Why J-10C repeatly defeat J-16 in Chinese air war game?

[SD 10]

Seems like more disappointment from Pakistanis than happiness with J-10C instead of F-16V being received by Pakistan airforce.

nah its just a bunch of fanboys..... pakistanis are more than happy......

 

[jupiter2007]

Seems like more disappointment from Pakistanis than happiness with J-10C instead of F-16V being received by Pakistan airforce.

Decisions were made based on ground realities

 

[leviathan]

The reported suggested exchange was much higher than 1:3.5 it was around 1 J-20 defeating many dozens of 4th generation fighters, or in Chinese nomenclature, 3rd generation fighters. I recall the reason of limit given as eventually being overwhelmed but those exchange ratios are allowing the 5th gen to not become saturated and makes lots of assumptions such as returning for refuel and reloading which in war is not always the case. However in perfect world, 5th gen clearly dominated.

This result was the initial tests of J-20 against 4th generations around 2018, reported later around 2020. Then the 4th gen teams developed counters. Basically the whole timeline was like first it was doubted how much more effective 5th gen was by PLAAF and then when they had J-20 in service and ran exercises, they realized the Americans were accurate about how much better 5th gen is. The reports and leaks made it sound like it troubled PLAAF a little bit because before that they still believed air combat is okay to just use 4th gen even against 5th gen. It just required better detection and targeting methods which PLA and PLAAF have invested heavily in ever since F117 was revealed.

I remember one leak then said continuous training against 5th gen made the 4th gen teams develop some better tactics against 5th gen even though the exchange was still heavily in favor of 5th gen. Part of the point of J-20 is also to improve the 4th generation fighters and how they operate against 5th gen fighters. They got the ratio down from 1 to several dozens to something a little bit more favorable but I can't remember if they ever gave a range.

As for J-10C defeating J-16 in last several Golden Helmet exercises, this is suggested as because J-16 RCS is quite large even with some effort to reduce it the engine is exposed. J-10C often detected J-16 well before J-16 found J-10C - said to be over 200km J-10C detected J-16 and took positions to attack them and make better use of terrain and J-16 vectors.

J-10C has quite low RCS actually a lower than Super Hornet and roughly Rafale's. Basically they are small RCS if clean and otherwise when armed it is just the missiles and pylons on its wings that contribute mostly to RCS. J-16 could not find J-10C at over 200km range. J-10C makes use of PL-15 and basically the exponential RCS to detection nature of the fight means J-10C exploit positions and available fuel much more efficiently and would fire first rounds at 200km and then reposition for better second and third rounds of missiles at J-16. J-16 can only realize the fight when those J-10C were found and assumed the missiles are in the air before active to avoid and by then J-10C is in better position and second rounds are on the way and third rounds nearly being fired. Overall that is just enough advantage to ensure J-10C victory overall in enough tries.

Both in close range probably depends totally on the pilot but the J-10C is the king of dogfight in PLAAF I guess after Su-35. J-16 is multirole but more attack fighter than pure dogfighter due to less fuel than single seater flanker and also much more weight than single seater flanker. It also carries a lot of heavy electronic equipment.

These reason make it quite unsurprising J-10C takes the crown during 4th gen Golden Helmet exercises since it participated. Before that, J-10A and J-10B did not fare as well as J-11B and J-16 but J-10C has improved a lot over J-10A in BVR.

Pretty good analysis for why J-10C can beat J-16. But keep in mind, this is just a 2 v 2 air combat exercise under a fair condition. In reality, ASW will be there for detecting long range targets... J-16 can easily carry 10 pl15 + 4 pl10 + a jammer and it will smoke J-10c under ASW guide...

 

[serenity]

Pretty good analysis for why J-10C can beat J-16. But keep in mind, this is just a 2 v 2 air combat exercise under a fair condition. In reality, ASW will be there for detecting long range targets... J-16 can easily carry 10 pl15 + 4 pl10 + a jammer and it will smoke J-10c under ASW guide...

You're right sort of but it's also not so simple because it would be a distance exchange pattern that depends far more on RCS and detection than it does on missile payload.

So with J-16 it does however make a goal by fielding a very powerful and advanced AESA radar as well. It is however the oldest AESA of PLAAF. Basically with phased array fighter radar in PLAAF it was J-10B's unknown whether it is actually PESA or AESA since there are many discussions on that and it is actually impossible to tell from available information for certain. Then J-16's following that, J-11D's and J-10C's different AESAs but of the same generation level which is one above J-10B's and J-16's, and then J-20's.

J-16's AESA is still far more powerful than J-10C's and it is at most one to 1.5 generation behind J-10C's. J-10C has very low RCS for non-stealth fighter, roughly around Rafale's RCS due to smaller size and frontal area, DSI intakes, and dedicated RCS reduction design when J-10A was redesigned to B and C versions.

