Chinese AESA not GaN. now no one country don’t have serial AESA on plane, based on GaN
1 Like
From the history of the “backwardness” of Russian/Soviet-made avionics for a number of “experts” for reference…
A method for obtaining gallium nitride…
During 2010, at the Institute of Microwave Semiconductor Electronics (ISHPE) Field-effect transistors with Ft = 77.3 GHz and Fmax = 177 GHz having a power gain of more than 11.5 dB at a frequency of 35 GHz were manufactured using AlGaN/AlN/GaN heterostructures of domestic production (Elma-Malachite CJSC). For the first time in Russia, the MIS of a three-stage power amplifier in the frequency range 27-37 GHz with a Cr > 20 dB and a maximum output power of 300 MW in pulse mode was developed and successfully implemented on the basis of transistors.
1 Like
Just random J-11 bonding.
3 Likes
omg das me :))
2 Likes
<3333
1 Like
There’s something I need to explain to you…If the engine has been given a name, it means that it has passed State tests and is in mass production…Information about the AL-51-F1 under this name appeared in August 2023…There is no discrepancy with the plans of the ODK (United Engine Building Corporation)…This is a priority program for the Su-57/Su-35S(M)/Su-75/Su-30SM2/S-70 Hunter/Su-34…She’s fine considering the SVO factor…
already
You cannot take physical dimensions as the mere standard for estimation. The efficiency of rocket engine and trajectory design would also matter a lot.
The designer of PL12/SD10, Liang Xiaogeng, mentioned in an interview that the maximum shoot range of SD10 and AIM120 are measured at 10km altitude and 1.2 Mach speed for both carrier and target aircrafts while the claimed 100km range for R77 is measured at 20km altitude and 1.5 Mach. When using the same test standard, the range of R77 would be =<70km, on par with or even worse than SD10/PL12.
In this regard, even the claimed 110km range of R77-1 is probably exaggerated as well.
And also note that even the export version of PL15, namely PL15E, is labled with a max. range of 145km by AVIC.
So yeah if someone still insists on this two having similar performance … Well, good luck.
4 Likes
The devs openly talked about how a better skin is coming for the plane and its own unique model, so don’t worry about that.
In 2015, PLAAF had a joint excercise with Thailand. PLAAF sent J11A while RTAF sent JAS39. J11A was severely defeated in the reports from western media. The truth, of course, is more complicated. In a 2019 lecture at Northwestern Polytechnical University by Li Zhonghua, one of the best test pilots of PLAAF, it was revealed that the J11A suffered mainly from its relatively outdated BVR capabilities. Most (86%) successful attack attempts made by J11A is done in the range of <30km, while the other 14% are all done in 30-50km range. PLAAF noted in this lecture that the maximum shoot range of AIM120C on JAS39 is 80km while for R77 on J11A it is only 50km.
3 Likes
God can the people who wanna make this a Russia vs China pissing contest please just go somewhere else? This is a thread that should be dedicated to productive conversations about the J-11 and it’s variants for china
7 Likes
The developer of the PL-12 allegedly said this, but it is not true. We can prove the AIM-120 does 74km from subsonic launch (0.9 mach) at a 0.9 mach target from 10km.
Likewise, the same situation for the R-77 yields closer to 80-100km.
The R-77-1 is a longer missile, more aerodynamic with more motor in it. At the test conditions that the R-77 receives 80km range the R-77-1 has 110km range.
The PL-15E is an export version of the PL-15 with less range, 145km is expected. The PL-15 is rumored to be a dual pulse motor (boost-boost, or boost-sustain-boost). Other missiles that were modified to dual pulse doubled their range (Such as MICA-NG).
So it is expected they might fit a normal single pulse boost-sustain type motor in the PL-15E and leave the dual pulse for the domestic model and the range figures match.
Discussing more so the ranges that they were detecting each other. The Su-27 is a huge aircraft with 15m2+ radar cross section versus the Gripen with less than 3m2, the Su-27 also has the worse radar for these types of conditions.
1 Like
Indeed. It is also mentioned in that lecture that the radar interception distance for J11A against JAS39 （with 1.5-2 m^2 RCS as claimed in the same lecture）is only 30-35km.
1 Like
I think the conversation had already concluded, recommend instead of butting in just sharing useful information on the J-11, like the fact that it’s underperforming in sustained turn rate at 700 km/h by ~0.5G currently (2 deg/s sustained turn).
3 Likes
@DracoMindC did the report for this beast.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/NnsJ3fscrl7R
2 Likes
They showed a lot of things there…or you misunderstood…
- Ballistic missile range in Soviet/
Russian documents are never indicated…because additional documents indicate the Limit value for the complex restriction "GOS + engine + power supply ) … That is, the rocket can continue to fly, but only in the form of an unguided dummy … - In the Soviet/Russian documents indicate the Launch Range under standard conditions ( Hц=Нн=10 км и Vц=Vн= 1100 км/ч , пуск в ППС ) …
- The range is not “measured”, but according to the formation of the “PR” signal by the Weapon Control System (SUO) of the fighter (Launch is allowed)…
4.For all missiles(Chinese/Russian/American and so on)…When launched into the Forward Hemisphere (PPS), the range of the missile will, of course, be less than the launch range, since the target itself flies towards it…
1 Like
Back on topic, why on earth would the J11(Not a) be heavier by 570kg? I wonder what sources Gaijin are using for this
The J-11 is a SU-27SK (multirole) so parts like the landing gear and fuselage are reinforced. It would’ve made more sense to add the J-11A and introduce the more modern RWR as a counterbalance to the slightly worse flight performance.
5 Likes