CHINESE TOTALLY FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just ask the Pakistani's and Burmese about their version of the F-16- the JF-17. It has cracks in the fuselage and fogging HUD. Even the F-7 AIRGUARD copied from the Mig 21 is total bullshit with parts falling off after 6 G manouvers.
I have a hard time believing Russia's military manufacturing is better than the Chinese. Military manufacturing is a subset of your overall manufacturing capacity. Not only China's manufacturing capacity is several times larger than Russia's, its manufacturing process is also more advance, and highly standardized. You can compared the finishes of a any modern Chinese aircrafts such as the J-10, J-15, or J-16, you will find their finishes are much better than any Russian aircrafts. There is a reason why Chinese consumer electronics are some of the best in the world, take drones for example, currently both the Russians and Ukrainians are using DJI drones for recons and attacks on the battle field, and they are extremely popular among average consumers as well. The DJI drones are very affordable, and they are made with excellent quality. And Chinese electric cars are also outselling Japanese ICE cars in ASEAN where they do no face unfair tariffs like in the west. Those EVs are also affordable and made with excellent quality. If a country can manufacture high quality drones, ships, EVs and other industrial goods, there is no reason why its fighter jets will somehow end up being uncompetitive. When the US was the world's sole manufacturing powerhouse in the 50s and 60s, the US made excellent consumer goods and military hardware.
like the youtuber said, you have to take what he said with a grain a salt, because it is an absolute taboo for them to acknowledge the fact that china is at least a peer tech to the west.
good point with DJI. they also make iPhones and other quality products. some material technology might be still not there yet or some manufacturing methods. (see bearings and ball pen balls) for decades this is still an area that is not mastered and fully depends on imports. so the reality is yes, they have made huge steps and are totally able to produce high quality products. and some areas where it's the top 5% they still need to catch up. jets in general are amazing products. want to print them in 4m size and put them on my wall. absolute beauty.
Just nitpicking, but no, DJI isn't selling any of their drones to either Ukraine or Russia anymore. At the start of the war both sides bought large numbers of DJI drones from the civilian market and used them extensively, but by the third month or so, no DJI drones were being bought for military use in the conflict. The main reason is because DJI drones are TOO EXPENSIVE, at least the ones actually usable on the battlefield. Instead, both countries buy components from the companies in China that supply DJI (and other drone manufacturers) and assemble their own drones.
Leave out your silly "grain of salt" on the jamming incidents, dude - the US commander of that flight was demoted by the US, and obvious was a reason for that. The Chinese indeed managed to humiliate the muricans on that day.
Coulter didn't get demoted, he got reassigned. These are not the same thing. He was relieved of command “due to a loss of confidence in his ability to command." You don't know for certain that he was relieved due to this incident in the SCS. It might have been, yes. But we don't know for sure. This could be a coincidence. It's fairly obvious though that China is growing very rapidly in their naval, EW, and AI capabilities. The US and its allies will need to catch up.
In the Chinese military enthusiast community, the prevailing view is that the J-20 is used for long-range attacks on critical enemy nodes such as AWACS, refueling aircraft, and aircraft carrier fleets to disrupt their air superiority. The J-35 is seen as a multifunctional fighter capable of both air combat and ground attacks, aimed at eliminating key enemy defenses. The J-20 and J-35 are responsible for "kicking down the door." The J-16, often referred to as the "bomb truck" due to its massive payload capacity, is considered ideal for attacks. Following these, an endless wave of large drones deploying small drones, unmanned dogs, unmanned vessels, and so on, is expected. Of course, these are merely speculations by military enthusiasts. The real situation is unknown due to strict confidentiality measures. Additionally, the sixth-generation fighter jet is highly anticipated.
They uploaded a photo of a presumably 5.5 gen fighter bomber type plane code named JH-26. I don’t know whether the photo is real, even though it appears to be. However, it does seem like JH-26 is in development since someone found the radar spec of the plane.
Not only China, but also Russia should be proud of this airplane. Absolutely beautiful and highly modified platform. This plane will be fighting another 50 years around the world even if they're retired from major air powers.
1:07 the Chinese achieved the mystery the Soviet Union couldn't during the 1970s. Its a common thing in the West that when their access to information is blocked by a country, they immediately try to underplay the said country.
Sure because underestimating the Soviet MiG-25 somehow led to the F-15, Soviet ABM capabilities led to the ABM Treaty, and Soviet dominance across the Communist world led to the Vietnam War and America's Cold War worldview in general 🙄
Some notes: 14:30 - The WS-10 series actually didn't have too much direct relations with the GE F101. The closest relationship is, the WS-10 is based on both russian's AL-31 turbofan, and reverse engineed engine core from the CFM56 engines on civil jetliner - share the same engine core with GE F101 and F110. The WS-10 did have some serious issue in its early stage, but at that time it was still using mechanical control system learning from the AL-31, plus being the first domestic made fighter jet turbofan engine, so it's kind of acceptable. The B variant replaced the mechanic system with FADEC and solved most of problems. Plus, many ppl said the J-16 is reverse engineer version of Su-30MKK/MK2. It's a widely circulated misunderstanding. The J-16 is based on J-11BS, i.e. the twin-seat version of J-11B.
@@itsericzhou Nope, if you watch it carefully enough you will find the tip of the vertical fins on Su-30MKK/MK2 are straight, and tilted (cropped) on Su-27/35/J-11. The J-16 have a cropped tail fin tip with no extended and no big nose - all chinese flankers by far have no modification to the shape of the nose, despite some of them could changed the inner sturcture, like the J-11D and J-15T which equipped with tilted AESA radar antenna - so it's obvious based on Su-27/J-11 series. Many photo that claimed to be "J-16" could just be the Su-30MKK which shared the same standard air superiority livery with J-11BS and some of J-16s. But if you see a chinese twin-seated flanker with LO painting and canopy coating, then it's 100% a J-16.
Fun fact: later-batch J16s have some Russian components installed. Shenyang is too busy fielding J-15s and getting J-35s tested, plus the Russian components are, in fact, cheaper than the Chinese equivalents 😂
@@daoistwanderer2671 they can make a lot of stuff but sooner or later you'll hit the wall at how many you can keep running. maintenance is really expensive
I personally believe the Chinese J16 is the best heavy fighter jet now compared to its American and Russian also European equivalent. Hope to see the real close encounters between them
@@Cruiser_Rao You sure endian? "The publication highlighted that these numbers made the J-16 "by far the most widely commissioned heavyweight fighter class by a single air force anywhere in the world since the turn of the century."
How can you say that. The Su-35, pilots, maintenance crews, engineering Sukhoi engineering team have been at war for about 3 years. They have 3 years of real life experience under their belts and actual real life combat kills. They have had time and the opportunity to make adjustments, upgrades and develop real life tactical changes in real combat J-16 has never seen real combat in real life and yet you are going to sit there and say that the plane and pilots that have never been to real life combat are better that the plane and pilots that have been fighting a war for 3 years. There goes your credibility.
@@danwelterweight4137 3 years of what, 3 years of fighting with teenagers does make you qualified to fighting someone like tyson who never fighted but well trained. Today, avionics and radars and datalinks are the key
@@danwelterweight4137 Radars, avionics, data links and composite materials used on Chy nese planes and J16 are far better than those used by Su35. There goes your credibility
@@oot007 That's according to whom? The Su 35S is facing Ukraine and NATO radars, Chinese fighters are afraid to enter Taiwan, when they fight against enemy radars and fighters, you say it, until then... It's just blah blah blah
3:02 J-11 is based on the SK, not twin-seated UBK.
