I also read unreliable/inaccurate news sources too, I think we would be lying if we said we never did. But sometimes it can cause users some cognitive dissonance when the unreliable news sources they’ve read don’t line up with in-game performance of their favorite vehicles which means that those users never made careful to separate speculation from reality.
Problem is ideally I wouldn’t come to a conclusion except maybe to further look into it and see what sources they used, atleast not like how I used to be taking news organization for truth, especially stuff like Jane’s.
The only thing the J-16’s radar needs over the J-10’s radar is higher range. “power” as a variable in radar configs only affects how visible the radar is on RWR afaik and is practically useless. Other than that, the KJ-16 is configured just like every other AESA radar at top tier except for the fact that it has a significantly better ACM/HMD mode than anything else (26 km range)
But Chinese radars don’t have that full horizontal scan mode like the Rafale or Typhoon have (not the extra gimbal angle, I mean).Though that scan mode isn’t really used all that often anyway.
A shame we dont even have that to any noticable extent.
At the same time as some other 14.7 got its engines, radar and centerline weapons based entirely on
“Might”
“Could have”
“Potentially”
and “Possibly in the future” as if its nothing.
J-15T double pylon? We do have, what we don’t have, is any documents regarding radar performance of J-16 and J-15T’s aesa radars as they are not for sale so there’s very little we can do about them.
Actually, in reality, the J-15T can also carry a heavier and more powerful hypersonic anti-ship missile, the YJ-15. As for the full-load condition you mentioned, the Kuznetsov’s ski-jump takeoff may indeed be insufficient, but we have a better electromagnetic catapult launch on the Fujian.
