PLA Air Force General News Thread:

GarryB wrote:That claim that the Gripen beat the Chinese Flankers is interesting... first if all is it coming from the Thais, and second we really don't know what equipment each side was using or NOT using.

Did the Chinese use R-77s or did they just use R-27s.... assuming the Thais used AMRAAM.

Deficiency in EW and long range combat and of course aircraft to aircraft communications would be expected for the Chinese aircraft because they probably want to use their own and they don't have the experience in that field that SAAB or the Russians have.

The fact that China is training with the Thai Air Force means they are looking at their own capabilities and trying to get better... which I would suggest should be of interest to the west.

Before the west ever came up against enemy MiG-29s in real air to air combat they got a chance to play with them in Germany in a safe environment and develop tactics and equipment to defeat them. The downgraded MiG-29s of Iraq in Desert Storm mostly just ran away to Iran.

These results might make Europe think they are fine against all Flanker types but these planes don't represent anything other than what they are, so the feelings of superiority and advantage will be largely misplaced and erroneous.

A Gripen operating from Thailand with Flankers arriving from China is one thing, but a Gripen in Finland fending off Russian Flankers operating as part of their IADS is something totally different... in Europe the roles are reversed because it will be European fighters operating away from their own territory and operating near Russian territory... which is not simulated in these exercises I suspect.

zepia wrote:

GarryB wrote:That claim that the Gripen beat the Chinese Flankers is interesting... first if all is it coming from the Thais, and second we really don't know what equipment each side was using or NOT using.

Did the Chinese use R-77s or did they just use R-27s.... assuming the Thais used AMRAAM.

Deficiency in EW and long range combat and of course aircraft to aircraft communications would be expected for the Chinese aircraft because they probably want to use their own and they don't have the experience in that field that SAAB or the Russians have.

The fact that China is training with the Thai Air Force means they are looking at their own capabilities and trying to get better... which I would suggest should be of interest to the west.

Before the west ever came up against enemy MiG-29s in real air to air combat they got a chance to play with them in Germany in a safe environment and develop tactics and equipment to defeat them. The downgraded MiG-29s of Iraq in Desert Storm mostly just ran away to Iran.

These results might make Europe think they are fine against all Flanker types but these planes don't represent anything other than what they are, so the feelings of superiority and advantage will be largely misplaced and erroneous.

A Gripen operating from Thailand with Flankers arriving from China is one thing, but a Gripen in Finland fending off Russian Flankers operating as part of their IADS is something totally different... in Europe the roles are reversed because it will be European fighters operating away from their own territory and operating near Russian territory... which is not simulated in these exercises I suspect.

This article from The Diplomat gave us a lot more comprehensive view on the drill.
https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/flankers-vs-gripens-what-happened-at-the-falcon-strike-2015-exercise/

To me, BVR engagement result was not unexpected. J-11 is a plain classic Flanker, and AFAIK Chinese didn't update them at all.
While Gripen C is a decade or two newer platform and design around concept of "situation awareness" and "network warfare" eg. integrated data link.
Plus the different in size, J-11 is a big big target in radar while Gripen is quite a smaller plane and incorporate some low observability design.

Actually the main reason RTAF broke their loyalty on US of A manufacturer was to obtain the key into these modern warfare concepts.
Saab was offered 12 birds, 2 Erieyes (+1 bare 340 plane) and an agreement to help RTAF develop their own tactical data link (called "Link-TH"). Which suit their needs very well.
Compare to US meh offer, a dozen of plain F-16 Block 52.

What catch my interest is the Gripen is no match for Flanker in WVR engagement.
I don't know if the engagement emphasis on platforms or weapons. AIM-9L did inferior to R-73 that's for sure.

Later years drill are more interest since Chinese participated with more advance domestic planes.
But I wonder if we will ever learn about the result.

walle83 wrote:

zepia wrote:

GarryB wrote:That claim that the Gripen beat the Chinese Flankers is interesting... first if all is it coming from the Thais, and second we really don't know what equipment each side was using or NOT using.

