Su-35S: News #2

Pretty much all Americans shill this idea that Chinese Flankers are the best. Even the Millennium 7 YouTube guy couldn't help himself.

And some unfriendly Chinese shill the same thing.

It's a simple (yet effective) tactic Pro-NATO trolls use to denigrate Russian weapons systems, everything that's Russian is shit until either China (Sukhoi Flankers) or the Ukraine (T series tanks) get their hands on them, then it suddenly becomes the best thing ever.

If Chinese Flankers are better than Russian Flankers why did China buy Su-35s and why are Russia continuing to buy more Su-35s.

Note the Su-35s Russia sells to other countries are not the same as the Flankers the Russian AF gets.

Giving their biased opinion is to be expected but we know they don't actually know... it is just based on their low opinion of Russian stuff.

It is like claims that the US based Hind attack helicopters were the best maintained Hinds in the world, because obviously Americans look after their stuff and Russians neglect their stuff.

Except that US stuff is fragile and stops working if you don't cover it in cotton wool, while Russian gear can be left out in the cold... build a fire underneath it to defrost it and then start her up...

The J-16 is a particular fascination for me. Note the wing tip pods for jamming. Also the amount of antennas on them.

But nah the su-35 and latest Chinese flankers are peers and do different things for different missions. The passive phased array on su-35 I bet is more powerful and dangerous than the j-16 aesa based on what I heard about concerning the rumored max and median power output. Still thr aesa on the J-16 is very good and I bet is near to the byelka.

N036 is a AESA variant of the N035 Hybrid Radar that is the Irbis-E.

Output is the same in terms of overall power and the N036 is 400km max detection range for 3M^2 targets, which is exactly the N035 detection range.  This is entirely to the provided upwards to 20KW of power to the radar.

Just because the supposed Chinese radar is "AESA" there are tons of questions.

What kind of T/R Modules does it use? How many are there? how much power is provided to the radar that these T/R modules can use? What is its cooling structure (the real reason why Russia didn't go gung ho on AESA radar since reliability was less and heat output was high)? What are its T/R modules failure rates (average was 10% in the past.  That is with less modules running at same time).

The Chinese flanker may be good.  But one, to get an idea, is to look at other jets available in other nations and their Chinese jets and radar systems to get a better idea - JF-17 for example.  Detection range is rather not very high at all and radar size is that of a MiG-29's (roughly) to which the PESA of the MiG-29's of later models had about better detection range.

Not knocking on the Chinese jets but there is a general trait that people think that a certain type of tech that is heavily advertised must = better.  But the question that is rarely asked is:
- Reliability?
- Necessary?
- Cost vs Benefit?

US has decided to go the route of AESA hard and while I dont necessarily think it is fantastic by any means, they at least mitigated a lot of the failure of the T/R modules with a ton of T/R modules forced into the radar, and with years of a bit of better development in cooling, they have done to AESA what Russia has done with PESA.  China just did a bit of both by trying to buy one and copy the other.  Then you have to think about all the little other things like the engines and power output to the electronics?  What about things like AESA L Band modules for the 360 view?  Su-35 has that, does the J-16?

Sounds a bit like air independent power systems for subs where the western "experts" claimed AIP was everything and a sub without it would be sunk and useless, but the western country with the most experience with AIP subs is Japan and they found that AIP systems they were using did not create a strong current that could power the subs systems and allow normal operations while at the same time charging the batteries so instead of going near the surface and running diesel engines for a few hours in snorkel mode charging up the batteries they would operate at very low speed with most non essential systems turned off and charge the batteries for days which isn't so great.

They finally decided after testing their AIP equipped sub that it actually made more sense to get rid of the AIP system and its oxygen and hydrogen tanks and to just carry a lot more lithium ion batteries which improved the amount of time the sub could operate in silent mode.

Equally when the Soviets introduced the T-62 with a smoothbore main gun everyone said it would be terribly inaccurate... ignoring the fact that an APFSDS round uses a sabot and does not engage the rifling so is not spinning when it leaves the barrel and the round is fin stabilised in rifled and smoothbore guns.

Most if the criticism is because of arrogance... we do it the right way so if you do it differently then it must be because you don't have the technology or skills to do it our way.

How moronic is it that you are asking for Chinese or US sources

But you use Dr Snekotron as your resource for Irbis performance

To this day , su35 is the only aircraft with real air to air experience against soviet su27 and mig29 aircraft, as well as IADS consisting of s300 , BUK, as well as SAM P T, and NASAMS

J20, rafale, f22 are still debating with the ghost of Kiev who has less RCS

Turkey said that the radars of the S-400 were actually better than the Russians claimed when the Turks agreed to buy it, which suggests that performance is probably under reported.

Russia is currently testing the way it does things and its tactics and equipment and if the US has its way China will be doing the same over the next few years too.

The performance of any aircraft or weapon system is more than the specs or claims of specs.

China bought export model Su-35s, so if they claim their versions are better does that mean they are better than the planes they never received and know little about?

... ie Russian Su-35s?

The important fact of the matter is that F-35s are not complete aircraft that don't fully work yet and there does not seem to be any rush from the west to send in some F-35s to finish the conflict the way they pretend they will finish WWIII by wiping out the VKS and PVO and everything else.

It is a big game of chess.

Perhaps they realised that the MiG-35 can do the job of an Su-35 over reduced distances and most foreign countries don't seem to have the same respect for the aircraft, but it is cheaper to operate and carries most of the same weapons at the same speeds and altitudes.

Together they are better than just one or the other but if you can only have one for now I would say go for the MiG-35 now and then in a few years when the US doesn't care any more get Su-35s or Su-57s.

Isos wrote:Chinese don't let any data filter in the open source.

That guy is taking all this from his ass.

Chinese radar techs are questionable. I remember a former twitter account managed by some syrian AD crew, they said all radars don't do as good as what the advertizement says but it's even worse for chinese radars. At that time they were operating some modern chinese radars alongside russian and european radar if I'm not wrong.

He had Tom from Tom and Jerry ad his profile pic. Remember him. He was indeed a Syrian AD guy and the radar he was really trashing was the Chinese "Quantum" radar that was brand new state of the art tech and couldn't even old Soviet radars in performance.

TR1 posted a video years ago of the Irbis E against certain air targets, range and RCS. From the radar system itself. So the proclaimed performance was exactly as Russians stated.

Much of China's military exports are trash because these are the 2nd runner ups for the competitions to supply the PLA. As such they rarely finish development before they are hawked to international customers just to recoup some of their losses. The foreign customer then gets left holding the bag when these inevitably fail.