3:53 J-11B is an air superiority figher, not a multirole one. J-15 is the very first multirole Su-27 adopted by the PLA (and yes, PLAN claimed said title before PLAAF). 5:41 There is never an A variant of the J-16s. 15:34 PLAAF did not adopt PL-9 on a significant scale - its role was fulfilled by PL-8 (licensed Python). 16:45 The AAM shown is a PL-17, not a 15. J-16 is, to date, the only PLAAF fighter operating this AEW&C/tanker-killer AAM. Nevertheless, good work on putting together the video
Plus: rumors said the PL-17 will have a whopping ~400-600km maximum range, and ~200km for maneuver targets (i.e. fighter), and the hugh active radar seeker have a detection range of 40km.
Thanks for the excellent correction as the inaccuracy appears everywhere in this video. BTW, - J-11 is a Su-27SK built with Russian parts and components. - J-11A is still a Su-27SK but fully built with China made parts and components, and it was not equipped with any China designed avionics and weaponry. - J-11B is the first Flanker model fully integrated with China designed avionics and weaponry.
Flanker shown impressive potential for modernisation. Probably cuz its a behemoth relative to other fighters and extra stuff doesnt affect its flight performance like in small - medium machines.
@@elestromusicgamesfun1101 I agree. It may have great aerodynamics for all I know but it does seem extra large for a carrier launched fighter. The cockpit, canopy and radome area just seems like it’s “fat”. The tails seem extra large and engine area also seem to be intentionally spaced out? Just observations
Agree esp. when it says China's strength today is no better than that of 1905s US (13:46) 🤣🤣🤣. That's how a super-vassal is like when it's trying so hard not to displease it's master.
The AIM-260 mentioned in the video actually still under development. Its part in the clip appeared to be computer generated, not even a real prototype.
Murica is decades behind on long range A2A missiles, Russia has the R37M for decades, with range up to 400km, much better than any US missile in production or even prototype, lol.
yeah, the writing is really weird, a lot of incorrect info and downplay. if they actually do proper writing they might as well stated aim 174B/sm 6 instead of aim 260 since it is more possible for it to be in active service now or at least very soon. and it might actually be a real contender that will outmatch Russian R37M or Chinese PL17. but instead, they use aim 260.
Meanwhile the AIM-174 is already in service, and it starts with a proven track record of live kills as a Standard SAM against small maneuvering anti-ship missiles, and its potency only improves when launched while aloft.
I think the J-11D project is scrapped. There haven't been any reports of it for many years. Many speculative thoughts from even Chinese military experts (Citing a retired PLAN general Zhaozhong Zhang) and media outlets (For example, refer to CrazyWarfareShow, they have a RUclips channel) have quoted that it is because J-16 is already the best flanker in the PLAAF arsenal even in air-to-air capability. And its avionics might have only been surpassed by the latest J-15T. Being a twin-seat fighter jet doesn't mean it is subpar to single-seat fighters, especially since the efforts to overhaul the J-11 variants have been largely abolished, likely due to unfavorable costs. It is reasonable to assume that the advancement in avionics and flight controls in the J-16 was greater than the gap between a possible drawback in the airframes. That is, even the latest J-11B variant, be it BHG or whatever, couldn't beat the J-16 in an air-to-air battle. And I believe they've done the simulation test before stating so. I would say the Su-35 is still on the upper hand during a dogfight because of its superior airframe and thrust vectoring, but hey, those AESA radars they just casually slap on the J-16 will grant a huge advantage in long-range engagements, which is increasingly more popular than dogfighting in a modern setting. The conventional wisdom that never fails will tell us that given the same level of technology, having 2 guys is always better than having only 1 guy, even without an onboard AI. It's certainly at least a level better for situational awareness and efficiency in target acquisition and executing attack orders. The WSO is essentially the force multiplier here that will leverage the arsenal to a new level, beyond a single-seated fighter that randomly slaps on some random TV-guided ground attack munitions only because it has the payload...
@@jason59k55 The J-16D is the EW version of the J-16. The J-11D was a basically an overhaul of the J-11. Many technologies from the J-11D eventually found their way into the J-11BG/BGH program.
They do have an array of impressive modern and up to date weaponry and equipment. What remained as a mystery is their stealth bomber.. they already have drone versions of that, so it’s quite a big question on how are their performance, and what number of those do they possess currently
People often forgot that China was supposed to be the primary buyer of F16-79 back in the 80s. That's when Americans started to teach China about avionics. Russian jets was almost as advanced as the west mechanically but was definitely behind avionics wise. Hence, any upgrade avionics wise would make any flanker superior than Russian counter parts.
I really, really want to know if these planes-the J16, F 18 Super Hornet, the F15 X, Euro Fighter, and Raphale-could do a mock-up dogfight and which of the fighter would come up on top...
Never Happen In Your Entire Life Because American And France,UK,Spain, Germany Restrict Operator Country To Trained Using They Modern Aircraft With Adversary Country But Is Okay For Them Rafale France Training With Su 30 MKI Indian USMC Super Hornet Training With Su 30 MKM Malaysia I Think Recent Training Refueling Su 30 MKM Using US Tanker In South China Seas You Can See That Videos Circulate In RUclips
You need high maneuverability today, mainly not for "dog fight", lol, but yes to improve your chances to escape - watch / listen the story of the russian fighter bomber who managed to outmaneuver a pair of Patriot missiles - just search on YT - the high maneuverability and speed of SU fighter saved those pilots' life !
F15EX and J16 are similar in concept. They are heavyweight standoff range missile trucks loaded with the best electronics the biggest missiles. They will not engage in close combat as those will be done by stealth fighters.
You might enjoy some DCS Videos. Although only based on publicly available information, it's still a thrill to watch. Go search for "Growling Sidewinder". These a lot of this stuff on his channel.
All the Su-27 derivatives are magestic Flankers. It's arguably one of the best looking military aircraft out there (I like the F-16, the Eurofighter, and the Hornet but they don't come close to it).
While I don't think it's anywhere near as good as the F-15ex, F-16 blk70, or even the Chinese/Pakistani JF-17 blk3, its probably the best looking fighter on the market.
@@blackkn1ght What?? The J-16 (especially more modern iterations) are quite literally the competitor to the F-15EX, J-16D being a competitor to the Growlers, while the F-16 would literally be in a disadvantage (smaller radar, worse kinematic performance) it still stands a chance, the JF-17 does not.
@@M16_Akula-IIIJ16 is the competitor that China brought to the table. It’s still no where nears as versatile as f35 or f15ex. F35 block 4 will have 10x the amount of jamming power of a F18G. The technology gap is significant.
Chinese long surpassed the Russians in electronics. So j-16 is better than su-35 is a given when the latter uses a PESA radar. The royal united service institute said that Chinese missiles have reached parity with western missiles and the Pl-15 surpasses the aim-120.
@@thebesttheworldhastoofferchann - R37M is tested for decades, and recently in Ukr is battle tested, in real war conditions. And prove to be far superior to the aim120. But is not surprise, considering we talk about missiles, a field where the russians are ahead of the US.
the omission of the internal cannon in the J-16D multi role EW fighter is really not necessary . . . the J-16D can carry out airborne electronic warfare mission while retaining the 30 MM GSh-6-30 six-barrel rotary cannon built into the starboard side wing root section of the J-16D airframe . . . in the track while scan mode the switching on of the missile's radar guidance can be delayed thus shortening the reaction time of the target aircraft once the missile radar is active . . . the PLAAF is said to have a fighter strength of no less than 3,455 active in use airframes . . . and a mission ready availability rate of 84% in actual combat situations . . .
@@pigmoonk2545 probably the content creator is misinformed. Because much smaller and inferior fighters like J-10C and JF-17 have multiple MAWS sensors on both rear and front of the fighter. So it's quiet counterintuitive to think that the more advanced and bigger J-16 won't have those set of sensors of not better.
@@pigmoonk2545 inferior means if compared to J-16, the JF-17 and J-10C are much smaller, limited and lower tier fighters in PLAAF. After the J-20, J-16 is the silver bullet, the spearhead of the PLAAF in non-stealthy 4++ gen fighter category
@@pigmoonk2545 I didn't meant to compare them with any non-chinese fighters. I don't know much about the current variants of the F-15 but if compared to the F-16s, J-10C is better in BVR engagements but F-16 has a slight edge over J-10C in close sustained turn rate fights. But the F-16s advantage is nullified when HOBS WVR missiles are deployed from each side. J-10C also have issue in 2 of it's hard points configuration as they need some modifications each time you wanna switch them to carry missiles instead of fuel tanks and vice versa. F-16 doesn't have any issues like that.
@@pigmoonk2545on par with f16 and f15, lol depends on version, J 10c is no match for f16 block 70 and forget about the f15ex, j10c could probably crash better with its ws 10b engines
The only thing the su27 & j11 share now is the general aerodynamic shape. Its like a different species of animal from the same evolutionary tree. Like a dog and a fox.
Well detailed video compiled from various sources. And it's actually good to have a multiple powers with equivalent or better military capabilities than any single hegemonic power... multi polar world is better for the majority 😊
That's what aspiring hegemons want you to believe. In reality a "multi-polar world" just means multiple fault lines for militarized conflict, much like what we had going into the World Wars. There's a reason that Pax Romana, Pax Mongolica, and Pax Americana are named after the single power who oversaw security and the peaceable trade it allowed for like a third of humanity at the time.
This was an outstanding video! From the narration, video editing, to the background music, everything was a major hollywood studio level production. Excellent job!
@@mab2187 TVC and canards are great for low speed maneuver, but basically useless at high speed. China choose to reduce weight and complexity though they proofed they have TVC and canards techs.
in the beginning they had problem reverse engineering the engines/turbine materials. Question is how good are these planes when used extensively over longer periods and how often do they need an overhaul. These details are important to have not too many planes grounded after few engagements. Pakistani use chinese airplanes. Anyone knows how the pakistani think now about their chinese planes?
America regularly does actually adversarial combat exercises, often deliberately nerfing its best equipment until they figure out how handicapped it has to be for an even match. Unlike the predetermined parades that the PLA performs in its "war games". That's on top of all the bona fide experience that America and quite a number of its allies bring to the simulated fight.
8:51 The story about the US jamming the Chinese is utter BS. A) jamming is an act of war B) why would you give away your capabilities to an adversary during peacetime?
Nothing uncommon. The Americans, Russians, and the Chinese often used encounters as a chance to exercise and show off. Buzzing ships, cutting into formations, mock attacks, sonar pings... EW is something the Americans are confident at, so I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to show off a bit...
Logically the AI can only work with the data it is fed. If a B-21 could still absorb any radar signal, then the networked sensors wouldn't have anything to work with. However if it caused some sort of network disrepency then that would be a weak link that an AI could pinpoint
Yes. It is between the J-16 and J-15, nothing else. I'd even say that this isn't the question to be asking as we know China has the best and most advanced. The proper question would be to ask is this the best 4.5+ gen in world, because I think it is.
The best 4.5+ aircraft would likely go to the F-15EX. It has a stronger powerplant which goes to powering a large and advanced radar. Then there is the EPAWS, which gives it quite potent jamming abilities.
@Sam7Algeria Um, no, it really isn't. It has a much smaller AESA array, a less advanced radar, is slower, and likely has a less potent EW system than the F-15EX.
@@voidtempering8700 no bro it has the best air to air hypersonique missile the meteor and can work in link with multiple systems with drones and fregate radars so its way better than the EX and it exsists
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432su 30sm2 has better and reliable Al 41 engines but IRBIS-E Pesa is far inferior even to the third gen aesa that China has in its j 16 SAR of irbis e is 3 meters, do you know how bad that is? Equivalent to early 80's f15 e radar or even worse
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432Chinese engines have proven their mettle, as well as their missiles and radars (which far exceed the Irbis in performance, note, J10C's radar beat Irbis. It's the weakest out of all PLAAF airborne radars.) China leapt 10 years ahead of Russia, whom they previously were reliant on, in such a short. time
While China does do industrial espionage this probably was far more a thing a decade ago with China now having abilities exceeding Russia in most areas and only slightly behind the US and Europe and ahead of the rest of the world. They've managed to develop apparently decent engines and their electronics probably exceed Russia's mainly because China has the funds and industrial power to actually invest in upgrades and building more than 5 units of current or next gen aircraft. The SU57 is cool and might be great but with only 10 or so of the things then they're not a major part as opposed to China which has 200 J20s and is building them at a rapid pace. Scale allows for development costs to be spread out and increases the likelihood of receiving upgrades over it's lifecycle. You only really only need to look at Chinas civilian industry tech which is competitive with all except the bleeding edge tech. Chinas green tech with batteries and solar are significantly ahead. Matching state support with workshop of the world enables a lot of rapid development and actually being able to build the stuff at scale.
The low number of Su57 is due to delays in development of it's new engine, nozzles and related technologies, as Russian Airforce refuses to greenlight full scale production until the plane is completely ready. Until then production is kept at small numbers to further test and refine the plane, and also to keep the manufacturing line running until the final variant is ready. The same goes for China, they are still in the process of developing engines that is yet to match their Airforce's initial requirement for J20 and J35. The high production rate of J20 then could be result of increasing tensions with US in South China sea so incase of a conflict they are more prepared, either that or as part of strategic deterrence. The completed variant of both Russian and Chinese planes would feature vastly improved new engines and from pictures released online, the engine nozzles would likely look somewhat similar to F22.
@@tofeelornottofeel5446Slight correction here - The desired engine for J20s has always been the WS15, which are in LRIP since last year following a successful test flight. This explains the increase in J20 production numbers as you rightly pointed out given their growing confidence with the platform's capabilities. PLAAF also seem to have forego thrust vectoring as a requirement even though the acrobatics J10 team equipped with WS10C3 possess the capability.
Their radars are better than the Russians but not by much. In the Aesa department they are way ahead of the Russians. The Russians really have an Archaic military compared to what China and the west can produce.
Su-57s are about 15 or so of combat-coded and combat-proven aircraft. They are CURRENTLY few. But production isn't stopped, acceptance is until new engines are installed. So airframes and all the other systems are being made and assembled. So there will be a fair few more of them. Initial contract of 76 will not be the only one.
The flankers are big; easy to just shove all the j-20 systems into the different airframe. Beyond the stealth airframe the flankers can be upgraded to j-20 standards
"Without the flanker as a starting point". The Chinese needed to fill a gap and it's been perfect for them. That's all. Just like J-7s before that and others. They have already surpassed the need for Russian equipment now. They could get by with J-10s and J-20s easily. They'll use up their J-16s until this new generation proves itself. I think the learning experiences of producing licensed aircraft is surely invaluable to their research and development but it seems they've gone in a new direction away from Russian engineering. It's the west they are catching up to now not the Russians who have been left behind and out of the loop. China knows Russia would turn on them the instant they would battle an outside adversary. They remember how they ceded upper Manchuria by force in a moment of weakness and how the Tsar treated them. Putin talks about returning to the ways of the Tsars. They know Russia is no ally and they need to stay ahead of them more than any western adversary. China will be ready to take their lands back if Russia should fall.
Excellent documentary. Well-infomed, well-researched, well-executed without any loss on artistical quality and without any visual inconsistencies. Good job! 👍
It's good enough. If you put 300 pretty good planes upp there every opponent will have a hard time. They are probably pretty good. Fully comparable to early F-15E's. The more modern Stealth planes are more likely wish copies of western planes. ie. not yet up there . But soon. 10-15 years from now there will be a Chinese plane comparable with western.
Resulta evidente el desconocimiento general sobre las características del radar su35s ruso.... primero los su35 de exportación osea el su35E como el que tiene china obtienen un derivado pero no el producto como el que usa la fuerza aérea rusa...aquí les va unos datos ........ características tácticas técnicas del radar no35 irbis.......Rango de funcionamiento de la radiación del radar: X, rango de frecuencia f= 8 - 12 GHz, longitud de onda de las señales de radar λ=3 cm Diámetro del reflector de antena (rejilla): 900 mm Número de EPI en el reflector de la antena (elementos transmisores y receptores, es decir, cambiadores de fase): 1779 Envoltura de radar (cono de observación): 240° (+/-120°) en azimut y elevación en total con desviación del reflector de la antena en la junta electrohidráulica de dos etapas a lo largo del eje vertical y rodando a lo largo del eje longitudinal. En posición fija, la envolvente es de 120°(+/ -60°) por acimut y elevación, y el escaneo en esa envolvente se realiza en tan solo unos segundos. [ 14 ] Una junta electrohidráulica giroestabilizada de dos etapas permite un cambio rápido de polarización, vertical a horizontal y viceversa.. Potencia media del transmisor principal en el modo de funcionamiento de alta frecuencia de repetición de la señal: 5 kW Potencia máxima de pulso del transmisor principal en el modo de funcionamiento de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal: 20 kW Potencia media del transmisor auxiliar en el modo de funcionamiento de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal: 2 kWEn regímenes VV arreglar Para el modo de operación de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal, el modo de combate PPS-DO (hemisferio frontal - detección adicional), en zonas de escaneo de 10°x10° o 20°x5°, es decir, 100 esquinas cuadradas = 450 km. Para el modo de trabajo de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal, modo de combate PPS = 400 km, en la zona de escaneo 30°x10°, es decir, 300 esquinas cuadradas, Para el modo de trabajo que combina frecuencias altas y medias de repetición de señales, el modo de combate AVT-Automat (PPS-ZPS) = 300 km, en la zona de exploración 300 esquinas cuadradas. Para el modo de trabajo de frecuencia media de repetición de señal, modo de combate ZPS=150 km, en la zona de exploración de 300 ángulos cuadrados. En modos VZ arreglar Para modo de trabajo de baja resolución - 3 m (modo de combate KRL - mapeo de haz real) = 400 km. Para el modo de trabajo de resolución media-2 m (modo de combate DOL-cartografía con estrechamiento Doppler del haz)=300 km. Para modo de trabajo de alta resolución: 1 m (modo de combate KAC - mapeo mediante apertura sintetizada) = 200 km. Distancias de detección y seguimiento automático de aeronaves en PPS (ángulo 0/4-1/4,+/15°=30°), en el contexto del espacio libre y dependiendo de su RERP (superficie reflectante efectiva de radar) en el X- rango de radiación del radar: ..Para RERP 0,01 m² = 100 km Para RERP 0,1 m² = 160-180 km Para RERP 1 m² = 270 km Para RERP 3 m² = 400 km [ 15 ] Selección de objetivos aéreos por tamaño de RERP: 0,01 m²-1 m² = Objetivo pequeño, 1 m² -10 m² = Objetivo mediano, 10 m² y más = Objetivo grande......
It is you who is purposely misreporting information, and failing to see the nuance behind the claimed figures. 1. The Su-35 detected a target out to 400km through a narrow-beam search, not volume search. 2. During a normal search, it can only detect such a target from 200km. 3. Keep in mind, this is detecting, not tracking. 4. There is a flight video from I dis that has them testing the Irbis-E. In the video, the Su-35 was only able to track the target at 100km, and this was for a single target in an environment with no jamming.
@voidtempering8700 primero y error más común es el vídeo que viste se trata de avión de pruebas su30mk2 blue..en 2006 con el primer prototipo de irbis con una potencia nominal de 1kw...el irbis entro en servicio en 2010 en los primeros su35s con una potencia nominal media de 5kw y max de 20kw...segundo uno de las ventajas del radar irbis es que está montado en auxiliar hidráulico en movimiento vertical y horizontal por lo que en modo de escaneo estrecho 10 x10... Puede mover la antena como un radar mecánico y lograr una gran eficiencia con mucha potencia en ángulo alto... generalmente trabajan en el modo pps de 30x10 en alta frecuencia y en pps y zps combinando alta y media frecuencia...ambos con alcances cercanos a los 400km frente 3m2 ...mientras mueve la antena el actuador hidráulico cubriendo ángulos muy anchos ....en resumen puedes elegir que sub modo en dependencia de la misión ..regulando la potencia sin perder cobertura de radar...los resultados están en Ucrania...el su35s tiene récord en distancias de derribo varios por encima de 100km incluyendo uno a 177km en modo look down...
@@adriveranes9454 ".both with ranges close to 400km versus 3m2...while the antenna moves the hydraulic actuator covering very wide angles...in summary you can choose which sub mode depending on the mission": This is the case for all radars, in fact, you don't even need an actuator to cover the entire frontal arc, but it does help with notching, since the higher angle can be more effective at guiding a missile. Secondly, this dos not address anything I said. Additionally, as I mentioned before, the Su-35 achieved that range through a narrow search, not to mention it had support to boot, it was a cued search from a supported aircraft. That is not an indication of its normal detection range, that is its max detection range under favorable conditions. "the su35s has a record for several shootdown distances above 100km, including one at 177km in look down mode". What is your source for these claims, and have they been verified? Lastly, as I mentioned before, this is a jamming free environment. Unlike in Ukraine, any modern conflict would be full of jamming equipment on both sides.
Think a few comments here. The first is that people underestimated Japan and especially its Air Force pre WW2 which was a massive mistake. The second re: China / West is that China has (had) the challenge of foreign powers moving up its coastline (for motivation) while the west had the challenge of how to maximise its monetisation from respective Governments. Hopefully a light bulb is going on now!
😂😂😂 Why is it that the military's view of China (be it aircraft carriers, fighter planes, tanks, etc.) is always said to be stolen and copied... but when it comes to rockets there is no such narrative, why is that ? because China is not part of the MTCR 😅😅
The short answer, no one knows. None of the Chinese equipment has been used in combat so it's really anyone's guess. Its also questionable if it can keep up with the tempo of battle too, so not only is it of unknown quality, its duration is equally unknown. The last part is about the pilots. Seeing that in the CCP Military, devotion to the Party is more important than anything else, the quality of each pilot is unknown. So the plane is only as good as the person flying it. So you are going into battle with three very big Question Marks and the answer is no one knows until it happens. It could be a situation like the Zero in WW II where it was better than expected at first but had massive design flaws. It could be a flying turd that isn't as good as the Russian platform it is based on. It could be a flying liability for China. No one knows. 🤔
@privatedata665 Thank you. My gut feeling is that China would take massive casualties if they tried for Taiwan and the US, Korea, and Japan got involved. I think at the start they would have success but eventually all this untested equipment would probably break down under the tempo of combat. Some vehicles will be absolute junk, so will be alright, and a few will be pretty good but those vehicles will not be enough to compensate for the junk and the "meh" equipment. The United States is far more agile in planning and then changing tactics in the fly than China will ever be, so the casualties China would endure would be far worse than Russia in Ukraine. China cannot really launch human wave attacks like in Korea so you won't see hordes of Chinese running across the Taiwan Straight. That's kinda a funny thought.😆 The other side to this is that Han Chinese (the demographic that lives in the coast and is basically the top group of the CCP as well as what most people think when one says "Chinese") are basically dwindling from a population standpoint. It's known that the CCP has "miscounted" their population so there are at least 300+ million people (almost an entire United States worth of population) that are not really there. Add to the fact that the CCP Military is really more of an internal/domestic force rather than an expeditionary force and the cards are stacked against China. Losing hundreds of thousands of military men and then having all the internal issues they have (Uighurs, Mongols, Tibetans, Koreans, Siberians, etc...) and a large scale war with a grab for Taiwan is really the start of the CCP's implosion and a Civil War. So how good does Chinese Military hardware work fighting Western hardware is a moot point. Again, my gut feeling is it will be like the Zero in WW II, it will be a big to medium headache at first but because Western pilots are more flexible and usually have more hours in the cockpit, my guess is that eventually it will be neutralized. The way that the CCP Military is arranged, it's not going to be agile or resilient enough going toe to toe with the US, let alone the rest of the other countries. Add to that the economic sanctions slapped on it by the US, Australia, and the EU. All that the US, India, or Australia has to do is basically block any Chinese oil shipments from going through the Straits of Malacca and China is starving for gas and oil in a month. So yeah, one plane isn't going to be able to undo all of that.🤔
At 17.32 - A2A kill - you get things wrong again, dude: the world record set for the longest air-to-air confirmed kill "the R-37M took down the Ukrainian Sukhoi-27 from a range of 217km (about 140 miles) - the R-37M was fired from Russia’s fifth-generation fighter the Sukhoi-57 Felon" Dude, is MORE THAN DOUBLE of what you say here, lol ! Read about such things before uploading, to avoid making a fool from yourself... To your education, learn about the R37M max range, who is some 400km - and is considered by many the world's best A2A missile, with no equivalent in the world, for BVR distances. "The R-37M LRAAM Set the Record for Longest-Range Air-To-Air Kill in Ukraine" ( US & UK source)
The best versions of the Su30s are the Indian Su30MKI - with its incoming *Super Sukhoi* upgrade. It uses engines from the Su57 which are the AL41,Virupaksha AESA Radar (more transmit receive modules on the AN radars of the F22),New IRST (america is behind the rest of the world in IRST tech by 10 years) Israeli/Indian mission management system and additional hardpoints. edit I forgot to mention a new glass cockpit
No,as a Indian it is not Al 41 was rejected, Virupaksha supposed to have 1800 GAN t/r modules but right now it is still under devlopment, the radar we currently have has 800 GAAS t/r far inferior SAR resolution As far as irst is concerned usa is far superior than any other nation, probably in early 1990 they were inferior, but now they are not
all i know is the su27 and all its variants are absolutely beautiful fighter craft.
