ShengYang J-16, China's "bomb truck"

[帅的一匹]

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here.

1. No Chinese Flanker will export. Granted, this agreement between Russia and China is not legally-binding, but given the existing market (the PLAAF) and the relative low importance Beijing places on exports, this rule will hold for now.

2. The J-16 is a multirole strike fighter in the same league as the F-15SG, albeit with secondary air-to-air capabilities.

3. The "best" air superiority fighter (aside from the 5th generation) will be the J-11D

thats a shame.

 

[_NOBODY_]

Hi,

I understood that----. The utility of a heavy strike aircraft is totally different than that of an F16 in certain areas----.

Right now China should make a deal with Russia that either let us sell our Flankers to Pakistan or you should sell Su-35 to Pakistan but its maintenance should be done through us and let them integrate our and their weapons on Su-35. We need to replace 190 fighters by 2020 and JH-7B can't replace any of our fighters. JH-7B does provide deep penetration into enemy's territory but it can't provide air superiority. PAF requires multi-role fighters and that is why I prefer Flanker over JH-7B.
@The Eagle @Quwa @Bilal Khan 777

 

[Deino]

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here.

1. No Chinese Flanker will export. Granted, this agreement between Russia and China is not legally-binding, but given the existing market (the PLAAF) and the relative low importance Beijing places on exports, this rule will hold for now.
...

Like I also said so often, a few simply do not - or cannot - understand !
Their desire on the PLA's latest toys for the PAF at best for free against all contracts and political considerations is soo huge ...

Anyway, let them dream on.

Deino

 

[MastanKhan]

Right now China should make a deal with Russia that either let us sell our Flankers to Pakistan or you should sell Su-35 to Pakistan but its maintenance should be done through us and let them integrate our and their weapons on Su-35. We need to replace 190 fighters by 2020 and JH-7B can't replace any of our fighters. JH-7B does provide deep penetration into enemy's territory but it can't provide air superiority. PAF requires multi-role fighters and that is why I prefer Flanker over JH-7B.
@The Eagle @Quwa @Bilal Khan 777

Hi,

The JH7B can provide air superiority thru its Growler type capabilites---. It can be used as a wild weasel to suppress enemy missile batteries---.

Air superiority is just not doing 9 G's---climbing straight up and have a plethora of missiles to launch---. There is an old gunfighter saying in the U S---the one who draws second---draws the quickest---and it is not in the quick draw that gets you the victory---it is the placement of the SHOT that makes the difference.


Its ability to fly longer distances with a heavy load---will spread the enemy's equipment wide & thin---which will take assets away from the primary battle zone---thus reducing the pressure on the center and diverting its attention elsewhere---.

In the second world war or every other war---the opponet would spend large amounts of money to fool the enemy into moving its assets away from the primary battle field.

In the war agsinst Khwarzim Shah--- Genghis Khan devised a tactic to take away the muslim cavalry away from the main army which was on foot. The cavalry was taken on a wild goose chase and decimated----. What was left was infantry---when cornered into a tight spot---it did not have the mobility of the mongol cavalry and was thus annihilated---even though the mongols were lesser in numbers.

A war is just not a 9 G turn from an F16 and neither it is superiority in a WVR dog fight---.

It is all about having the RIGHT assets and their utilization in a proper manner.

 

[_NOBODY_]

Hi,

The JH7B can provide air superiority thru its Growler type capabilites---. It can be used as a wild weasel to suppress enemy missile batteries---.

Air superiority is just not doing 9 G's---climbing straight up and have a plethora of missiles to launch---. There is an old gunfighter saying in the U S---the one who draws second---draws the quickest---and it is not in the quick draw that gets you the victory---it is the placement of the SHOT that makes the difference.


Its ability to fly longer distances with a heavy load---will spread the enemy's equipment wide & thin---which will take assets away from the primary battle zone---thus reducing the pressure on the center and diverting its attention elsewhere---.

In the second world war or every other war---the opponet would spend large amounts of money to fool the enemy into moving its assets away from the primary battle field.

In the war agsinst Khwarzim Shah--- Genghis Khan devised a tactic to take away the muslim cavalry away from the main army which was on foot. The cavalry was taken on a wild goose chase and decimated----. What was left was infantry---when cornered into a tight spot---it did not have the mobility of the mongol cavalry and was thus annihilated---even though the mongols were lesser in numbers.

A war is just not a 9 G turn from an F16 and neither it is superiority ion a WVR dog fight---.

It is all about having the RIGHT assets and their utilization in a proper manner.

PAF requires their every fighter to be multi-role and its air superiority capabilities should include both WVR and BVR capabilities that is why PAF loves Typhoon. J-16D is an electronic warfare variant of J-16. Operating one 5th generation fighter platform is equal to operating almost two 4/4++ generation platform since stealth fighter have expensive maintenance cost. So right now PAF is operating 4 platforms and two of them will be retired and one new platform would arrive which is known as J-31, now there is a place for one other platform which would be 4++ generation fighter. As a strike fighter can you compare Su-35, J-16 and JH-7B ? In my opinion the air superiority capabilities of J-16 and Su-35 are far beyond of JH-7B as JH-7B can only be used for BVR combat. As far as dealing with enemy's SAM batteries is concern that would be the job of J-31.
@The Eagle @Quwa

 

[MastanKhan]

PAF requires their every fighter to be multi-role and its air superiority capabilities should include both WVR and BVR capabilities that is why PAF loves Typhoon. J-16D is an electronic warfare variant of J-16. Operating one 5th generation fighter platform is equal to operating almost two 4/4++ generation platform since stealth fighter have expensive maintenance cost. So right now PAF is operating 4 platforms and two of them will be retired and one new platform would arrive which is known as J-31, now there is a place for one other platform which would be 4++ generation fighter. As a strike fighter can you compare Su-35, J-16 and JH-7B ? In my opinion the air superiority capabilities of J-16 and Su-35 are far beyond of JH-7B as JH-7B can only be used for BVR combat. As far as dealing with enemy's SAM batteries is concern that would be the job of J-31.
@The Eagle @Quwa

Hi,

You have not understood my post at all---. You need to read it again---if you want me to respond---answer the concerns on those points.

You are just answering in general terms----every major weapons systems has a utility and function---I have clarified how the utility needs to be used and the outcome---.

 

[_NOBODY_]

Hi,

You have not understood my post at all---. You need to read it again---if you want me to respond---answer the concerns on those points.

You are just answering in general terms----every major weapons systems has a utility and function---I have clarified how the utility needs to be used and the outcome---.

Sir I would love to have a cup of tea with you.
I completely understand your post, if JH-7B is used properly it can cause havoc on the enemy as you have mentioned but what puzzles me is that can't Flankers provide the same ability ?

 

[RAMPAGE]

Their desire on the PLA's latest toys for the PAF at best for free against all contracts and political considerations is soo huge ...

I beg your pardon? What gives you the impression that we desire free toys from China?

 

[MastanKhan]

Sir I would love to have a cup of tea with you.
I completely understand your post, if JH-7B is used properly it can cause havoc on the enemy as you have mentioned but what puzzles me is that can't Flankers provide the same ability ?

Hi,

Yes they can---but the JH7B is a dedicated strike aircraft---. It is the closest thing that you can do to get to the F111 Aardvark--and it is the least expensive as well.

A used refurbished and upgraded with an aesa may run about 20 million dollars. Plus you have all the weapons that you may need for this air craft in stock. With the SU---you will have to get a new stock pile.

Plus it is totally sanction proof and the EASIEST to get. A 10000 kg is a lots of bomb load---.

With this aircraft---you can go out and hit the enemy from both flanks---right now---you got nothing to hit the enemy flanks with----.

Because of our geography---the enemy has to converge at a narrow place to overpower us---which means that with its current resources----its flanks are open to strikes with standoff weapons---.

