What's new

Chinese Air Force (PLAAF) News & Discussions

It's not blurrred-out. It's auto stealth technology for China haters.:p:


But I'm surely not a China hater !!!

upload_2020-3-4_15-10-34.png


... and even for me it looks like blurred.

Anyway, looks like another Flanker (J-11B or J-15) given the PL-8-pylons.
 
.
deino,
not clear if you're china-hater
but clear you're the only image hog
and NEVER listen to chinese (although very interested in our arms)
you're just among foreigners who never understand china :disagree::disagree::disagree:
 
.
deino,
not clear if you're china-hater
but clear you're the only image hog
and NEVER listen to chinese (although very interested in our arms)
you're just among foreigners who never understand china :disagree::disagree::disagree:

Funny ... indeed I might never fully understand the Chinese way of thinking and I'm also well aware that the PLA plays great game of hiding its secrets but I quite well understand to differ facts from fiction at least as long no proof is given.

Therefore, always to believe everything "that is said" even when facing the exact opposite to what one claims can surely be rated "you will never understand", but on the other side it can also be rated as proof for a "lack of understanding on your behalf" since you only believe what you get told regardless the facts. It could in fact be rated as "a stupid one, who believes everything he get told or what fits his opinion".

So in essence again: While you simply believe the J-11B and J-15 as well as J-10B are operating AESA radars and refuse to proof even in contrast to what others say and in strict contrast to what all images show, I stick to what is know and most probable given other reliable sources ... and to my regret I won't rate you a reliable one.
 
.
Anyone care to explain why this J-10 is using both the airbrakes and the drogue chute but not the canards for slowing down?
I would have thought that the FBW system would automatically have used the large surface area of the canards as very effective airbrakes as is done with all the euro-canards.
What am I missing?

7ef45ee2gy1gcd2kyq6xnj22gw1e0u0z-jpg.610149
 
. . .
J-20, J-16, JL-10, and Su-30MKK
aa725855gy1gcohbfwvxkj219e0q24gl.jpg
aa725855gy1gcohbgec9hj21sl0u04qp.jpg

Via @空军发布 from Weixin and @yankeesama的帧察小队 from Weibo
 
.
The PLAAF has just issued a new guideline for painting aircraft and marking schemes. In an aim to standardize markings and paint schemes to achieve low-visibility all newly produced aircraft are to switch to the new system first, with in-service aircraft repainted in phases.

空军颁发《空军飞机涂装及标识喷涂规定(试行)》 - 中国军网

Air Force issued "Air Force Aircraft Painting and Marking Spraying Provisions (Trial)

http://chinamil.com.cn/jmywyl/2020-03/13/content_9767465.htm

Air Force issued "Air Force Aircraft Painting and Marking Spraying Provisions (Trial)

The People's Liberation Army News Zou Zhaoxia and Duan Jun reported: In order to further focus on actual combat and matchmaking, according to the relevant provisions of the Military Commission, the Air Force has recently issued the "Air Force Aircraft Painting and Logo Spraying Provisions (Trial)" (hereinafter referred to as the "Provisions").

It is reported that the low visibility of aircraft painting and marking in the air is a practical requirement and development trend, and the main purpose is to reduce the probability of visual discovery. The newly issued "Regulations" fully implements the requirement that "painting is also combat effectiveness." In accordance with the principle of "uniformity, standardization, low visibility, and operability," clear requirements have been set for the painting and marking of Air Force aircraft.

The "Draft" drafting team analyzed in-depth domestic and foreign Air Force aircraft painting and marking cases, fully drawing on the opinions of all parties, and ensuring that the "Strict" is scientific, targeted and operable. The "Regulations" are in line with the actual development and construction of Air Force equipment in the current and future periods, and will play an important role in strengthening Air Force aircraft painting and marking management and adapting to actual combat mission requirements.

The "Regulations" have a total of 5 chapters and 16 articles, which clearly require new production combat aircraft to implement low-visibility coating, uniform marking of active service and old aircraft spraying; standardize national flags, "Chinese Air Force", "Red Cross" and other special mission markings and spraying requirements. Since 2020, the "Provisions" have been promoted and implemented in accordance with the thinking of "integrated planning, step-by-step implementation, easy first, then difficult, and progressive advancement."


Maybe similar to those? :-)

JH-7A 69347 - 83. Brig - low viz art.jpg
J-10B 50655 low viz - Cadder.png
Y-20 11051 low viz - Cadder.png
J-11B 32035 low viz - Cadder.png
 
. .
Would J-11B/BS have a white radome?:coffee:

I must admit I don't know ... if they really want to reduce the aircraft's visibility, a new grey radome is IMO a must and even more important than merely putting low-viz. grey PLAAF symbols on the wings
 
.
I must admit I don't know ... if they really want to reduce the aircraft's visibility, a new grey radome is IMO a must and even more important than merely putting low-viz. grey PLAAF symbols on the wings
Do you remember the so-called "J-11BG"?
 
.
Do you remember the so-called "J-11BG"?


Yes for sure ... but I think these new rules shall not only those types with new radars like the J-11BG but also all older J-11As, JH-7s and J-8s with their black radomes.
 
. . . .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom