PLA-MKII
This along with some HQ-7s could do nicely.
Easy to operate and maintain. Additionally the Gs are much easier / simpler to fly (ease of training)
PLA-MKIIAnd here I was thinking that Su-24M2s were more effective than indiscriminate single bomb dropping…
Hi TR1, you are right, they are more effective if used with their proper kit. They have superb smart munition capability. For some reason, Syria has not used them in that way, largely dropping dumb bombs that miss most targets (pilot quality?)
Some analysts hypothesize that Assad is holding back on them and his smart munition stockpile for a later stage of the war.
The Su-24s are based out of T-4, which is now more or less surrounded by ISIS. If they want to use those smart munitions, the time for it is fading.
PLA-MKIIor in other words, you wish ISIS just focused on killing Shias right? we see your racial agenda more and more lol
– your scandinavian israeli or whatever you want to believe, friend.
Well, I’m glad you still consider me your friend, I thought you wouldn’t be able to look past your prejudices, but happy to see otherwise. I am not some blood thirsty guy who wants to see people outside my faith dead. I do however want to stand against injustice and oppression by one group over other. Whether it is:
1. Nazis against Jews
2. Pol Pot / Khmer Rouge against common Cambodians
3. Apartheid South Africa against Africans / “coloreds”
4. Israel against Palestinians
Or, today, Iran’s attempt to become Big Brother in the Middle East.
Just as, I am not against white people if I say that I oppose the Nazis, or that I am not against Jews because I oppose what Israel is doing to the Palestinians, in similar vein, I am not against a common Shiite citizen, who, sitting in Iran and opposing his / her government, has nothing to do with the oppression going on at the behest of Iran / Hezbollah / assorted thuggery.
Now, I hope we can return to the topic at hand, I was thinking you’d have more interesting opinions regarding it, sadly you disappoint me my crispy friend.
PLA-MKIISheytan, i.e. “Satan” is an Iraqi Shiite, when you get your news from one source (him) you’d think so. But if you go and look at the wide variety of sources available on the internet, you’d see that even the international community recognizes what Assad / Iran / Hezbollah is doing in Syria as mass tyranny and oppression on a grand scale. Systematic rape, and cleansing of vast territories, these are backed by solid research and figures from well established international organizations.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/02/19/irans-shiite-militias-are-running-amok-in-iraq/
https://www.hrw.org/middle-east/n-africa/syria
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/05/us-syria-crisis-barrelbombs-idUSKBN0NQ17F20150505
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_civil_war
There is no moral argument to supporting, aiding and abetting a state that drops barrel bombs on its cities and uses chemical warfare on its citizens. I am sad anyone would think otherwise.
PLA-MKIIWell my nutty friend, I definitely support Sunnis over Shias as its the latter trying to take over the Sunni majority countries and regions, initiated genocide and tyranny on a scale that has not been seen in a long time. However, I definitely do not support ISIS from an intra-Sunni political perspective. If I had a dollar to give and had a choice of groups to support it with, I’d go with either Harkatal Hazm or Jaish Mujahideen, they being far closer to the brand of Islam I understand than the Jihadi Salafis (i.e. ISIS / JaN)
But let’s not make this a political discussion.
I’m talking about a rebel air force, one your governments are also, by and large also supporting. So my nutty friend, do your patriotic duty for your country and strap yourself to that plane above for a test flight, your mother Israel calls you to it, as does your daddies in Scandinavia. Between, I’ve never seen such a contraption, most curious and interesting.
along the lines of V1/Qassam for strike, but more significantly hobby remote a/c with strap on cameras for recce,
there can never be enuff info
That’s an interesting take Obligatory! Very out of the box thinking, and yet has much merit if I think about it.
I was originally thinking in the lines of 3 squadrons of J-7Gs/Es and 3 batteries of HQ-7Bs.
PLA-MKIIHi MSphere, we are talking about the rebels – widely known as groups such as those that make up the Southern Front and the groups in Aleppo and Idlib, including FSA, Ahrar, etc.
ISIS is generally not considered a rebel group for whatever reasons.
Basically u have groups to the North supported by Turkey, KSA, etc and groups to the south supported more by Jordan, USA, Israel
(An oversimplification but gives you the broad strokes. There are about 300-1000 different rebel groups…)
PLA-MKIIJust to put things into perspective: $191B in procurement dollars (1998$), 2852 aircraft, $67M each (1998$)(Pentagon, 1998)
2. Risks associated with a revolutionary design are being steadily retired. The F-35 is probably the most complicated military-technology project in history. It introduces a host of innovations that have never before been integrated into a combat aircraft. However, developers have successfully resolved every problem that arose with the new technology. For instance, a deficiency in the data that pilots see displayed on the visor of their high-tech helmets has been eliminated; a tailhook on the Navy variant of the fighter that wasn’t consistently grabbing arresting wires was redesigned and now works 100% of the time; a cracked bulkhead discovered during durability testing of the Marine version was strengthened.
How are those “risks associated with revolutionary design? Unless I am much mistaken, tailhooks existed before the F-35…
On a different note:
I wonder if LM pays for writing long posts and technical-sounding gibberish?
PLA-MKIIDefinitely in modern aviation given that the airframes are from the 80s and 90s. But did you already know that? On a side note, wonder what is causing all these crashes lately!
PLA-MKIII think we must stop the disinformation here, it is clearly stated, and repeated multiple times in this thread that the F-35s were as good as the production model. This isn’t some limited prototype being tested but one that is an aerodynamic equal to the production models.
On that note, I’d like to know, once more, why an F-16 based aircraft be offered with F-35 gadgetry. It would be a cheap and simple alternative, I bet even the USAF would find it useful to fill numbers.
PLA-MKIII am at a loss to understand why the US just doesn’t design a light fighter from the parts of the various programs it has. An upgraded F-16 with the XL / M-2000-like wings and thrust vectoring, perhaps one of the new high TWR engines, and parts from the JSF program would be a world beater. An AESA radar and IRST. A supercruising fighter that costs reasonable money and operates at reasonable costs. Doesn’t seem like an impossibility. Even if the US doesn’t need it, surely other allies would. Something like a modern day F-5 for those that have submitted to the Empire.
PLA-MKIIHere is an interesting comment by “Yak” on Aviationist:
I saw it in static display and in demo flight, and I must say that the flight was quite impressive.
In flight, the plane looked like an F16 (which I saw a few times in demo flight too), and actually as manoeuvrable as the Viper or another single engine fighter. Lightweight, rolls fast, however the turbofan was quite smokey.
This is a classic airframe design, something between the F16 (from above) and a Mirage (profile). Its large apexes and divergent outer missile rails remind the F18E.
On a personal note, I must admit that I prefered the aerobatics the Pakistani pilot pulled than the Rafale’s (which I know well, since I’m French), it was an exotic touch in this airshow and one of the only two fighter jets in flight, which was really disappointing from everyone’s opinion (even the US pilots I talked to).I’m not here to gamble on what this fighter is really capable of in combat, but the nice pamphlet they were giving away (14 pages in colour) was talking price, and it’s worth “a third of its occidental counterparts”. They built this plane and the plant which products it out of barely nothing, which is quite remarquable for a country like Pakistan (even if helped by China), considering. Little is known about its avionics and weapon systems, as well as the capabilities of the weapons it carries, so discussing this could only be speculation VS propaganda.
In my opinion, this plane, for what it’s worth and what I have seen, is a decent alternative for a low-budget air force which wants a basic 4-gen aircraft, while staying away from European, US, or Russian influence.Here are the few pics I took of it, enjoy ;).
http://theaviationist.com/2015/06/18/pak-air-force-jf-17-at-pas-2015/
PLA-MKIIlet him have this one.
he kept changing variables in another thread so his upgraded j-8 idea would seem reasonable, but got his heart broken when the entire forum said it was a stupid idea.
now he’s switched to j-7.so yes.. if we exclude BVR, radar capability, service life, nose and lerx upgrades, and limit the rules to variants that only have wing modifications and guns.. then yes j-7 wins! 😉
How magnanimous of you. Any other massaged half-truths you want to continue with, please feel free. I know you get a free ticket from the Mods here, maybe because of your religio-ethnic identity. Don’t think we don’t know 😉
PLA-MKIIUsing the SD-10 with the J-7 was never a technical issue, always whether there is an operational requirement or not. This is back from 2003 and you can confirm with PLAAF watchers as well.
From Jane’s Air Launched Weapons 2003
SD-10 (PL-12)
Type: Active-radar guided beyond-visual range air-to-air missile.
Development:
The SD-10 active-radar BVR air-to-air missile is now the highest priority air-to-air weapons programme for China’s military industry, and has supplanted several previous developmental projects (such as the PL-10 and PL-11) in terms of effort and importance. When, and if, it enters service, it should provide the People’s Liberation Army Air Force with a sophisticated, indigenous airborne weapon that will complement, to some degree the Russian-supplied R-27/R-77 missiles that equip the PLAAF’s Sukhoi Su-27 and Su-30 force.
