Regarding the Type 930-4 RWR used by the J-7D, we currently lack verifiable data and can only speculate that its performance is similar to the KJ-8602 system. China’s stringent secrecy policies on military equipment make it extremely difficult to model high-tier vehicles accurately in-game. Most “information” about advanced Chinese assets in War Thunder is essentially guesswork, pieced together from limited public photos or vague references—none of which provide substantial evidence for proper implementation.
Frankly, obtaining authoritative sources would likely be illegal—I might as well confess my “sins” in prison! It’s baffling that even this outdated aircraft (J-7D) remains shrouded in secrecy when it logically should be declassified by now.
I’ve submitted multiple issue reports, but without concrete data, progress is hopeless. To add irony, the in-game J-7 cockpit is still a copy-paste of the MiG-21’s, which is downright laughable.
Is there any system in China that allows for disclosure of those manuals and technical documents?
In the United States, there’s a system called the Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR). While requests are often denied, if you follow the proper procedures, it’s possible to gain access to declassified or redacted manuals even if you are live in outside of US.
No, there isn’t. The Chinese government carefully evaluates whether to disclose technical details of military equipment based on the current global situation - such information is only released when the technology is considered thoroughly and completely obsolete.
In our internet culture, we have a lighthearted saying about weapons systems displayed to the public, media or foreign observers:
“If it’s being shown, it must already be outdated!”
(The phrase humorously suggests that only non-sensitive, obsolete technology gets publicly displayed)
Actually, most of these lingering issues with the Chinese tech tree in-game originated from the era when the “tech tree researcher” system was still in place. The Chinese tech tree researcher at that time was highly irresponsible - they submitted incorrect and even disparaging information that misrepresented Chinese equipment. A particularly egregious example is the depression angle issue with the PGZ-09 SPAA. This is why we encounter significant difficulties when attempting to submit issues to correct these problems.
Regarding the topic of this thread, I was tagged here after another user referenced my previous post, so I’d like to share my perspective.
It’s completely understandable why some players find the J-7D’s current BR (10.7) questionable. But have you actually flown this aircraft? Here’s the reality:
Limited Armament: It carries only 4 rear-aspect IR missiles (no all-aspect capability).
No Versatility: Unlike the MiG-21BIS at the same BR (which can equip 6 missiles: R60M/MK x6 or R60M x4 + R13M x2), the J-7D cannot even multirole effectively. The MiG-21BIS can run 4 missiles (2+2 on composite pylons) + 2 ZB-500 incendiary bombs for base strikes, while the J-7D is stuck with its 4 rear-aspect missiles only.
Conclusion:
The J-7D is over-tiered at 11.0 in Air RB. The best solution isn’t just lowering its BR—it’s expanding the BR spread in Air matchmaking to better balance such disparities.
Well… here’s how it actually works: The J-7D’s onboard radar has American roots (reverse-engineered from captured F-105 components), while its avionics trace back to British Marconi Company technology (acquired through trade, collaboration, and reverse engineering). I even have an AVIC-published e-book documenting these details—but unfortunately, the issue moderators dismissed it as “irrelevant.”
PL-5B is literally one of the best rear-aspect IRAAMs. It is also better than R-13M, depending on your point of view. R-60M is not a bad missile overall, but in the end it is the worst all-aspect missile in the game, with a very short range and the speed of the missile is not that fast.
Why do you even care about bomb loadouts since ARB is basically TDM?
Well… as long as napalms are also one of their historical armament.
On the historical side, J-7D/E also have the right to have ZB-500.
I saw some Chinese player complains about it for being unhistorical. Including ‘You-know-who’
But on the gameplay side, yes. I agree with you.
I really am unsure that J-7D need ZB-500 in the current meta.
Well, let me clarify—I may not fully understand your perspective, as I’m using AI translation for communication. If any misunderstanding occurs, I apologize in advance. Gaijin balances vehicles based on multiple factors, not just weapon systems. In BR (Battle Rating) considerations for aircraft with IR missiles, whether a jet has all-aspect missiles is the most critical factor. I own and have flown both the J-7D and the MiG-21bis, which is why I feel qualified to comment on this issue.
The MiG-21bis boasts higher engine thrust, greater payload capacity, and all-aspect missiles—these factors make it unlikely to see a BR reduction. Now, recall the J-7D’s performance at 11.0 BR:
Opponents: Faced aircraft equipped with pulse-Doppler radars (AIM-7F, R-24R), all-aspect/high-off-boresight missiles, and even the AIM-54 Phoenix.
Disadvantage: Limited to just 4 rear-aspect IR missiles, rendering it severely outmatched.
If you understand these dynamics, you’ll also grasp:
Why the Saab 35 “Draken” only recently received a BR reduction.
Why the MiG-21bis remains at 11.0—its capabilities justify the placement.
English:
Gaijin balances by battle rating by Silver Lion earning
MiG-21BIS (Lazur) earns much more by bombing with 4x R60M
J-7D can’t get close. Therefore is “fine” at 10.7
J-7D can’t get close because some dumb idiots bomb the base with J-7D even though the fact it can’t even destroy the base with 1.5kg payloads while sacrificing all four of PL-5B.
You and your fellow J-7D bomber keep decreasing the average netting of J-7D and keep J-7D being undertiered.
Lastly. As I claimed earlier in another topic, The logic of Gaijin at Balancing is illogical.
Don’t bring that illogical theory for defend your illogical theory.
Therefore, the most logical solution is to further expand the BR spread for aircraft equipped with semi-active radar missiles (SARH) and infrared-guided missiles. This is the root cause of the imbalance.
ndeed, it’s truly disheartening. Player experience seems secondary—maximizing profits takes priority. XD As the Chinese proverb warns: ‘Draining the pond to catch all the fish’ (竭泽而渔) — a short-sighted strategy that kills long-term sustainability.
Oh wow, the same thing every fighter at this BR deals with! Some fighters even only get TWO rear aspect missiles, in fact this isn’t even uncommon! womp womp
(MiG-21bis is a higher BR)
bringing up the fact the J-7D has to lose missiles to use napalm is so weak of an argument lol
Oh, friend—since when do you get to decide what’s ‘correct’? Are you implying this is about the F-5? Then let me ask you: Why can the F-5 only carry two missiles when it has usable hardpoints?
I was comparing the MiG-21bis to explain why the J-7D deserves a lower BR. At no point did I suggest the J-7D should lose missile capacity to carry incendiary bombs—it doesn’t even have that option! The core argument here is why the J-7D remains at 10.7, and I’m explaining the rationale. So what’s your actual point?
And you, my friend, care only about your own gameplay experience. You haven’t even bothered to understand how Gaijin balances vehicles or what factors they consider. All I see is you using sarcasm and bitterness to oppose anything that doesn’t align with your views.
Perhaps you should buy the J-7D during the next sale and actually play a few matches with it. Watching kill compilations won’t help you understand reality—though since you already own the A-5C, I’m certain you’d never bother.
