Well, its interesting that you only sight late war conflicts to prove your point. How about late 1942 – early 1943 in the South West Pacific. Just as types like the F4U Corsair, P-38 Lightning, and P-47 Thunderbolt were entering service. At this time the Japanese still had highly experienced Zero Pilots. Yet, they were over come by less experienced American Pilots. Flying larger and heavier US Fighters. None of which were more agile…………….These contest were purely WVR fights. Yet, they prevailed!!!!

Wow, like we did not see that one coming. And just like before, you completely ignore all the details and only focus on results that suits your opinion.

Firstly, the war in the pacific, at least to start with, was not a battle of britain type of fighter v fighter war of attrition. It was a cat and mouse game of seek the carrier, which the Americans won, not by shooting down all the Japanese fighters, but instead by sinking their carriers, and thus taking out all the pilots by default.

Secondly, the Japanese zero was engineered with far less consideration for pilot protection then their American counterparts, and as such, had little or no armour for the pilot. This made it far easier to take out a zero by nailing the pilot then taking out American planes. A zero might hit a hellcat a dozen times in several strafes and not bring it down, but a hellcat was far more likely to bring down a zero with a single burst. Does the kill rates from such encounters tells us anything meaningful about the performance of the various planes? Not really. Its like fighting between soldiers wearing bodyarmour and those without. The kill rates tells little about how many times a hit is scored.

Thirdly, while the Japanese kept their top pilots in the field, where the vast majority of them were eventually killed. The Americans set many of their best pilots home to train the FNGs, and thus was able to pass on their experience and knowledge.

There are many many other critical factors that played a great role in determining the outcome of the war in the pacific, that you have all ignored in favor of the result merely because the result shows what you want it to show.

But all that is not the funniest thing of all this nonsense. What really takes the cake is how you can come here and categorically state that power is better then agility when the international fighter designing and piloting communities are divided on that very question. To make such a statement is to imply that you know better then half the expert designers and professional fighter pilots in the world. What hubris. Since you seem to be a big fan of all things navy, I suggest you go into a naval bar and tell some hornet drivers that power is all that matters and agility means nothing and see what their reaction would be.

Frankly, I expected better of you.

Now today most combat happens at BVR. Yet. your J-10 beats the larger more capable Flanker. With a more powerful radar and better avionic……..not to mention more speed and longer range!

If the above is what you base you opinions on, then I suggest you illuminate yourself with some actual facts first, and maybe then you will see the error in your ways. Go look up what radar Su27SKs use, what missiles they can carry, and what their cockpits are like. Compare that to even the specs of the JF17’s radar and avionics suit and then make an objective assessment of which has the better radar and avionics suit. Because bigger and more powerful does not automatically equate to superior.

Further, I am not dismissing the J-10 beating Flankers in mock Combat. Yet, what were the ROE’s??? Was is a WVR fight or a BVR fight??? Funny, on how the J-10 can be superior to the Flanker. Yet, the smaller and much more agile F-16. Is not compared to the F-15! 😉

Ahh, now you are interested in details and not just the results. :rolleyes:

The reports are that the J10 consistently beats the Su27s in all fair engagements. So both BVR and WVR. If you had bothered to learn some basic facts, then that would not be as big a shock to you.

I have already explained that the F16 v F15 performance comparison cannot be applied to the case of the J10 v su27SK. To argue that the bigger fighter is always better is plain nonsense. Else by that flawed logic the J8II must be superior to all F16s.

Funny, on how many always consider the most agile fighters as the winner. Yet, in history that has hardly been the case. Except in the Korean War were both the F-86 Sabre and Mig-15 were so closely matched. Let’s not forget WWII was a totally WVR Fight. Yet, most of the successful types were hardly the most agile. Even 25-30 years later in Vietnam. American F-4’s were beating Mig-17’s, Mig-19’s, and Mig-21’s! Really, to be honest the more powerful fighters with good aceleration, speed, and reasonable agility have won the day…………..

A case in point would be the spitfire. And that is important because it proved to be the critical difference at the start of the war. What was the famous quote of a German fighter commander when asked what it would take to win the battle of Britain again?

The huge kill ratios near the end of the war are essentially meaningless indicators of fighter design because by that time, the axis powers had been stripped of their best train and experienced pilots and were massively outnumbered in the vast majority of engagements. Not even the introduction of a revolutionary new engine was able to turn the tide against those odds.

