What's new

Could China's J-10 Fighter Kill the Best from Japan's Air Force?

Kyle Mizokami

rtx1vjgk.jpg


If on the other hand the J-10 could get in close, the infra-red search and track capability will give the Chinese fighter an advantage in short-range fights. The F-2 has no IRST.

Both the J-10 and F-2 have their advantages and disadvantages. At long ranges, the F-2 would eat the J-10 alive. At short ranges, the tables turn. The long-range battle comes first though, and the F-2’s advantage could be enough to end the fight before both sides enter visual range. In the end, the F-2 comes out ahead in this duel of fighters.

The rivalry between Japan and China over islands in the East China Sea has triggered close encounters between the two sides in the air. Chinese fighters have intercepted Japanese aircraft patrolling the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands to China), resulting in Japanese fighters being scrambled to intercept.

These aerial encounters in the Western Pacific highlight the People’s Liberation Army Air Force and the Japan Air Self Defense Force. China’s Su-27 and J-11 air superiority fighters are well known to outsiders, as are Japan’s equivalent, the F-15J Eagle.




Less well known are the single-engine multi-role fighters that back up their large, twin-engined cousins. China’s J-10 “Vigorous Dragon”, the first modern Chinese multi-role fighter, was introduced in 2005. An improved variant, the J-10B, has already entered service. Japan’s F-2 multi-role fighter entered service in 2000.

The Mistubishi F-2 fighter is the result of the FSX program, a joint Japanese-American project to develop a multi-role fighter. Both the F/A-18 Hornet and the F-16 Fighting Falcon were proposed as a baseline, with the F-16 eventually winning out. At the time, the FSX program was controversial as many in the U.S. Congress feared transferring advanced fighter technology to Japan.

Officially, the J-10 is the creation of the Chengdu Aircraft Design Group. Unofficially, it too has roots in an American aerospace program. The J-10 bears a striking resemblance to the joint American-Israeli Lavi fighter. Also based on the F-16, the Lavi was eventually canceled due to cost and political concerns. In 1987, the Office of Naval Intelligence stated that China had received Lavi—and thus American—technology, a conclusion shared with Jane’s.

A joint collaboration between Mitsubishi and Lockheed, the F-2 took the basic F-16 design and enlarged it. The aircraft includes a 25% larger wing area, GE F110 engine, and Japan’s J/APG-1, the world’s first active electronic scanning array radar installed on a fighter. It is armed with the Mitsubishi AAM-3 and AAM-5 infra-red guided air-to-air missiles (similar to the AIM-9 Sidewinder) and the AAM-4 radar-guided air-to-air missile (similar to the AIM-7 Sparrow.) The F-2 is also tasked with the anti-invasion mission, and is capable of carrying up to four ASM-2 anti-ship missiles. An M61 20-millimeter gatling gun rounds out the F-2’s armament.

Despite this, the aircraft is generally regarded as a failure. The per unit cost of the F-2 was a staggering $171 million dollars, more than four times that of an F-16C Block 50/52. Needless to say the F-2 was not four times as effective as the F-16. The lone upshot of the F-2 was the opportunity it gave Japan’s aerospace industry to work on a fighter program.

The J-10 fighter is a delta wing design, powered by Russian-made Saturn-Lyulka AL-31 afterburning turbofan engines. The aircraft is equipped with a Type 1473H pulse-doppler radar, and has 11 hard points for weapons and external fuel tanks. For air to air combat, the J-10 carries PL-9 infra-red guided air-to-air missiles and PL-12 radar guided missiles, and the Russian GSh-23 23-millimeter cannon. It can also carry a variety of laser and satellite-guided bombs.

All of that is very good, but which would win? At 520 miles, the F-2 has a better combat radius than the J-10, which is estimated at 340 miles. Assuming the two planes meet each other operating at equal distances from base, this would give the F-2 pilot slightly more fuel to maneuver and spend on speed. The J-10 also has an older design pulse-doppler radar to the F-2’s more modern AESA radar, so the F-2 would probably detect the J-10 first. The two planes are roughly the same weight, but the F-2 has a slightly better thrust to weight ratio.

All in all, the F-2 has the advantage.

The story doesn’t end there, though. Both countries are upgrading the J-10 and F-2. China has already started production of the J-10B. The B model features an improved engine, the AL-31FN, with improved thrust and range. Further improvements include a phased-array radar and infra-red search and track (IRST) for short-range air-to-air engagements.

In the case of Japan F-2 production has already ceased, so the emphasis is on upgrading existing planes. The F-2 is receiving new data links and a new radar, the J/APG-2, which will be mated with the AAM-4B air to air missile. The AAM-4B is currently the only missile in the world with its own AESA radar. The after-launch target lock capability of the AAM-4B allows pilots to launch the missile and begin evasive maneuvers before achieving radar lock.

