The operational empty weight (including all necessary configurations for takeoff, excluding payload and fuel) of the Su-35S is over 19 tons, while the J-16’s operational empty weight is 17.7 tons. The J-16 has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio (WS10B engine provides ~144kN thrust), but it’s twin-seat configuration may result in higher drag at certain speeds. The J-16D is an electronic warfare aircraft, similar to the EA-18G, and is generally excluded from air superiority fighter comparisons.
In WVR dogfights, the Su-35S likely holds an advantage due to its thrust vectoring and radar with a wider scan angle. However, in beyond visual range (BVR) combat, the J-16’s superior AESA radar and advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles (like the PL-15) give it a significant edge.
Should be at least 4, no problem under intakes, too long for middle, not sure about No.3/10 hardpoint.
And I think PL-17 should be better than R-37M, R-37M’s problem is that it’s based on old low length/diameter ratio body, causing extra drag and less propellant loading ratio
They’re pretty much comparable. J-16 its a bit more modern. But Su-35s have TVC. My guess is that they(China) study the Su-30MKK and dev it own “Su-35”. After all MKK are also made by Knaapo. With more use of composite materials. Russia its suppose to get a new Su-35s this years but what they will update its unknow.
I don’t see gaijin adding missile like R-37m. so don’t count in a equivalent to them.
That figure its wrong. It come from a Knaapo brochure where the Flanker was equipped with Khibiny pods. It even have the Wingspan data wrong 15.3 is not the real wingspan of the SU-35s. It should weight less than Su-30sm.
Also these are just name. Like India Super Sukhoi.
Edit; If Russian get Su-35s, China can also get it own one. If China equipped these Su-35s with China missile i feel like it could be better than the Russian TT variant.
Another possible figure is 18.4 tons, but I believe this applies to the Su-27M (old Su-35, not modern Su-35S). Additionally, the Su-35S’s operational empty weight of 19 tons remains lighter than the Su-30SM, which has an operational empty weight of 19.71 tons.
The No. 3/10 hardpoints and No. 4/9 hardpoints are positioned closely on the wing. Given their proximity and shared aerodynamic profile, there shouldn’t be significant additional aerodynamic interference when carrying ordnance like the PL-17.
Correct if I’m wrong. But isn’t the Масса снаряжённого The gross weight of the plane?. At least with missile and pilot(2x80k)? So the 19710 its taking in account the 2xR73 (210k) and 2xR27(700K). The Empty weight should be near 18700-18800.
Yea but that (19710) its not the empty weight. I search it and said its Weight of the Vehicle + Equipament (aka missile). Its just don’t count the fuel. ITs rare that the “True” gross weight its 26090. That is more than the gross weight (25300) of the Su-35s that can carry more fuel and Khibiny pod installed.
Clearing up misconceptions, WS-10B is specifically made for later J-10s and are not used on flankers due to different position of the gearbox, flanker engines have gearbox on the top while J-10s use engines with gearbox on the underside. Therefore flankers only use WS-10A, C and D.
WS-10D never existed. The difference between the WS-10A and WS-10B lies in the enlarged fan diameter and increased thrust (12% higher than WS-10A). Crucially, even if modifications were made to the gearbox position , the PLA would not assign a new designation like “WS-10D” for such incremental changes. As for the “WS-10D”: it has never appeared in official statements; such rumors refer to WS-10B variants, not a distinct model.
The WS-10C is a specialized variant designed as an interim powerplant for the J-20, significantly boosting military thrust. Importantly, the WS-10 family ceased new model development after the 10C.
Su35s are likely past 19 tonnes although my calculation is based off the official data for standard takeoff weight which I assumed to be 60% oil, similar to that of @MiG_23M
I thought it would be a bit less since pilot is around 100kg, all the oil and machinegun rounds would be quite a bit, 150 30mm rounds after all.
Although if that is 50% fuel it will go to around 20t.
Where did u get these figures from? Just curious.
IDK how they found space for extra 2t of fuel. Then that is probably 50% fuel, no reason to take that much fuel as standard takeoff weight. Also that should maintain around the same operational range as standard Su27.
I dug into Type 1493’s Datamine, I think it’s more completed than we thought. it has copied APG-70’s search mode, and better MPRF transmitter
the problem is the 60km limit, and n001’s 10km ACM.
plus same TWS tracking problem for every non-ESA radar this update, could be some problem with TWS tracking file
