Not really. While the Su-35S hasn’t entered active service yet it is at least in series production and therefore a lot closer to achieving operational status than an aircraft which hasn’t even flown so far.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but I believe J-11B first entered service around 2006, and Su-35S is entering service now?
That’s about a five year difference, but J-11B did have some issues when it first entered service… :confused:

Either way J-11B does not have the extensive modifications and upgrades which the Su-35S has. But by the sounds of it J-16 will be a whole different aircraft altogether, that should rival the 35S. Let’s wait and see as always.

Yeah, we can draw conclusions as to what J-11B has and doesn’t have based on what we can see (like lack of TVC, refuelling probe as you said), but that’s as far as I would take it WRT the actual title of this thread.

hey wait a minute, why didn’t you highlight the rest of the article, especially this part

so is the J-15 also part of this license? or is it a violation of IP rights?

Well it would depend on whether SAC paid for additional licenses/royalties I suppose, and whether the Russian side accepted it.

Here we go again, they have right to build 200 under license production in the original agreement. They already paid the amount in full. Where is theft of IP if they paid for it? Of course, once they get past 200 and still don’t pay for the additional airframes, I’d agree that’s a huge problem.

If the Chinese side does pay additional royalties to produce additional airframes I have a feeling we won’t hear about it.

J-11B does seem to have moved on to WS-10A now, although I think there are still plenty of issues with it. They are going to have to suck it up and go through the pain, because the Russians are not going to be sending them anymore AL-31F for J-11Bs.

Before it was quality control issues with mass production, I thought they mostly got that under control? Also, how does the WS-10A’s thrust compare to AL-31F? I keep hearing conflicting reports from everywhere but I thought the general consensus was that it was a fraction higher.

I agree with quantum — we dont’ know enough about J-11B if you want to compare the number of changes it has with Su-35S.

1.) the Su-35 is ligher than the SK.

2.) Given the replacement of legacy heavy Soviet electronics, that’s honestly not that impressive.

WRT 2) huitong’s site seems to imply 700kg was lost due to use of composites alone?

PKoschei, where’d you get the number for J-11B’s empty weight from?

He didn’t even write a single word about Su-35 in his post. Don’t get so defensive. 🙂

By the way, 3 tons difference is quite a lot in my opinion. It cannot be explained only by avionics.

To be fair he wasn’t being defensive, Pkoschei said it was rare for J-11B to be lighter than an aircraft it was developed from (Su-27), so the Su-35 being lighter than SK is quite relevant.

I think the first batch of J-11Bs used Al-31s (two, three years ago?). All the ones since then have been using WS-10.

And one of the biggest changes for J-11B is being able to use indigenous weapons. That was basically why it was conceived in the first place.

Hmmm considering Russia’s GDP is oh 1.46 trillion USD and India’s 1.53 trillion while China’s is 5.87 trillion, I don’t see why the PLAAF couldn’t afford to buy twice as many J-20’s as PAK-FA’s. I realize my intial count of 600 was probably a little low, better bump that up to a 1000. :dev2:

I hope you arent’ serious.
There is no way the PLAAF will acquire 600 J-20s, let alone 1000. They might eventually produce a number near 600, but despite the strength of the PRC economy the government is not saturating the PLA with money… There are better things to use it on.