They can send a lot of the Wing Loong drones to Taiwan. These are numerous and cheap to operate. Plus, if they shoot down a drone that means war, giving China the carte blanche to take Taiwan which China lays claim to.

Shooting down a drone in international airspace would be an interesting proposition as to whether is was an act of war or not... one could argue it was a danger to civilian air traffic and had to be destroyed for safety reasons.

The obvious solution would be to claim it entered Taiwan airspace and was a danger to air traffic so it was destroyed... I don't think even the US would use that as a justification for war... and they are the most trigger happy.

I'm not even sure if these are Russian or Chinese engines but it won't matter to them. They will still say that the US's last 4x as long either way.

They say China's mission capable rate is only 60%. I wonder how they would know this.

They have a cheek, considering engine lifespans for F-35s is another issue isn't it... certainly the airframe is supposed to be 8 thousand hours and most are achieving 2,500 at best.

Perhaps they calculate Chinas mission capable rate by taking the F-35s mission capable rate and multiplying it by 600... doesn't mean they are right... and I suspect they are not trying to be right.

They are fighting a war and it is more important to win than to be right or wrong.

GarryB wrote:

They can send a lot of the Wing Loong drones to Taiwan. These are numerous and cheap to operate. Plus, if they shoot down a drone that means war, giving China the carte blanche to take Taiwan which China lays claim to.

Shooting down a drone in international airspace would be an interesting proposition as to whether is was an act of war or not... one could argue it was a danger to civilian air traffic and had to be destroyed for safety reasons.

Drones typically don't fly as high as civilian airliners. Typically no more than 2 km. Below the clouds when they do recon so EO is not obstructed by cloud.

Civilian air traffic includes civilian air traffic of all types... ie cessnas and even drones...

Unauthorised foreign drones that don't follow local air control authority could be deemed a risk to civilian and military air traffic and ordered to be brought down for safety reasons.

I remember there was a Balloon race in the 1990s or 2000s where a Balloon drifted into Eastern Europe and I think was shot down by a Czech Hind.

The crew were killed and Air Force Magazine did an article on the evil Czech air force and why did they murder and obviously unarmed manned aircraft.

The following month (monthly magazine) there was a letter from the pilot of the helicopter published that countered the previous article saying things like they tried to communicate and got no response and that it appeared to be unmanned and was floating into a congested bit of civilian airspace.

The original article asked why they had to blow it out of the sky with a burst of HMG fire, but as the pilot pointed out the 12.7mm four barrel gatling can't fire single shots. He said he directed a very short burst into the balloon and it just disintegrated and plummeted down to earth.

H-6K bomber which has EO turret