Japan’s F-2 would have the advantage in long-range fights, being able to launch AAM-4B missiles from beyond visual range and then “turn and burn” in retreat. Thanks to their data links, F-2 units will be able to coordinate these long-range launches for maximum effect. Although China’s new phased array radar may be good, Japan’s long experience in radars means it’s safe to assume that the Japanese radar is better. J-10s might take serious losses in a scrape with the F-2 before they can even engage the enemy.

If on the other hand the J-10 could get in close, the infra-red search and track capability will give the Chinese fighter an advantage in short-range fights. The F-2 has no IRST.


Both the J-10 and F-2 have their advantages and disadvantages. At long ranges, the F-2 would eat the J-10 alive. At short ranges, the tables turn. The long-range battle comes first though, and the F-2’s advantage could be enough to end the fight before both sides enter visual range. In the end, the F-2 comes out ahead in this duel of fighters.

Kyle Mizokami is a defense and national security writer based in San Francisco who has appeared in The Diplomat, Foreign Policy, War is Boring and The Daily Beast. In 2009 he cofounded the defense and security blog Japan Security Watch. You can follow him on Twitter:mad:KyleMizokami.

This appeared several years ago and is being reposted due to reader interest.

Image Credit: Reuters.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...r-kill-the-best-japans-air-force-21658?page=2

Full of biased writting. What you expect from a Japanese writing about their own plane? J-10 win both BVR and WVR. J-10 wins hand down. F-2 problematic AESA is well known. It performance infact is even worst than a modern Doppler pulse radar.
 
Last edited:
.
''These aerial encounters in the Western Pacific highlight the People’s Liberation Army Air Force and the Japan Air Self Defense Force. China’s Su-27 and J-11 air superiority fighters are well known to outsiders, as are Japan’s equivalent, the F-15J Eagle.''

Well if that's the case then SU-30MKK are said to be much more capable, which was repeatedly locked by the J-10A during maneuvers.

Chinese-J-10A-Fighter-Jet-Locks-on-SU-30MKK2-Flanker-During-Exercise-2.jpg
 
.
I will repeat what I have always said on this forum...

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours.

And cheating is allowed.

Since every weapon has its strengths and weaknesses, you win by somehow having your opponent fight under your strengths, not by him over your weaknesses.

This is a double-edged sword, meaning most likely he knows the same statement like you do.

The article made it clear...

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...-fighter-kill-the-best-japans-air-force-21658
Both the J-10 and F-2 have their advantages and disadvantages.
The fact that the aircrafts are physically distinct from each other means innately, there are advantages one has that the other does not.

If you have a longer reach radar than your opponent, that is a rule.

If your turn rate is greater than his, that is a rule.

If your climb rate is greater than his, that is a rule.

If you are visually smaller than him, that is a rule.

And so on...

So in terms of physical dimensions, nobody looks forward to a fight, even a simulated one, against an F-16. That is a rule that we in the Viper community exploit to the max. We fly low where it is difficult to acquire us with radar and human eyes. We go head-on where it is difficult to discern us from background.

But there are also situations where one side will be able to exploit its rules before the other can.

The long-range battle comes first though,...
This is true.

With radar, he who sees first has the first advantage. By virtue of fighter A can see fighter B before fighter B can see fighter A, fighter B is at immediate disadvantage. He is fighting under his opponent's rule.

There is an old saying in aerial combat: Lose sight, lose fight.

No pilot is going sacrifice his advantages, especially when it is given to him by the environment, just for a fair fight. For a combat pilot, nothing is more terrifying than your radar warning receiver ( RWR ) telling you there is a strong radar signal in your six ( rear ). It is almost panic inducing. In peacetime training, such an inferior condition will have you buy the rounds at the bar, but in a real war, you will most likely be dead.

The long-range battle comes first BECAUSE of the first sight advantage.
 
.
I wonder how much old the article under discussion is as it is now mentioned every where that latest versions of J10 are more stealthier and have AESA radar, even pics of new BVRs are also appearing having longer range.

Moreover after refueling option the disadvantage of limited war radius can be overcome.

Hope that future comparisons shall be based upon latest info.
 
. .
@gambit

Having said what you said on your last post.

What are your thoughts on the J-10 as it compares to the F-16?

BTW, just wanted to say you are a REAL ASSET to this forum.
 
.
''These aerial encounters in the Western Pacific highlight the People’s Liberation Army Air Force and the Japan Air Self Defense Force. China’s Su-27 and J-11 air superiority fighters are well known to outsiders, as are Japan’s equivalent, the F-15J Eagle.''