Did the Chinese use R-77s or did they just use R-27s.... assuming the Thais used AMRAAM.

Deficiency in EW and long range combat and of course aircraft to aircraft communications would be expected for the Chinese aircraft because they probably want to use their own and they don't have the experience in that field that SAAB or the Russians have.

The fact that China is training with the Thai Air Force means they are looking at their own capabilities and trying to get better... which I would suggest should be of interest to the west.

Before the west ever came up against enemy MiG-29s in real air to air combat they got a chance to play with them in Germany in a safe environment and develop tactics and equipment to defeat them. The downgraded MiG-29s of Iraq in Desert Storm mostly just ran away to Iran.

These results might make Europe think they are fine against all Flanker types but these planes don't represent anything other than what they are, so the feelings of superiority and advantage will be largely misplaced and erroneous.

A Gripen operating from Thailand with Flankers arriving from China is one thing, but a Gripen in Finland fending off Russian Flankers operating as part of their IADS is something totally different... in Europe the roles are reversed because it will be European fighters operating away from their own territory and operating near Russian territory... which is not simulated in these exercises I suspect.

This article from The Diplomat gave us a lot more comprehensive view on the drill.
https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/flankers-vs-gripens-what-happened-at-the-falcon-strike-2015-exercise/

To me, BVR engagement result was not unexpected. J-11 is a plain classic Flanker, and AFAIK Chinese didn't update them at all.
While Gripen C is a decade or two newer platform and design around concept of "situation awareness" and "network warfare" eg. integrated data link.
Plus the different in size, J-11 is a big big target in radar while Gripen is quite a smaller plane and incorporate some low observability design.

Actually the main reason RTAF broke their loyalty on US of A manufacturer was to obtain the key into these modern warfare concepts.
Saab was offered 12 birds, 2 Erieyes (+1 bare 340 plane) and an agreement to help RTAF develop their own tactical data link (called "Link-TH"). Which suit their needs very well.
Compare to US meh offer, a dozen of plain F-16 Block 52.

What catch my interest is the Gripen is no match for Flanker in WVR engagement.
I don't know if the engagement emphasis on platforms or weapons. AIM-9L did inferior to R-73 that's for sure.

Later years drill are more interest since Chinese participated with more advance domestic planes.
But I wonder if we will ever learn about the result.

Does the Thai Gripens have meteor missiles? Would explain alot.

AIM-9L did inferior to R-73 that's for sure.

China has flown ten aircraft including fighter jets into Taiwan's air space just a day after the UK, US and Australia signed a defence pact to push back against Beijing.

Taipei said two J-11 fighters, six J-16 fighters, one Y-8 anti-submarine plane and one Y-8 spy aircraft entered its air defence identification zone near Pratas Island today.

Fighter jets were scrambled to turn the aircraft back while radio warnings were also broadcast and missile defence systems activated to monitor the situation.

Taiwan scrambled fighter jets and activated its missile defences today to drive away what it said were ten Chinese aircraft that encroached into its airspace
Details of the flights published by Taiwan's defence ministry show the Chinese fighters briefly skirted into the defence zone before turning back.

But the spy plane and anti-submarine aircraft made a longer route, flying several miles along Taiwan's south coast before turning around and heading away.

The island's government has complained for a year of repeated missions by China's air force near its borders, often in the southwestern part of its air defense zone close to Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island.

Self-governing Taiwan, which is home to the Republic of China which fought against the Communist Party when it first emerged, views itself as an independent state but Beijing views it as a breakaway province.

It has long-standing ties with the US, which historically recognised it as the legitimate government of China.

Tensions around the island have been mounting since President Xi Jinping vowed in 2019 to 'reunify' Taiwan with the Chinese mainland, using force if necessary.

Among the aircraft Taiwan said it intercepted were six J-16 fighters (pictured, file image) and two J-11 fighter jets which were quickly turned away

A Y-8 anti-submarine plane and a Y-8 spy aircraft (pictured, file image) also entered Taiwan's airspace and flew a longer route before turning back

The standoff entered a new phase on Thursday when Australia, the UK and US announced a new defence pact to share military technology that will include giving Australia its first fleet of nuclear submarines.

