Shenyang J-11, J-16, J-15, History, Performance & Discussion

The J-7 made major visual modifications to the airframe such as double delta wings. These aircraft had massive structural changes compared to the Russian MiG-21’s and operated in areas where the difference between a fishbed and a fishcan could mean winning or losing a fight. The fishcans were using more advanced weaponry at one point, such as the PL-5 and PL-8 when the MiG-21’s were utilizing only R-3S, R-60, etc.

Aside from that, the capabilities of the Russian and Chinese flankers is not as varied as the MiG-21 to J-7.

All of the analogies you and the others have made to try and discredit my point on the Chinese flankers being only minor derivatives of their Russian origin have failed.

I would say there is no reason to give China a Russian export fighter at this point, they have their own indigenous modifications and designations.

For a multirole fighter, the J-15 is a superior choice.

1 Like

ofc they mean something, do you really think they would make that whole system for no reason whatsoever?

really? i always heard it was the musical instrument they named it after

I’m unaware of the CAS abilities of the baseline J15, otherwise a J15A or J16 would be better options imo

J-15 = the air-to-air fire control system of the J-11B + the air-to-ground/surface fire control system of the JH-7A + two additional hardpoints

2 Likes

Eeehh even then it still has the Su33 AL31 engines, at least on the baseline J15, so maybe J16 instead for multirole? Given Russia has gotten it’s pinnacle multirole flanker in line with the Strike Eagle, it’s time CN got theirs.

That’s too overpowered. Just wait for J-16 with PL-10/15/17 (J-16 is not compatible with PL-8B) and choose J-15 with PL-8B/12 for now.

currently Chinese CAS basically based on how soon Gaijin can bring some more loadouts, there are plenty choices. Sadly they haven’t added C704 series this update but only models.
also, IR LS-6 with turbo engine in triple pylon is also a choice, Chinese equivalent of AASM.

Can the J-16 not use the PL-9C? If it indeed can then it could be added with that instead of the PL-8B for balancing reasons, I do recall the basic PL-9 model itself being hidden away in the files so it could be put to good use with the J-16 if added.

I’d much rather a J-16 with PL-9C/12 than a J-15 offering not a whole lot of improvement over what we currently have.

The PL-9 series is an export series not used by domestic aircraft.

It’s hard to imagine that there are two fools who keep attacking Chinese planes, turning a blind eye to the mistakes that have been pointed out. Only believe what you want to believe.

2 Likes

No. Because of the wingtip pylon, J-16 only use PL-10.

Damn, I don’t expect Gaijin to introduce advanced IR missiles very soon so that’s a shame, unless the PL-8B gets improved soon enough IR missiles and Radars are the only things holding back top tier China air.

The PL-8B’s are great though.

Eh… they aint bad, but I wouldn’t call them great. Too much energy for just FOV IRCCM

Definitely great. Its the same IRCCM as missiles like the magic 2’s and R-73s, also great missiles

“Too much energy” is a new one though, never heard that before.

Im not saying it bad or that it IRCCM is weak, only that it (the FOV IRCCM) most potent in point-blank shots and/or within 2km. PL-8 is too fast to be effectively used in this manner, so you had to use it from greater range akin to 27T/ET, but it invites a possibility of missile being flared

1 Like

They are good missiles, far from performing poorly. However they aren’t exactly stellar in comparison to other top tier IR missiles. If it gets the proposed IRCCM changes like it should, then I expect it to be much more popular, as I know some people using the J-10A still prefer PL-5EIIs over the new PL-8B simply due to the IRCCM.

They have the same IRCCM…

0.75° fov post launch