So the question is whether J-16 can maintain a good lock on J-10C at around 100km. If we assume PL-15's 90%+ kill range is 75km or less, then J-10C would easily have annoyed J-16 and forced it into defensive maneuvers around 150 to 100km range and then taken much better positions to engage them. If J-16 can detect J-10C at around 100km for firm lock, it does not guarantee kill with PL-15 at all and requires another 25km closing or so. Assuming by then J-10C is down to last two PL-15 after shooting 4, it is at least in much better position since it has only at most faced one wave of missiles from J-16 fired from around 100km away. This is easy to defend against and here in this position, J-10C in vastly superior positions dictating how they engage since they found J-16 at least 100km more away (200km away since J-16 has huge RCS still) and J-16 has faced and defended already against 2 waves of J-10C's missiles.

PLAAF would do exercises and training in the form you suggested. With EW and with and without support and AWACS. J-10C simply has advantage due to J-16's large RCS and J-10's small RCS. If playing field in AWACS supported environment makes the detection and positioning all even, then yes J-16 has massive energy and payload advantage and one J-16 is roughly equal to two J-10C in such circumstances. But also much more expensive to operate and maintain and buy so on. Which is why both are hi-lo combined use. For most purposes an airforce faces, something like a single engine fighter reduces the cost of operation so much you do need a lot of them. Look at the difference in F-15 and F-16 numbers in USAF from 1980s to now. It becomes clear the single engine is actually more combat effective but useful in for example 70% of cases where redundancy is there but for the rest 30% you do need to spend the extra money for the hi tier.

 

[Trango Towers]

Of course. But the J16 will sacrifice some of its air combat capabilities for multi-purpose capabilities. The simplest example is the backseat pilot and his equipment. This will affect the flight performance of the J16. This is why J11B can beat J16 in air combat. However, in a large air battle, the J16's high-powered electronics and dual pilots will take advantage. Multirole fighters have no advantage in solo combat, but have a huge advantage in battler-level operations.

Oh please .... what nonsense

 

[Song Hong]

J10C is semi stealth very much due to the
1. DSI air intake.
2. the canopy is gold coated (RAM coated)

You can see from the image. There are several notable improvements, but with this 2, J10C can see J16 far earlier.

 

[Shotgunner51]

J10C is semi stealth very much due to the
1. DSI air intake.
2. the canopy is gold coated (RAM coated)

The golden tint on the canopy (same can be seen on J-20) is likely due to ITO (Indium Tin Oxide) electroconductive film coating embedded between the layers of optical glass. It serves to scatter radio waves in various directions so as not to be detected by radar, and act as electromagnetic wave shield preventing harmful electromagnetic waves from invading into cabin except for visible radiation.

 

[Song Hong]

The golden tint on the canopy (same can be seen on J-20) is likely due to ITO (Indium Tin Oxide) electroconductive film coating. It serves to scatter radio waves in various directions so as not to be detected by radar, and act as electromagnetic wave shield property preventing harmful electromagnetic waves from invading into cabin except for visible radiation.

View attachment 808221

I know gold is a good material for RAM, but I have not research on what China is using. Could be the material you suggest. The canopy has a very big RCS. Those radar engineers knows it. The RAM plating reduces lots of radar echo.

 

[Shotgunner51]

I know gold is a good material for RAM, but I have not research on what China is using. Could be the material you suggest. The canopy has a very big RCS. Those radar engineers knows it. The RAM plating reduces lots of radar echo.

Yes it's a tech that helps lower RCS.

 

[CrazyZ]

Flankers designed purpose during the cold war war was to intercept USA bomber AC over long distances. Flankers only got used for front line combat because the Mig-29 was a disappointment. Larger fighter AC are vulnerable to light fighter AC in front line skirmishes. This has been shown in numerous past conflicts. Armed with modern munitions and data links......light fighter AC are being more potent in air superiority missions.

 

[lcloo]

J10C has combat radius of 1,240km or 2,600km with mid-air refueling (data from manufacturer AVIC on J10CE). Below maps show 1,240km combat radius from Lahore and Karachi, with-out mid-air refueling.

 

[luciferdd]

Flankers designed purpose during the cold war war was to intercept USA bomber AC over long distances. Flankers only got used for front line combat because the Mig-29 was a disappointment. Larger fighter AC are vulnerable to light fighter AC in front line skirmishes. This has been shown in numerous past conflicts. Armed with modern munitions and data links......light fighter AC are being more potent in air superiority missions.

Mig-29 has many advantages compare to F-16A at the same time at 1980s,it's a great jet when the warzone is Europe.

 

[CrazyZ]

Mig-29 has many advantages compare to F-16A at the same time at 1980s,it's a great jet when the warzone is Europe.

On paper...Mig 29 was no where near as successful as the F-16 over the last 40 years. Both in sales and in combat performance.

 

[luciferdd]

On paper...Mig 29 was no where near as successful as the F-16 over the last 40 years. Both in sales and in combat performance.

Mig-29 is suitable for CCCP but only suitable for CCCP,that is the problem.Mig-29 will defeat F-16A with its BVR capability, helmet sight system and R-73 SRAAM in the Europe,but F-16C is another story it's much more powerful than F-16A and Mig-29s.

 

[beijingwalker]

J-10C will become a real dark horse in future air battles.