the nose leans so much to the ground it looks like its about to fall of the aircraft. looks disgusting
CHINESE TOTALLY FAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just ask the Pakistani's and Burmese about their version of the F-16- the JF-17. It has cracks in the fuselage and fogging HUD. Even the F-7 AIRGUARD copied from the Mig 21 is total bullshit with parts falling off after 6 G manouvers.
@@xD-mc5po your opinion sucks nuts
@@MacVerick not even my opinion. thats literally how the nose looks like
@@xD-mc5po That was my exact opinion as a kid back in kindergarten about the plane 😂
I have a hard time believing Russia's military manufacturing is better than the Chinese. Military manufacturing is a subset of your overall manufacturing capacity. Not only China's manufacturing capacity is several times larger than Russia's, its manufacturing process is also more advance, and highly standardized. You can compared the finishes of a any modern Chinese aircrafts such as the J-10, J-15, or J-16, you will find their finishes are much better than any Russian aircrafts.
There is a reason why Chinese consumer electronics are some of the best in the world, take drones for example, currently both the Russians and Ukrainians are using DJI drones for recons and attacks on the battle field, and they are extremely popular among average consumers as well. The DJI drones are very affordable, and they are made with excellent quality. And Chinese electric cars are also outselling Japanese ICE cars in ASEAN where they do no face unfair tariffs like in the west. Those EVs are also affordable and made with excellent quality.
If a country can manufacture high quality drones, ships, EVs and other industrial goods, there is no reason why its fighter jets will somehow end up being uncompetitive. When the US was the world's sole manufacturing powerhouse in the 50s and 60s, the US made excellent consumer goods and military hardware.
like the youtuber said, you have to take what he said with a grain a salt, because it is an absolute taboo for them to acknowledge the fact that china is at least a peer tech to the west.
It really doesn't matter what you think
good point with DJI. they also make iPhones and other quality products.
some material technology might be still not there yet or some manufacturing methods. (see bearings and ball pen balls) for decades this is still an area that is not mastered and fully depends on imports.
so the reality is yes, they have made huge steps and are totally able to produce high quality products. and some areas where it's the top 5% they still need to catch up.
jets in general are amazing products. want to print them in 4m size and put them on my wall. absolute beauty.
@@damaoniu But both Ukcrain and Russia go to China to buy almost everything.
Just nitpicking, but no, DJI isn't selling any of their drones to either Ukraine or Russia anymore. At the start of the war both sides bought large numbers of DJI drones from the civilian market and used them extensively, but by the third month or so, no DJI drones were being bought for military use in the conflict. The main reason is because DJI drones are TOO EXPENSIVE, at least the ones actually usable on the battlefield. Instead, both countries buy components from the companies in China that supply DJI (and other drone manufacturers) and assemble their own drones.
Leave out your silly "grain of salt" on the jamming incidents, dude - the US commander of that flight was demoted by the US, and obvious was a reason for that. The Chinese indeed managed to humiliate the muricans on that day.
👍💯🎯
你这样子说出来了人家不要面子的吗，尽管大家都心知肚明😂😂😂😂
Coulter didn't get demoted, he got reassigned. These are not the same thing. He was relieved of command “due to a loss of confidence in his ability to command." You don't know for certain that he was relieved due to this incident in the SCS. It might have been, yes. But we don't know for sure. This could be a coincidence.
It's fairly obvious though that China is growing very rapidly in their naval, EW, and AI capabilities. The US and its allies will need to catch up.
The Americans were locked by a type 55 destroyer not a j-16.
@@max2008abhi The J-16D overcame the EA-18G in that incident and the yoo essay sacked their wing commander.
In the Chinese military enthusiast community, the prevailing view is that the J-20 is used for long-range attacks on critical enemy nodes such as AWACS, refueling aircraft, and aircraft carrier fleets to disrupt their air superiority. The J-35 is seen as a multifunctional fighter capable of both air combat and ground attacks, aimed at eliminating key enemy defenses. The J-20 and J-35 are responsible for "kicking down the door." The J-16, often referred to as the "bomb truck" due to its massive payload capacity, is considered ideal for attacks. Following these, an endless wave of large drones deploying small drones, unmanned dogs, unmanned vessels, and so on, is expected. Of course, these are merely speculations by military enthusiasts. The real situation is unknown due to strict confidentiality measures.
Additionally, the sixth-generation fighter jet is highly anticipated.
I see that it's supposed to be today but we'll see
They uploaded a photo of a presumably 5.5 gen fighter bomber type plane code named JH-26.
I don’t know whether the photo is real, even though it appears to be.
However, it does seem like JH-26 is in development since someone found the radar spec of the plane.
Not only China, but also Russia should be proud of this airplane. Absolutely beautiful and highly modified platform. This plane will be fighting another 50 years around the world even if they're retired from major air powers.
1:07 the Chinese achieved the mystery the Soviet Union couldn't during the 1970s. Its a common thing in the West that when their access to information is blocked by a country, they immediately try to underplay the said country.
@@traviswalker8933
lol
By “achieved” you probably mean intellectual theft.
Sure because underestimating the Soviet MiG-25 somehow led to the F-15, Soviet ABM capabilities led to the ABM Treaty, and Soviet dominance across the Communist world led to the Vietnam War and America's Cold War worldview in general 🙄
Some notes:
14:30 - The WS-10 series actually didn't have too much direct relations with the GE F101. The closest relationship is, the WS-10 is based on both russian's AL-31 turbofan, and reverse engineed engine core from the CFM56 engines on civil jetliner - share the same engine core with GE F101 and F110. The WS-10 did have some serious issue in its early stage, but at that time it was still using mechanical control system learning from the AL-31, plus being the first domestic made fighter jet turbofan engine, so it's kind of acceptable. The B variant replaced the mechanic system with FADEC and solved most of problems.
Plus, many ppl said the J-16 is reverse engineer version of Su-30MKK/MK2. It's a widely circulated misunderstanding. The J-16 is based on J-11BS, i.e. the twin-seat version of J-11B.