Hurt the flanks bad enough and the enemy power will fall back to cover its vulnerable areas---.

I would also go the next step up as well. Maybe the H6 bomber as well---. I remember clearly when the british were retiring the bombers some 8-10 years ago---I read an article from a retd RAF officer stating that was the best option for paf to procure as it did not have any bombers---he was surprised why the paf did not jump on it.

You can build specialized Babur cruise missiles for these strike aircraft---. The beauty of this option is that you don't have ONE STATIC LAUNCH SIGHT----you have a million and one way points that you could launch these missiles from a standoff distance---and the enemy would be kept guessing would from which direction the missiles are coming from.

Why do we settle for a 300 KM Hatf 8---why not a air launched 1000-1500 +++ KM Babur cruise missile.

 

[_NOBODY_]

Hi,

Yes they can---but the JH7B is a dedicated strike aircraft---. It is the closest thing that you can do to get to the F111 Aardvark--and it is the least expensive as well.

A used refurbished and upgraded with an aesa may run about 20 million dollars. Plus you have all the weapons that you may need for this air craft in stock. With the SU---you will have to get a new stock pile.

Plus it is totally sanction proof and the EASIEST to get. A 10000 kg is a lots of bomb load---.

With this aircraft---you can go out and hit the enemy from both flanks---right now---you got nothing to hit the enemy flanks with----.

Because of our geography---the enemy has to converge at a narrow place to overpower us---which means that with its current resources----its flanks are open to strikes with standoff weapons---.

Hurt the flanks bad enough and the enemy power will fall back to cover its vulnerable areas---.

I would also go the next step up as well. Maybe the H6 bomber as well---. I remember clearly when the british were retiring the bombers some 8-10 years ago---I read an article from a retd RAF officer stating that was the best option for paf to procure as it did not have any bombers---he was surprised why the paf did not jump on it.

You can build specialized Babur cruise missiles for these strike aircraft---. The beauty of this option is that you don't have ONE STATIC LAUNCH SIGHT----you have a million and one way points that you could launch these missiles from a standoff distance---and the enemy would be kept guessing would from which direction the missiles are coming from.

Why do we settle for a 300 KM Hatf 8---why not a air launched 1000-1500 +++ KM Babur cruise missile.

HD-6 would be a game changer and it is the electronic warfare variant of H-6. A combo of J-31 and H-6 can be very fearsome, J-31 would destroy enemy's air defenses and H-6 would completely obliterate the ground forces within our airspace.

As for a Growler type aircraft we can have an electronic warfare variant of J-31 since in my opinion it is better to have an electronic warfare variant of a multi-role fighter rather than of a dedicated role fighter.

I still prefer Flankers over JH-7B. We can ask Russians with the help of China to let us integrate our and Chinese weapons in it. If we agree to give them access to CPEC then Russia would happily allow us to integrate Chinese and our weapons and they would even allow us to maintain these Flankers through China due to which we would be able to afford their maintenance easily. Unlike JH-7B Flankers(Su-35) have outstanding air superiority capabilities. Strike role fighters should be very fast and Su-35 is faster than JH-7B. Lets suppose that JH-7B went on a strike mission and enemy has a surprise air defenses system then JH-7B would be very vulnerable so it requires back up such as JF-17 as a distraction but Flankers don't since they can easily dodge missiles with their thrust vectoring especially Su-35 since it has three dimensional thrust vectoring.
@Quwa @The Eagle

 

[Deino]

Guys ... I close this tread until some get back to reality and back on topic !

What You are discussing here are the wildest dreams of what the PAF should acquire or purchase even if some seem to have lost all sense of reality: begging for H-6 bombers, JH-7B or J-16, the integration of Pakistani weapons into these Chinese types by the Russians or whatever is first well beyond any sense of reality and second completely off-topic.

If You want to continue this discussion please start a new thread in the PAF-section, but this section is related to Chinese systems and not fan-boys wet-dreams.

Thread closed and will be cleaned later.

Deino