The SD-10 (perhaps known also as the PL-12) is evolving under aegis of the Beijing-based China National Aero Technology Import & Export Corporation (CATIC), while work on various aspects of the programme is underway at a number of different technical centres around the country. The SD-10 is listed as part of CATIC’s current ‘Thunder-Lightning’ family of air-to-air missiles, that includes the PL-5E, PL-9C and TY-90 systems (all developed by the Luoyang Electro-Optical Technology Development Center). However, confusion surrounds the provenance, and even the designation, of the SD-10 programme. ‘SD-10’ is the export designation of a national programme that may, or may not be, the PL-12.
The PL-12 designation has also been associated with a notional air-to-air development of China’s LY-60 surface-to-air missile, but the actual status of this development effort is unclear. The SD-10 on the other hand is a very real programme.
Prior to the emergence of the SD-10, China’s active radar seeker AAM development programme was sometimes identified as the ‘AMR-1’. During Air Show China 1996, held during November in Zhuhai, the China Leihua Electronic Technology Research Institute/No 607 Research Institute exhibited a newly-developed active radar seeker, the AMR-1. This seeker was, in turn, believed to have been applied to a new air-to-air missile design, derived from the LY-60 surface-to-air missile, and dubbed the ‘PL-12’. This active radar missile, and the earlier semi-active radar homing PL-11, seemed to have a common design heritage with the Italian Aspide missile, supplied to China during the late 1980s. The status of the PL-11 and ‘LY-60/PL-12’ development programmes is unclear, but sources within CATIC say these earlier programmes have all been abandoned in favour of the SD-10.
The existence of the SD-10 programme was acknowledged by Chinese officials for the first time in early 2002 (the first pictures of the new missile appeared from Chinese sources during 2001). According to CATIC sources the missile has a range of 80 km. Earlier speculation around the AMR-1/LY-60 programme suggested that a ramjet engine was being developed for it, and such a powerplant would allow a missile to be effective at such long ranges. All available models and artist’s impressions of the SD-10 released to date clearly show a rocket-powered missile with a conventional airframe configuration. However, unidentified models of a notional ramjet-powered air-to-air missile have been shown in China and so an enhanced propulsion solution may be under consideration, or even under development, for the SD-10. According to a CATIC engineer, speaking in February 2002, several SD-10 test firings have already been undertaken, and most of the SD-10’s subsystems testing had been completed (although the missile was not yet ready for service).Description
The SD-10 is outwardly very similar to the US-designed AIM-120 AMRAAM. The two share a comparable aerodynamic configuration, although with a length of 3.85m, a diameter of 20.3 cm and a weight of 180 kg the SD-10 is a little longer, wider and heavier than the AMRAAM. The SD-10 has four rear-mounted control fins that each have a very distinctive notch cut into their base. These fins are longer and more prominent than those of the AMRAAM and are cropped at an angle (rather than in line with the missile body). Four larger triangular fins are fixed to the mid-section of the missile. Internally, the leading edge of the centrebody fins is in line with the start of the missile’s rocket motor. That motor is a variable-thrust sold rocket booster, that offers two levels of motive power for different sections of the flight envelope.
CATIC is known to be developing X-band and Ku-band active radar seekers, which may be intended for the SD-10. However the latest reports confirm that China has been co-operating closely with Russia’s AGAT Research Institute, based in Moscow, and that AGAT is the source of the SD-10’s essential active seeker. This joint development effort (perhaps with the name ‘Project 129’) has reportedly seen the supply of AGAT’s 9B-1348 active-radar seeker (developed for the Vympel R-77, AA-12 ‘Adder’) to China for integration with a Chinese-developed missile, the SD-10. Alternatively, technology from AGAT’s 9B-1103M seeker family may be offered to China. Russia is also the source for the missile’s inertial navigation system and datalink.
The SD-10 has four engagement modes. To take the greatest advantage of its maximum range it will use a mix of command guidance (via a datalink) plus its own inertial guidance before entering the active radar terminal guidance phase. The missile can also be launched to a pre-selected point, using its strap-down inertial system, before switching on its own seeker for a terminal search. Over short ranges the missile can be launched in a ‘fire-and-forget’ mode using its own active seeker from the outset. Finally, the SD-10 has a ‘home-on-jam’ mode that allows it to passively track and engage an emitting target, without ever using its own active radar or a radar from the launch aircraft. The seeker is connected to a digital flight control system that uses signal processing techniques to track a target. The missile’s warhead is linked to a laser proximity fuse.