Beijing reacted angrily to the deal, denouncing the allies' 'Cold War mentality' while warning it risks stability in the region and could make Australia the target of a nuclear strike.

Shortly after the alliance was announced, Australian defence minister Peter Dutton admitted that war with China is possible - with Taiwan likely to be the flashpoint.

The deal is about securing 'peace' in the region, Mr Dutton insisted, but added that the odds of a conflict with China 'shouldn't be discounted'.

Australia admits war with China IS possible over Taiwan amid warnings that Beijing could use nukes and fears that Britain could now be dragged into the conflict after signing AUKUS submarine pact

North Korea is expanding its plutonium-producing nuclear reactor and could increase stocks of weapons-grade uranium by 25 per cent, satellite images reveal
'The Chinese.. are very clear of their intent with regard to Taiwan [and] the United States has been very clear of their intention toward Taiwan,' he said.

'Nobody wants to see conflict but that really is a question for the Chinese.'

The incident came a day after Taiwan proposed extra defence spending of $9billion over the next five years, including on new missiles, warning of an urgent need to upgrade weapons in the face of a 'severe threat' from China.

Peter Dutton, Australia's defence minister, warned that war with China is possible after signing joint defence deal with the UK and America
Speaking earlier on Friday, Taiwan Premier Su Tseng-chang said the government had to take the threat from China seriously.

'The Chinese Communists plot against us constantly,' he said.

Taiwan's defence spending 'is based on safeguarding national sovereignty, national security, and national security. We must not relax. We must have the best preparations so that no war will occur', he added.

China's government, for its part, criticised Taiwan Foreign Minister Joseph Wu on Friday for comments this week in which he said Taiwan was a 'sea fortress' blocking China's expansion into the Pacific.

As the world struggles to decode the ‘China enigma’, speculating how Beijing will fight its next war, views expressed by its defense specialists provide a glimpse into how it could look at the battleground against the US.

F/A-18 Super Hornets Finally On Cusp Of Beating F-35 Stealth Fighter Jets For Lucrative RCAF Contract?
‘Deal Of The Century’: Why Tata-Airbus Joint Venture Could Pave Way For India To Become A Global Aerospace Hub
China seems to have evolved from its “informationized war” concept to “intelligentized war”, where the primacy of possessing information and an “enhanced situational awareness” can decide the outcome of a battle.

Speaking at a seminar, Lu Jun, Chief Designer of China’s KJ-2000 early warning aircraft, and Cui Jixian, the Deputy Executive Designer of the KJ-500 early warning aircraft, talked about future airborne warning roles to be distributed between various small and big aircraft and assets.

“A future Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) will likely not be one single early warning aircraft, but a cluster of platforms that can accomplish different missions and build an information network,” he said.

The KJ-2000 is based on the Russian 190 ton-class Il-76 large transport aircraft, and the KJ-500 is derived from China’s indigenous 60 ton-class Y-8 medium transport aircraft.

Russia Activates S-400, Pantsir-S Anti-Aircraft Missiles To Ward-Off Rafales, Typhoons, F-35s During Zapad 2021 War Games
Eyeing Joint Combat Capability
While individual assets like aircraft, submarines, or tanks can deal with their counterparts in war, the key is to integrate all space, aerial, ground, surface, and underwater systems for “joint combat capability.”


KJ-2000 AWACS
The KJ-2000 AWACS aircraft.


“Future AWACS will definitely become an information network system that includes not only one single aircraft, but a cluster of platforms that can either operate together or alone.

These platforms will play their specially designed roles based on the demands of combat missions, with the final goal being winning the war”, Cui said, noting that both large and small AWCAS platforms are future trends.

A manifestation of this primacy of information sharing is in China’s pride and joy, the J-20 ‘Mighty Dragon’, as its designer Yang Wei calls the concept of maneuverability as “outdated”.

