Originally posted by AinuMan

The Su-35/37 is NOT the same thing as the MKK or MKI. The Su-35/37 uses a different air frame with different materials being used as well as a slightly different radome area. The MKK shares some of the building components, while the MKI uses the larger radome.

The MKK, the MKI and the SU-35UB all have the same standard radome which is no different from the SU-27s.

The reason why the SU-35/37 had a longer radome is the use of the original N011 (planar) that had bulkier electronics. The newer radars like the N011M has smaller electronics that allowed the return to the original radome size.

From the 2nd rear half of the plane, the MKK shares the same airframe as the SU-35, with the tails, booms, structural reinforcement, and the extended internal fuel layout in the wings.

Originally posted by dirtyharry
Can anyone (crobato) tell us about the ordances carried by JH7A? China must have producing LGMs for this aircraft,but dont know whether TVGMs were available for JH7A or not.

It is very likely to be the TV version of the C-701, for land attack and close support, while an infrared version of the C-701 may be intended for antiship use in littoral (coastal) waters.

A TV guided version of the C-803 may be being developed for land attack use and could have been tested last year, as shown with the Zhuhai airshow video of the H-6 carrying six such missiles. This could enable the plane to engage ground targets at stand off distances (over 200km).

Other armaments may include Kh-31P and Kh-31A, and the YJ-12.

Simple.

Because Malaysia’s MKM’s are based on the MK design that is the template for the MKI. The MK design is made by IAPO (canards, TVC engine, N011 Bars radar).

Vietnam’s SU-30 order is based on the MKK on the other hand and that is KnAAPO’s jurisdiction.

Indonesia’s SU-27s are the upgraded SU-27SK’s (using MKK avionics), which KnAAPO also handles.

Originally posted by rockgordon
That is not totally true, Irkutsk (IAPO) also builds Su-27SK for China.

Totally wrong. Only the UBKs to China are built by IAPO. All the SKs, and the SK kits for the Chinese license, are built by KnAAPO.

You can easily see the extent of KnAAPO’s productivity. It took IAPO from 1999 to the end of 2002 to deliver 28 SU-27UBKs to China.

In the same time period, KnAAPO delivered 56 SU-30MKKs.

And not just the MKKs, but delivered over a possible 100 to 120 kits for Chinese J-11 assembly.

While doing a lot more maintenance work on the existing SU-27s in the RuAF and former Soviet republics.

IAPO has its equivalent of the MKK for the RuAF called the SU-30KN, and in another form, the SU-27UBM. All these aircraft use similar fire control systems and radar, but with different avionics suppliers. The SU-30KN and the MKK started just about the same time in development, but the MKK’s development was completed in 1999, while the SU-30KN was still only 65% completed around March of 2002, and the UBM around 45%. At the end of the year, the RuAF abandoned modernization plans based on IAPO’s SU-30KN/SU-27UBM in favor of using KnAAPO’s MKK related technlogies on the new SU-27SK upgrade.

Sukhoi tends to side with IAPO, as KnAAPO is becoming too strong and technologically competent for its own good. It’s hard to say how much of the MKK, SU-35/37, SU-27KUB, is of Sukhoi bureau’s design or KnAAPO’s work, but more and more, despite Sukhoi’s statements, a lot of the development work is being done by KnAAPO itself.

A schism exists between Sukhoi and KnAAPO. For instance, Sukhoi wants to use the Chinese contract money to help develop PAK-FA; KnAAPO wants to use it to modernize its plant. KnAAPO even sued Sukhoi over jurisdiction of the Chinese contract money.

In 2001, things really boiled over, as Sukhoi took over the second Chinese MKK contract and transferred it to IAPO, which could have made the second batch, effectively SU-30KNs. Chinese government intervened and forced the contract back to KnAAPO, possibly with the threat of cancellation.

One of the heart of Sukhoi’s friction with KnAAPO is the later’s building of two seaters beyond the Chinese market, and competiting with Sukhoi’s scheme of assignments and IAPO’s jurisdiction. Against IAPO’s Su-30MK standard, KnAAPO is marketing two seaters based on the MKK standard and the SU-35UB standard. As IAPO markets to Malaysia, KnAAPO hits at Vietnam and Indonesia, while marketing to both S. Korea and Brazil. KnAAPO is also positioning itself against Sukhoi’s and NAPO’s SU-32 with the SU-27KUB.

Of course, in public, Sukhoi and the contractors try to hide their differences and schisms and like to present an image of unity. But there is no doubt about the private rivalries of these components, with no less than the future and employment at stake.

Originally posted by Flanker_man
They are larger – so they confer greater directional stability.

Ken

Actually, all two seater SU-27UBs have taller rudders than their single seater counterparts. They also have thicker wing chords.

While the two seaters does have increased weight, the increased height of the tail fins is not about confering greater directional stability to a heavier plane but to compensate for the increased rear disturbance caused by the higher cockpit of the two seater.

The MKI’s tails fins, just as all two seater fins, are actually of the same height of the MKK’s and the SU-35’s fins. The only difference is the clipping of the corner, where the SU-35’s and the MKK’s fins are not clipped but squared.

The tailfins could be used as a UHF receiver, and it’s possible that both the SU-35 and the MKK has the same receiver.

The SU-35 was designed with a higher internal fuel load and a higher takeoff gross weight. The MKK borrows the same structure as the SU-35, which gives the reported increased fuel load and higher takeoff gross weight—considerably more than the single nose wheel KN. The MKK’s structure is considerably beefed compared to the KN, hence the MKK is stress rated at 9G in turns, while the KN is only up to 8G.

It should be added that the MKI also changed from single nose wheel in one of the prototypes to double in the final version, as takeoff weight requirements were raised.

Originally posted by SOC
Nice 😀

The first J-8IIB photo has been neatly altered, look at the red blurb where the second J-8II has the bort number on the fueslage side.

The SU-30MKK also has its numbers and badges neatly removed too.

You can do with the religious mumbo jumbo the first time, when you reach to the second or worst the third time, you’re over doing it. Just how far you can go with the “Chosen” thing—a common clique with geek flicks.