Corect. J-16 is based on J-11BS👍
true
it has the different nose and the large vertical stabs of the su30 though? idk people toss that argument around alot
WS-10 have like FADEC since WS-10A version, pretty much every WS-10 engine this day is digital controlled
@@itsericzhou Nope, if you watch it carefully enough you will find the tip of the vertical fins on Su-30MKK/MK2 are straight, and tilted (cropped) on Su-27/35/J-11.
The J-16 have a cropped tail fin tip with no extended and no big nose - all chinese flankers by far have no modification to the shape of the nose, despite some of them could changed the inner sturcture, like the J-11D and J-15T which equipped with tilted AESA radar antenna - so it's obvious based on Su-27/J-11 series. Many photo that claimed to be "J-16" could just be the Su-30MKK which shared the same standard air superiority livery with J-11BS and some of J-16s. But if you see a chinese twin-seated flanker with LO painting and canopy coating, then it's 100% a J-16.
They took the shape and inside is 100 percent Chinese.
Fun fact: later-batch J16s have some Russian components installed. Shenyang is too busy fielding J-15s and getting J-35s tested, plus the Russian components are, in fact, cheaper than the Chinese equivalents 😂
@ that’s out of convenience.
@@RyanSummer-o2d even body changed a lot, it is shorter
SpaceX rocket also took the shape of firework invented by Chinese thousands of years ago.
@@slau8495 Not surprised given now China's GDP/cap is on par with Russian's. China's labor is no longer cheap.
China’s shipbuilding prowess and capacity is 250x that of the U.S. Never underestimate the Chinese.
@@daoistwanderer2671 they can make a lot of stuff but sooner or later you'll hit the wall at how many you can keep running. maintenance is really expensive
@@weilam03 财政收入不用来制造武器装备，难道用来当战争赔款？
@@weilam03china could probably maintain 20 ships with the price of 1 us ship cost
@@daoistwanderer2671 don't worry... US is superior in every way..
@@daoistwanderer2671 It's more like 6x that of the US, but six times is massive.
This plane somehow hit my G spot directly, so freaking gorgeous
I'm more partial to the rough-and-tumble Fulcrum design
The video thumbnail made me click. Sexy plane
I personally believe the Chinese J16 is the best heavy fighter jet now compared to its American and Russian also European equivalent.
Hope to see the real close encounters between them
F-15E & J-16
🍿🦅🎉
@@arminius6506 j16 is not heavy fighter.....
@@Cruiser_Rao You sure endian? "The publication highlighted that these numbers made the J-16 "by far the most widely commissioned heavyweight fighter class by a single air force anywhere in the world since the turn of the century."
@@Cruiser_Rao Flankers & Eagles are heavyweight fighters as compared to their Falcon & Mig-29 counterparts.
No matters what, J-16 is still a superiority fighter planes.
How can you say that.
The Su-35, pilots, maintenance crews, engineering Sukhoi engineering team have been at war for about 3 years.
They have 3 years of real life experience under their belts and actual real life combat kills.
They have had time and the opportunity to make adjustments, upgrades and develop real life tactical changes in real combat
J-16 has never seen real combat in real life and yet you are going to sit there and say that the plane and pilots that have never been to real life combat are better that the plane and pilots that have been fighting a war for 3 years.
There goes your credibility.
@@danwelterweight4137 3 years of what, 3 years of fighting with teenagers does make you qualified to fighting someone like tyson who never fighted but well trained. Today, avionics and radars and datalinks are the key
@@danwelterweight4137 Radars, avionics, data links and composite materials used on Chy nese planes and J16 are far better than those used by Su35. There goes your credibility
@@oot007 That's according to whom? The Su 35S is facing Ukraine and NATO radars, Chinese fighters are afraid to enter Taiwan, when they fight against enemy radars and fighters, you say it, until then... It's just blah blah blah
@@oot007 Even weapons on J16D is far better..
The airframe is gorgeous
3:02 J-11 is based on the SK, not twin-seated UBK.
3:53 J-11B is an air superiority figher, not a multirole one. J-15 is the very first multirole Su-27 adopted by the PLA (and yes, PLAN claimed said title before PLAAF).
5:41 There is never an A variant of the J-16s.
15:34 PLAAF did not adopt PL-9 on a significant scale - its role was fulfilled by PL-8 (licensed Python).
16:45 The AAM shown is a PL-17, not a 15. J-16 is, to date, the only PLAAF fighter operating this AEW&C/tanker-killer AAM.
Nevertheless, good work on putting together the video
Plus: rumors said the PL-17 will have a whopping ~400-600km maximum range, and ~200km for maneuver targets (i.e. fighter), and the hugh active radar seeker have a detection range of 40km.
@@jeffery7281 telephone pole flying at mach7 to greet you
@@slau8495 The characteristic strictness of a military fan towards weapons identification
Thanks for the excellent correction as the inaccuracy appears everywhere in this video. BTW,
- J-11 is a Su-27SK built with Russian parts and components.
- J-11A is still a Su-27SK but fully built with China made parts and components, and it was not equipped with any China designed avionics and weaponry.
- J-11B is the first Flanker model fully integrated with China designed avionics and weaponry.
@@jeffery7281 This is what happens when a ballistic missile bureau is assigned to create an AAM
Flanker shown impressive potential for modernisation. Probably cuz its a behemoth relative to other fighters and extra stuff doesnt affect its flight performance like in small - medium machines.
Sukhoi also from the start designed it for easy upgrades and modifications.
This channel is great! Glad I found it
That thing is HUGE
tbf all aircrafts are. have you seen a photo of a f15 on the ground?
@@elestromusicgamesfun1101 I agree. It may have great aerodynamics for all I know but it does seem extra large for a carrier launched fighter. The cockpit, canopy and radome area just seems like it’s “fat”. The tails seem extra large and engine area also seem to be intentionally spaced out? Just observations
@@endeend1 J-16s do not operate on carriers, only J-15 does. Also, Flankers are just a tad bit bigger than Foxhounds.
Yep, modern fighter aircrafts are quite huge. In fact if they stand straight it would be about the same height of a Gundam lol.
considering all aircrafts are around 30t, they are expected to be massive by size
Hey, nobody has thought that electronic warfare (like the Intruder) is so important. They are heroes.
This video goes into turbo-copium mode halfway through.
Agree esp. when it says China's strength today is no better than that of 1905s US (13:46) 🤣🤣🤣.
That's how a super-vassal is like when it's trying so hard not to displease it's master.
Shun Bot is that u?
lol
@@tweedy4sg They're talking about relative economic strength not military strength.
Well… duh thats literally all global aviation as of right now unless tried and tested. You have to presume worse case at all times
The AIM-260 mentioned in the video actually still under development. Its part in the clip appeared to be computer generated, not even a real prototype.
Murica is decades behind on long range A2A missiles, Russia has the R37M for decades, with range up to 400km, much better than any US missile in production or even prototype, lol.
yeah, the writing is really weird, a lot of incorrect info and downplay. if they actually do proper writing they might as well stated aim 174B/sm 6 instead of aim 260 since it is more possible for it to be in active service now or at least very soon. and it might actually be a real contender that will outmatch Russian R37M or Chinese PL17. but instead, they use aim 260.
@@mirandela777 yeah, and still Russia is losing in Ukraine
@@arixdne_fallen_angels losing? are you dreaming?
Meanwhile the AIM-174 is already in service, and it starts with a proven track record of live kills as a Standard SAM against small maneuvering anti-ship missiles, and its potency only improves when launched while aloft.
I think the J-11D project is scrapped. There haven't been any reports of it for many years. Many speculative thoughts from even Chinese military experts (Citing a retired PLAN general Zhaozhong Zhang) and media outlets (For example, refer to CrazyWarfareShow, they have a RUclips channel) have quoted that it is because J-16 is already the best flanker in the PLAAF arsenal even in air-to-air capability. And its avionics might have only been surpassed by the latest J-15T.