Well if that's the case then SU-30MKK are said to be much more capable, which was repeatedly locked by the J-10A during maneuvers.

Chinese-J-10A-Fighter-Jet-Locks-on-SU-30MKK2-Flanker-During-Exercise-2.jpg

oh windy, J 10 better than Su 30, better than Rafale, better than EFT.
 
.
It's too far,J11B VS F15 is more likely.
 
.
My genuine opinion is that it all depends more on one who is in control of the bird than the bird itself. :)
How long will we third world countries hide behind this man behind machine mindset to cover up our ill equipped huge armies and lack of innovative technologies by our Industry man.
I am literally sick of this idea. We keep purchasing knocked off systems lacking in our own innovations and sparing our defense industry of criticism.
I mean Imagine what is LCA or JF17 against the class of Gripen, F16 blk52?
Hell what does Export market Flankers compare to Russian flankers?
And we give aways huge chunk of our budget to defence industry on cost of wel being of public. Still we Third World Country folks are happy with "56 Inch ki Chati" and "Zore Bazu e Mard e Momin" Propaganda.
 
.
Desert storm is a 25 years ago battle where AESA, real time feed info ,high speed data link is not available. Most BVRAAM are quite short range. Kill and no escape zone is quite limited.

Now 2017 , it will be a different ball.
certainly,
but mock combat is different than real combat
BVR is being vigorously "Tested"
its application .............. its successful application is yet to be seen

a BVRAAM can be detected earlier giving more time to pilots for counter measures
even their lethality without pilot using countermeasure is yet to be brought to satisfactory point........... all in all for air superiority WVR is still a the main thing.
 
.
certainly,
but mock combat is different than real combat
BVR is being vigorously "Tested"
its application .............. its successful application is yet to be seen

a BVRAAM can be detected earlier giving more time to pilots for counter measures
even their lethality without pilot using countermeasure is yet to be brought to satisfactory point........... all in all for air superiority WVR is still a the main thing.

Well, Pakistan's whole strategy against SU-30 relies on BVR. But there is a gap that we can take advantage of: size. The flanker's large size and no stealth make it vulnerable.

On the other hand, the J-10 and F-2 are both medium weight fighters, so radar tactics will make a lot of difference. If J-10 can get past the radar, it will be a test of pilot skill. And Chinese are masters of cyber warfare.

So, that adds what to the discussion? Clearly, one would not add expensive kit to a fighter and then not train yur pilots how to use is. Besides, you don't think Japanese pilots train WVR combat?

If you re-read the article, their tactics are shoot and scoot. It makes sense given not many of these expensive fighters were procured in the first place. This is a recipe for failure. If these are the tactics they practice, adding IRST won't help much.
 
.
Well, Pakistan's whole strategy against SU-30 relies on BVR. But there is a gap that we can take advantage of: size. The flanker's large size and no stealth make it vulnerable.

On the other hand, the J-10 and F-2 are both medium weight fighters, so radar tactics will make a lot of difference. If J-10 can get past the radar, it will be a test of pilot skill. And Chinese are masters of cyber warfare.



If you re-read the article, their tactics are shoot and scoot. It makes sense given not many of these expensive fighters were procured in the first place. This is a recipe for failure. If these are the tactics they practice, adding IRST won't help much.

The article is simplistic and likely inaccurate.
 
.
Well, Pakistan's whole strategy against SU-30 relies on BVR. But there is a gap that we can take advantage of: size. The flanker's large size and no stealth make it vulnerable.

On the other hand, the J-10 and F-2 are both medium weight fighters, so radar tactics will make a lot of difference. If J-10 can get past the radar, it will be a test of pilot skill. And Chinese are masters of cyber warfare.
detection and lock-on are two different things entirely
thats where AWACS come into play ........
well i think most of our aerial strategy (given our assets) is interception
i.e defensive
however both flanker and viper are well regarded for WVR
 
.
J-10b cost 27M USD /bird
F-2 cost 171M USD /bird
You can have 5-6 j-10 in price of 1 F-2
Of course j-10 wins
 
.
If you re-read the article, their tactics are shoot and scoot. It makes sense given not many of these expensive fighters were procured in the first place. This is a recipe for failure. If these are the tactics they practice, adding IRST won't help much.
Try not to shift the topic from aircraft to pilot training.
Clearly, if you a piece of kit that gives ou new possibilities in combat, you modify your tactics accordingly. Why do you assume the JASDF wouldn't? It is just silly.

If you're trying to figure out which country is considered to have the best fighter pilots, and rank countries accordingly the answer is simple: the country that gives its pilots the most hours and best training will have the best fighter pilots.
JASDF is surely in the top 10.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom