Are you comparing it to the Su27SK kits? In that case I think it important to remember the incredible jumps electronics have taken since the mid to late 80’s, which the 27SK was made with avionics and electronics from that era. Iirc some big weight savings with the F15EX from the 15E were from the complete digitization of all systems, and the doing away with old, heavier computers and whatnot. Given what we know of the J11B it likely underwent a very similar procedure, with the old heavy 80’s era electrics being replaced with modern, lighter equivalents. Now I’m not ‘claiming’ this as absolute fact, just presenting it as a theory as to why the weight on new-built J11B airframes would be different from the 27SK’s built pre-soviet collapse.
That is incorrect, the antenna itself of an esa radar is not too heavy and lighter than a mechanical radar due to it not needing the gimbal
The actual heavy part of a radar is behind it and I would expect that they were able to reduce weight there as well due to more modern and lighter electronics
1 Like
They removed the gun from the j16 and the gun itself would be part of the empty weight
reads j-11 j-16 j-15 thread
it’s just russians mains saying nuh uh to everything posted with no source on their claims that the chinese flankers are worse other than “russia number 1”
mods this must have been like the 5th time these guys come here and just do this, why this keeps happening? can we keep the russian flanker talk in the russian flanker threads? thank u
isn’t against the rules to talk about stuff that is not part of the thread?
9 Likes
That…
Explains alot- He seemed to be more knowledgeable than most on Flankers.
i know it is not meant to be taken seriously, but imo the russian and chinese flankers are sidegrades to each other ingame and it depends on what your preferences are.
But i also think, with how the current meta is, that the Su-35 will probably be the better flanker compared to a J-15 or J-16 due to its ammount of armaments, the gimbal limit on the IRBIS and the current performance of the r-77-1.
But i hope that gaijin will ungimp the Pl-12
I am comparing the J-11 to the other modernized Russian Sukhois, who for the most part share all of the same advancements.
Right… clearly didn’t even read the conversation. You saw a username and made an assumption? What makes you think I am a Russian main? I don’t have the top fighters in Russia or China right now.
Right, which is also my point. There just isn’t a world where China saves literal tons of weights over their Russian counterparts when both have similar research and experience developing radar absorbent materials and composites. In fact, the Russians are still matching the rest of the world in lightweight composites and last I heard - could manufacture them cheaper than anywhere else right now (barring the ongoing conflict).
if thats right then how on earth did the j-10c gain 1450 kg, where would the weight come from over the j-10a. although irl j-10a is more like 8500-8700 instead of 8300
Indeed.
Eventually →
J-16 → better missiles in terms of range, less missiles, no gimbaled esa radar, lighter with slightly more thrust, better maws
su-35 → more missiles, better missiles in terms of close range engagements, gimbaled pesa, better irst (who tf knows the irst stats on the j-16), less thrust and heavier but with thrust vectoring
of course china well get both so it doesnt really matter
The J-10B/C variants feature an enlarged radome, heightened vertical stabilizer, and enhanced avionics suite, like evolutionary progression paralleling the F-16A to F-16C upgrades.
Pretty sure the chinese flankers will just have better missiles in effectively all situations over the Su-35, with the PL-10 likely being superior to the R-74M2, and the PL-15/17 being superior to the R-77-1/R-37M the Su-35 fields. The Su-35 having access to the 2 dual R-77 racks along the centerline will give it a few more missiles in total though.
The radar situation regarding WT though is likely a coin toss. As it stands, theres no notable difference between PESA and AESA in WT, and we know quite a bit about the Su-35’s radar while we know effectively nothing about the J-16’s. IRL, I think basic inference would tell you the J-16’s radar likely beat the pants off the Su-35’s radar in effectively every metric, being an AESA from what is estimated to be an extremely capable nation vis-a-vis radar development vs a PESA from a nation that is generally considered to be quite far behind in radar tech.
In-game though, most likely scenario (unless there is info on the J-16’s radar I do not know about) will be that the J-16 will get either a copy paste Su-30SM radar, or a copy paste Su-35 radar If it gets a copy paste Su-30SM radar, that’ll be quite rough, but if it gets the Su-35 radar (more likely imo), it would leave the J-16 to have the superior flight model, missiles, and access to an actual real HMD and TGP, unlike the Su-35, which to my knowledge is still using the old HMCS system seen on soviet era fighters along with no TGP. For sim particularly, but likely for all game modes, the J-16 will be at a significant advantage over the Su-35 I’d think.
3 Likes
What do you mean of old Soviet HMCS? Does that mean Su-35 can’t guide radar lock via HMD?
Extremely bold of you to just assume R-37M or PL-15/16/17 will even be added.
J-16 could be added next patch with PL-12 only.
I don’t think there’s any evidence that j-16 has an aesa mounted on a mechanical gimbal, it’s highly unlikely for it to get the su-35 radar because of that
Does the pl-10 get datalink? Also what’s max range of that thing, like 40 km? All sources I’ve seen of it stated it has a pretty abysmal max range of 20km, around 10 km less than the og r73
yes.
Verified data indicates the PL-10 features a 160mm diameter (vs. MICA-EM’s 165mm), weight of 105kg (vs. MICA-EM’s 112kg), and total impulse of 95 kN·s (vs. MICA-EM’s 98.5675 kN·s)—all substantiated by airshow exhibits and academic papers. Additionally, unverified sources suggest the PL-10 employs a high thrust-to-weight ratio, short-burn propulsion profile similar to the PL-5B, with motor burn time lasting 3.5 seconds. Synthesizing these parameters, the PL-10’s max range is close to that of the MICA series.
edit: My review of research papers confirms that the 3.5-second burn time has been substantiated.
2 Likes
Haven’t seen any official information on the PL-10 but the PL-10E has some bits
1 Like
why would u compare pl15/17 to r77-1/r37m instead of r77m/r37m ? ill take 10-12 r77m over 8pl15.
Afaik theres no evidence it doesnt either. We dont even have a name for the radar afaik. Easiest (laziest) thing gaijin could do would be to just copy/paste the Su-35 radar and call it a day