Being a twin-seat fighter jet doesn't mean it is subpar to single-seat fighters, especially since the efforts to overhaul the J-11 variants have been largely abolished, likely due to unfavorable costs. It is reasonable to assume that the advancement in avionics and flight controls in the J-16 was greater than the gap between a possible drawback in the airframes. That is, even the latest J-11B variant, be it BHG or whatever, couldn't beat the J-16 in an air-to-air battle. And I believe they've done the simulation test before stating so.
I would say the Su-35 is still on the upper hand during a dogfight because of its superior airframe and thrust vectoring, but hey, those AESA radars they just casually slap on the J-16 will grant a huge advantage in long-range engagements, which is increasingly more popular than dogfighting in a modern setting.
The conventional wisdom that never fails will tell us that given the same level of technology, having 2 guys is always better than having only 1 guy, even without an onboard AI. It's certainly at least a level better for situational awareness and efficiency in target acquisition and executing attack orders. The WSO is essentially the force multiplier here that will leverage the arsenal to a new level, beyond a single-seated fighter that randomly slaps on some random TV-guided ground attack munitions only because it has the payload...
also the J-11D has essentially been replaces by the J-16D
@@jason59k55 The J-16D is the EW version of the J-16. The J-11D was a basically an overhaul of the J-11. Many technologies from the J-11D eventually found their way into the J-11BG/BGH program.
@@Simulcrom you are correct, i was mixing up planes. my apologies.
There is so little of Chinese fighter footage that they had to use DCS World videos.
Because they don't dare to tell the truth, and they are too lazy to even search for videos from China
Well you can direcly toch it in last month at Zhuhai air show.
This is not surprising, as it is difficult for people who cannot understand Chinese to search and quote content on the Chinese Internet.
This analysis is bad ass !!!
the plane is so beautiful
Was this voiced by AI? If not the narrator might have a bright future as an AI impersonator.
AI Impersonators are coming to take the jobs of honest, hard-working AI.
Not sure if you can find any group or class to put J16 in, it's like, an air supreme bomber
Is it kind similar to F-15E?
@@leoleoleoliao4413 J16 has ASEA radar, its more like F15EX (based on QA), while its number overwhelming the F15EX
@@leoleoleoliao4413 yes, think of J11 as F15C, J11B as F15E and J16 as F15EX, it’s an oversimplification but good enough
F-15EX
我是台灣人更是一個驕傲的中國人，我為我的祖國中國感到無比的光榮與驕傲。期盼兩岸早日統一台灣回歸祖國!!!
@@jayhi88 不如早点移民中国
你一个拿美国护照的中国人，请不要故意用繁体字来假装台湾人了。狠无聊！
来上海请你吃饭兄弟
@@Wwy-l9b Jay就是一个拿美国护照的、故意打繁体字的中国人啦。现在台湾人100%反对统一的。怎么可能“企盼”，还“回归祖国”？把“中华民国”的正统牌位都丢了？！ 可能么？！
@@jayhi88 we also hope so never go to otherwise.
They do have an array of impressive modern and up to date weaponry and equipment. What remained as a mystery is their stealth bomber.. they already have drone versions of that, so it’s quite a big question on how are their performance, and what number of those do they possess currently
People often forgot that China was supposed to be the primary buyer of F16-79 back in the 80s. That's when Americans started to teach China about avionics. Russian jets was almost as advanced as the west mechanically but was definitely behind avionics wise. Hence, any upgrade avionics wise would make any flanker superior than Russian counter parts.
I really, really want to know if these planes-the J16, F 18 Super Hornet, the F15 X, Euro Fighter, and Raphale-could do a mock-up dogfight and which of the fighter would come up on top...
Never Happen In Your Entire Life Because American And France,UK,Spain, Germany Restrict Operator Country To Trained Using They Modern Aircraft With Adversary Country But Is Okay For Them
Rafale France Training With Su 30 MKI Indian
USMC Super Hornet Training With Su 30 MKM Malaysia
I Think Recent Training Refueling Su 30 MKM Using US Tanker In South China Seas You Can See That Videos Circulate In RUclips
You need high maneuverability today, mainly not for "dog fight", lol, but yes to improve your chances to escape - watch / listen the story of the russian fighter bomber who managed to outmaneuver a pair of Patriot missiles - just search on YT - the high maneuverability and speed of SU fighter saved those pilots' life !
F15EX and J16 are similar in concept. They are heavyweight standoff range missile trucks loaded with the best electronics the biggest missiles. They will not engage in close combat as those will be done by stealth fighters.
J16 is not good at dogfight, J15T would be much better on that.
You might enjoy some DCS Videos. Although only based on publicly available information, it's still a thrill to watch. Go search for "Growling Sidewinder". These a lot of this stuff on his channel.
Beautiful, absolutely beautiful.
Never belittle the enemy !
why do you think we are enemy?
@@wl82 Professionally the competitor I mean. Arrogance attracts defeat.
We can be family. Don't you love china at all ?
when you belittle somone... they are always the enemy Just treat likewise
@@zejusun323 I do like & respect the traditional China. Not the CCP.
China only purchased 24 su-35 fighters in 2015, it is impossible to allocate them to both PLAN and PLAAF
He said Su-35 and Su-30MKK/2 , PLAAF got the Su-35 ans the Su-30s are used by the PLAN
All the Su-27 derivatives are magestic Flankers. It's arguably one of the best looking military aircraft out there (I like the F-16, the Eurofighter, and the Hornet but they don't come close to it).
While I don't think it's anywhere near as good as the F-15ex, F-16 blk70, or even the Chinese/Pakistani JF-17 blk3, its probably the best looking fighter on the market.
@@blackkn1ght What?? The J-16 (especially more modern iterations) are quite literally the competitor to the F-15EX, J-16D being a competitor to the Growlers, while the F-16 would literally be in a disadvantage (smaller radar, worse kinematic performance) it still stands a chance, the JF-17 does not.
Don't fight guys, it's my subjective point of view. I like most modern fighter jets, but I tend to like the Soviet era planes more.
Yeh exactly.... I am not even ashamed to admit that Russia made the most beautiful aircraft in the world.
@@M16_Akula-IIIJ16 is the competitor that China brought to the table. It’s still no where nears as versatile as f35 or f15ex. F35 block 4 will have 10x the amount of jamming power of a F18G. The technology gap is significant.
Excellent work
j15t and j35a are also very good , they are carrier based j16 and j20
dont belittle struggle and that is all Western arrogant will do. remember this, Technology dont stand still and can be learn with time.
"learn" or steal and copy?
@@motha_trucker stop mindlessly copying comments from other people, sixteen-year old lol
@@Amoore-vv9wx are you mental, chinese or just gay?
@@Amoore-vv9wxjust cope
@@motha_truckercopy？we have a Electromagnetic catapult carrier，do Russia have？
Chinese long surpassed the Russians in electronics. So j-16 is better than su-35 is a given when the latter uses a PESA radar. The royal united service institute said that Chinese missiles have reached parity with western missiles and the Pl-15 surpasses the aim-120.
And all are surpassed by R37M :p
More goes into it then mere range. These missiles are not nearly as tested as the aim120.
@@thebesttheworldhastoofferchann - R37M is tested for decades, and recently in Ukr is battle tested, in real war conditions. And prove to be far superior to the aim120.
But is not surprise, considering we talk about missiles, a field where the russians are ahead of the US.
@@mirandela777 Yeah but its not targeting top tier fighters. Also ukraine only got very old variants of aim120 and still found them useful.
@@mirandela777 Also, last I checked Ukraine despite having a tiny airforce is still kicking so Rwhatever hasn't turned the tide.