India Pitches Its HAL Tejas Fighter Jets To Australia; Pins Hope On Malaysia For The 1st Elusive Contract
The J-20 stealth aircraft has been rightfully criticized for lagging in kinematic performance of speed, nimbleness, and payload, but that is never what the jet was designed for and purported to fight in the first place.

J-20 Could Be A Game-Changer
The EurAsian Times had reported how the J-20, combining its stealth, radar-reflecting Luneburg Lens (on the rear underside), advanced avionics, Electronic Warfare (EW) and jamming suites and ultra-long-range air-to-air missiles like the PL-15 (range 300 km), will slip past fighter screens and knock out enemy air assets, in a classic ‘hit-and-run’ role.

These will be transport, Airborne Early Warning (AEW), and air-to-air refueling planes that degrade an air force’s logistical and surveillance capability. This is also adopted in China’s plans to keep the US Navy at bay in the Western Pacific.

By using YJ-18, YJ-12 supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles (range 540 km), the PL-15 that outrange the US’ subsonic 240-km range Harpoons and the 161-km AIM 190D and the DF-21D Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM), China aims to keep the Americans at bay, never allowing them to get close to the mainland.

In a paper in the Chinese military aviation journal Acta Aeronautica Sinica last July, the J-20’s Chief Designer Yang Wei gave the most extensive insight into the present Chinese military doctrine that puts situational and all-domain awareness and information processing ahead of the performance of individual combat systems.

PLA Air Force J-20 fighter jets patrol in the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone. (via Twitter)
“Information has now become the deciding factor, as modern fighter jets focus on gaining more information with the help of AESA radars and data chains, while also reducing opponents’ ability to gain information, including using stealth technology and electronic countermeasures.

When aircraft can get more information with these advanced devices, pilots must have extensive knowledge, sharp analysis and sound decision-making to put them to use,” Wei says.

After Airbus Deal, India’s ‘Next Lockheed Martin’ Eyes Multi-Billion Fighter Jet Contract From The Air Force
Here, artificial intelligence will help pilots process the information, and help them become mission objective-oriented by leveling up the observe-orient-decide-act (OODA) loop to OODA 3.0.

Here too, it is the range, combat endurance, powerful stealth and heavy payload of air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles and the ability to provide the pilot with “easy-to-understand” battlefield situation images drawing and transmitting to and from all friendly assets in an “integrated network” are vital, according to Yang.

A US Department of Defense (DoD) September 2020 study acknowledges the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) belief in the side that has “intelligentized capabilities” for “rapid and efficient decision making” to be able to win a war.

“To quickly observe, orient, decide, and act in an increasingly dynamic operating environment…China is pursuing AI to support future capabilities, such as autonomous command and control (C2) systems, sophisticated and predictive operational planning, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) fusion.

“In addition, the PLA is developing…future command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems will seek to use AI to collect, fuse, and transmit big data for more effective battlespace management and to generate optimal courses of action,” the DoD report said.

Parth Satam is a Mumbai-based journalist who has been covering India’s defense sector for more than a decade. He maintains a keen interest in defense, aerospace and foreign affairs and can be reached at satamp@gmail.com

Isos wrote:You should say "su-30 is beautiful".

GarryB wrote:Just shows they have good taste... they could have copied any old design...

GarryB wrote:I don't agree... if they decided they wanted F-15s they would have stolen the designs and copied them... they wanted Flankers and they bought Flankers... if Russia had refused to sell then they probably would have stolen the planes and made a copy anyway... this is not a game... this is national defence...

Many of their drones look like US drones... some of the Russian drones look like US drones... when you are given the task of solving a problem for your country the first step in the design process is to look at all current and suggested solutions used by other people... you then evaluate good points and bad points of each of those designs and decide which features and problems suit you best.

Most of the time there is the best available solution, but other peoples problems and therefore their solutions are not always exactly the same as the ones you are dealing with so sometimes other details need to be added for your solution to work for your problem.

GarryB wrote:I don't agree... if they decided they wanted F-15s they would have stolen the designs and copied them... they wanted Flankers and they bought Flankers...