The SD-10 is claimed to have an operational ceiling of 20 km, with a maximum effective range of 70 km and a minimum engagement range of 1,000 m. The missile has a 40 g manoeuvring limit and, according to CATIC, it has been tested for a 100-hour captive ‘live flight’ life.Operational status
The SD-10 is not yet believed to be in PLAAF service, but is in an advanced stage of development and may have been released for operational test and evaluation with the air force. According to CATIC, the SD-10 can be carried by a range of aircraft including the J-7 (F-7), J-8 (F- and MiG-series fighters, or any Western aircraft that have been fitted with the missile’s PF95 launcher and pylon. The obvious radar limitations of these aircraft make it clear that they will probably never be fitted with the SD-10, at least in Chinese service. While trials firings have probably been conducted using Shenyang J-8 testbeds, it is believed that the SD-10/PL-12 programme is intended, initially, to equip China’s fleet of Su-27 (J-11) ‘Flankers’ as part of a wider nationally-sourced capability enhancement for the PLAAF’s ‘Flanker’ force.
The other potential applications for the SD-10/PL-12 in Chinese service are on the Chengdu J-10 next-generation combat aircraft now under development, perhaps the upgraded Shenyang J-8M ‘Finback’ and the CATIC FC-1/Super 7 lightweight multirole combat aircraft being developed jointly by China and Pakistan. During 2001 officials at Pakistan’s National Development Complex confirmed that the NDC was conducting study/development work on a new active-radar missile programme, a possible reference to the SD-10. Certainly the most prominent ‘public appearance’ of the SD-10 to date has been on the full-size mock-up of the FC-1/Super 7. Pakistan has established a national production line for the Italian Galileo Avionica (formerly FIAR) Grifo 7 multimode fire-control radar at its Kamra Avionics and Radar Facility. A version of the Grifo radar (Grifo S7) is being developed for the FC-1/Super 7, and the Grifo is already fitted to Pakistan’s Chengdu F-7PGs. In July 2002 Galileo Avionica confirmed that it would be offering the latest development of the Grifo radar, the Grifo 2000/16, as a candidate radar for the J-10 once its entered the production phase. Galileo Avionics describes the Grifo 2000/16 (originally designed as a radar for F-16 upgrades) as a modern, modular, multimode radar with enhanced air-to-air capabilities that is compatible with modern BVR missiles.Specifications
Length: 3.85 m
Body diameter: 203 mm
Wing span: n/k
Launch weight: 180 kg
Warhead: HE fragmentation
Fuze: Active proximity fuse
Guidance: Inertial mid-course and /or datalink updates, with active radar terminal homing
Propulsion: Solid dual-thrust rocket motor
Range: 70 km (in a head on engagement)Contractor China National Aero Technology Import & Export Corp (CATIC), Beijing.
At present 16 F-7BGs are in the BAF’s inventory and have been in service since 2006 though it intends to procure up to 70 more BVR-capable F-7BGs in total to strengthen its interception capabilities.
http://www.defencebd.com/2010/11/f-7bg-of-bangladesh-air-force.html
If you have any further doubts, look up the details of the KLJ-6F radar.
PLA-MKIIsince we’re on the F-5,
did the Singaporean F-5S/T ever get their AMRAAMs delivered?
the modified wing/lerx, inflight refueling capabilities, plus AMRAAM means it can rip apart any J-7 way before they can even get close..the Chilean F-5s probably worse since they have Python 4 and Derby to snipe them from afar, or slit their throats up close.
as JSR would say, J-7 is limited because of its small nose. no potential for better radar.
hi there Y-20 Bacon, we are actually discussing basic maneuverability i.e. wvr, gun fight.
However, to humor you here, J-7Gs do have HOBS capability and can use the SD-10, albeit not to its max range (usable only up to about 40-50 km).
Again, that takes us to a very different discussion here.
PLA-MKIIright! potentially lots of great deals! maybe in Latin America or Indonesia!
don’t worry about Bangladesh though, lots of cheap multi role J-8s and JF-17s coming their way! who needs falcons or mirages when you have the light sabre for the third world?
Hi there Y-20, don’t worry I’m not thinking of Bangladesh, although cheap S-300s, submarines and frigates might interest us. Mirages – Egypt or India. F-16s – Indonesia, Pakistan, Chile, Jordan… too many countries to list. Come to think of it Turkey might buy it all, just because they love their neighbor so much.
Sign In