The same thing applies to all your other examples, since those high kill ratios were only achieved because of the lack of training of opposition pilots and/or overwhelming numerical/technical advantage.

Yet all that is all essentially meaningless since your claim of acceleration and speed wining out over agility is nothing but a theory, whereas there is the inescapable FACT that the J10 has consistently and convincingly came out on top when pitched in mock combat against Su27s. The harder you try to deny a fact, the more reason you give others to suspect that you do not care about facts and the truth.

Its funny how its all about the numbers until the numbers start going against you, then suddenly numbers don’t matter so much.

Pure agility rarely wins in Air Combat………..Especially, today with BVR weapons. So, I wouldn’t count your chickens before they hatch!;)

If you bothered to read the actual article, you would not have made the above statement since the article itself shows the lie in that.

That was not some staged fly off to see who can do the more fancy routine. They took some of the best combat pilots from one of the operational front line flanker units (which just so happens to be one of the PLAAF’s premiere fighter regiments) to fly against the test pilots from the J10 programme.

One of the points that was stressed was that while the combat pilots had great respect for their test pilot counterparts’ skill and technical knowledge, and knew that the J10 had incorporated many new technologies, they (combat pilots) felt that they would win hands down because past experience has shown that test pilots were not fully up to date with the latest in air combat theory and techniques as that was not their field.

That proves that the fly off was not just a technical evaluation, but a mock air combat exercise, which the J10 won handsomely, against front line flankers flown by the best pilots who have train hard for years on the type.

Your remark above BVR is even more off the mark since there are constant reports that the J10 dominate there as well (hardly surprising since J10s have ARH PL12s while the Su27s and the early J11s had only SRHs, not to mention newer radars). Against J11Bs, BVR might be a different story, but thats only because they are using the same missile and generation radars as the J10s.

But its still amusing that some would retreat to making vague statements about BVR combat rather then say anything positive about consistent reports of J10s dominating what many regard as the most agile and deadly WVR fighter of its time. :rolleyes:

How is saying ‘you cant attack me’ provocation?:rolleyes:

Because historically, America has almost always been the one doing the attacking, and that one of the chief considerations in deciding whether or not to bomb someone is how costly that endeavor is likely to be? And that America has constantly implied or even overtly threatened military action if others do not ‘play ball’?

In the eyes of many a ‘loser’ country, as you so maturely puts it, :rolleyes: saying ‘you can’t attack me’ is pretty much synonymous with America saying, ‘I can smack you up as much as I want whenever I want, so behave biaach’.

If you think trying to prevent yourself from being attacked by developing the means of taking out strike assets that potentially might be used against you with hostile intent is not provocation, then the US should not get into such a huff about China developing means to sinking its aircraft carriers around China then. After all, who seriously think China wants to invade the US? All China wants is to develop the means of being able to say ‘you can’t attack me’ to the US. According to you, that should be perfectly acceptable then.

Perhaps the fanboys can take their petty face saving somewhere else? A very informative and interesting thread has very quickly been drowned by the howls of hurt pride and denial, while the gloating and goading of others are not helping matters one bit.

Is it any wonder that threads worth reading and people who’s views and insights are informative and based on actual knowledge instead of wishful thinking are getting more and more scare around here? :rolleyes:

Well if they designed and built it in 1980 and it could take 7Gs then, I don’t see why they can’t make the thing do 8,9 or more Gs now, especially with the planes being new built and the design having gone through structural re-designs along the way. The only issue is whether the PLA bothered to strengthen it as that would have cost implications. And its not like it needs to turn fast for the job its supposed to do now.

The latest J8IIs are intended as BVR platforms, where their decent speed and service ceiling coupled with modern radar and ARH missiles makes them pretty capable in the BVR field.

J8s don’t have many weapons stations to start with, so the chances of them carrying WVR missiles when out in a combat mission is going to be pretty slim, especially against decent opposition. For anything to get within WVR combat with a late model J8II is going to need either good fortune on the side of the opposition or bad piloting of the J8. Could happen, just don’t expect it to be often. Thus all this ‘analysis’ based on the difference of a few fractions of a G is immaterial.

developing a commercial plane is a lot harder than a military jet. The Russians had delayed first flight of RRJ. Boeing and Airbus did the same thing too.

Surely you would have learnt by now that replying to certain members is just an exercise in futility? No need to feed the trolls, they are only desperate for attention, just don’t give it to them and they will eventually get bored and go bother some other poor souls.