As far i know Su-35 only operated by PLAAF 24 unit in South Military Theatre
确实如此，战机最漂亮的，是唯一！
The original Flanker, the SU-27, is still the most beautiful fighter jet, even after all these years...
the omission of the internal cannon in the J-16D multi role EW fighter is really not necessary . . . the J-16D can carry out airborne electronic warfare mission while retaining the 30 MM GSh-6-30 six-barrel rotary cannon built into the starboard side wing root section of the J-16D airframe . . . in the track while scan mode the switching on of the missile's radar guidance can be delayed thus shortening the reaction time of the target aircraft once the missile radar is active . . . the PLAAF is said to have a fighter strength of no less than 3,455 active in use airframes . . . and a mission ready availability rate of 84% in actual combat situations . . .
That is a huge radar reflector
All aspect IR missiles are commonplace. Explaining the IR threats are rear only seems to be outdated.
@@pigmoonk2545 probably the content creator is misinformed. Because much smaller and inferior fighters like J-10C and JF-17 have multiple MAWS sensors on both rear and front of the fighter. So it's quiet counterintuitive to think that the more advanced and bigger J-16 won't have those set of sensors of not better.
@@asimjabbar8445 J10C is on par to F15s and F16s. They are not inferior
@@pigmoonk2545 inferior means if compared to J-16, the JF-17 and J-10C are much smaller, limited and lower tier fighters in PLAAF. After the J-20, J-16 is the silver bullet, the spearhead of the PLAAF in non-stealthy 4++ gen fighter category
@@pigmoonk2545 I didn't meant to compare them with any non-chinese fighters. I don't know much about the current variants of the F-15 but if compared to the F-16s, J-10C is better in BVR engagements but F-16 has a slight edge over J-10C in close sustained turn rate fights. But the F-16s advantage is nullified when HOBS WVR missiles are deployed from each side.
J-10C also have issue in 2 of it's hard points configuration as they need some modifications each time you wanna switch them to carry missiles instead of fuel tanks and vice versa. F-16 doesn't have any issues like that.
@@pigmoonk2545on par with f16 and f15, lol depends on version,
J 10c is no match for f16 block 70 and forget about the f15ex, j10c could probably crash better with its ws 10b engines
The only thing the su27 & j11 share now is the general aerodynamic shape.
Its like a different species of animal from the same evolutionary tree. Like a dog and a fox.
Well detailed video compiled from various sources.
And it's actually good to have a multiple powers with equivalent or better military capabilities than any single hegemonic power... multi polar world is better for the majority 😊
That's what aspiring hegemons want you to believe. In reality a "multi-polar world" just means multiple fault lines for militarized conflict, much like what we had going into the World Wars.
There's a reason that Pax Romana, Pax Mongolica, and Pax Americana are named after the single power who oversaw security and the peaceable trade it allowed for like a third of humanity at the time.
This was an outstanding video! From the narration, video editing, to the background music, everything was a major hollywood studio level production. Excellent job!
The best aircraft to come out of china are those DJI drones...even those american governments uses it for its border patrol operations..😅
The Su-35 does not have an active phased array, and its avionics are not as good as the J16
Its a light weight medium range bomber/fighter so it has its purpose in the oceanic war
J-16 developed from J-11BS ,J-11B tandem seat
Fascinating and objective.
That is a beautiful aircraft...
Does it have TVC and canards? like the Su-30SM2? Kinda feels naked without them. China really making proper use of the Flanker airframe.
@@mab2187 TVC and canards are great for low speed maneuver, but basically useless at high speed. China choose to reduce weight and complexity though they proofed they have TVC and canards techs.
J10,C is a Beautiful jet.❤
Aw! What about this Bill? Every weapon needs to be built new, because of this ancient Ground-To-Air attack system we found.
in the beginning they had problem reverse engineering the engines/turbine materials. Question is how good are these planes when used extensively over longer periods and how often do they need an overhaul. These details are important to have not too many planes grounded after few engagements.
Pakistani use chinese airplanes. Anyone knows how the pakistani think now about their chinese planes?
外国人很想看中国的实战经验，我也很想看，请问你们有国家准备好下场了吗？我们随时欢迎
他们想要我们的实战经验，又没有一百多年前他们祖宗那样的胆量，把他们的战舰开过来。
AI in the back seat? Sounds like R2 D2 ! LOL
"but it is doubtful that it is anywhere close to the strenght of 1950s America" lmao the cope
Those new jets never tested in the war, so the real abilities are unknown.
So is F22…
@@luoyanyang7625 F22 has shot down a Chinese weather balloon,so F22 is very powerful!😂😂😂
America regularly does actually adversarial combat exercises, often deliberately nerfing its best equipment until they figure out how handicapped it has to be for an even match. Unlike the predetermined parades that the PLA performs in its "war games". That's on top of all the bona fide experience that America and quite a number of its allies bring to the simulated fight.
@@doujinflip Your understanding of PLA’s “war games” is obsolete…
@@luoyanyang7625 a balloon kill and some Syria action . Maybe bombing in Syria ?
Cool vid.
8:51 The story about the US jamming the Chinese is utter BS. A) jamming is an act of war B) why would you give away your capabilities to an adversary during peacetime?
Wow Is that the case Russian United States have been at war for a long time
Well, the superior one always likes to show off its ability and piss off its opponent.
Read about it, before commenting dumb things ! The US flight commander was demoted right after the incident ! Google-it, lol.
Nothing uncommon. The Americans, Russians, and the Chinese often used encounters as a chance to exercise and show off. Buzzing ships, cutting into formations, mock attacks, sonar pings... EW is something the Americans are confident at, so I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to show off a bit...
@@mirandela777 any link? can't find it
AI sensor data pattern processing could render even B-21 stealth capability useless?
@@tsechejak7598 most likely stealth is no longer an advantage against capable countries, but no country will openly say it.
Logically the AI can only work with the data it is fed. If a B-21 could still absorb any radar signal, then the networked sensors wouldn't have anything to work with. However if it caused some sort of network disrepency then that would be a weak link that an AI could pinpoint
What about J20S and J35A?
Don't ignore Hal Tejas
@@gandhikumar2956 wtf😂😂comparing samosa to marvel of technology 😂😂
Yes. It is between the J-16 and J-15, nothing else. I'd even say that this isn't the question to be asking as we know China has the best and most advanced. The proper question would be to ask is this the best 4.5+ gen in world, because I think it is.
The best 4.5+ aircraft would likely go to the F-15EX. It has a stronger powerplant which goes to powering a large and advanced radar. Then there is the EPAWS, which gives it quite potent jamming abilities.
@@voidtempering8700 I would partly say it's pretty close between the F-15EX and J-16. Although for EW purposes, E/A-18G and J-16D.
No vro the raphale gen 4 is the best 4.5@@voidtempering8700
@Sam7Algeria Um, no, it really isn't. It has a much smaller AESA array, a less advanced radar, is slower, and likely has a less potent EW system than the F-15EX.
@@voidtempering8700 no bro it has the best air to air hypersonique missile the meteor and can work in link with multiple systems with drones and fregate radars so its way better than the EX and it exsists
I had tuna on toast for dinner
Like a nice seared slice of bluefin on a crustini?
amazing.. i had fried chicken with coleslaw
I just had a chicken and cream cheese sandwich.
Noice
I just had chicken with rice for lunch.
The music in the beginning is japanese
To be honest, j16 is more in parto Su30sm2 that to the Su35...
The J-16 is better than both. It has better radar, avionics, and can fire better missiles.
@voidtempering8700 Sure buddy...
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432su 30sm2 has better and reliable Al 41 engines but IRBIS-E Pesa is far inferior even to the third gen aesa that China has in its j 16
SAR of irbis e is 3 meters, do you know how bad that is? Equivalent to early 80's f15 e radar or even worse
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432Chinese engines have proven their mettle, as well as their missiles and radars (which far exceed the Irbis in performance, note, J10C's radar beat Irbis. It's the weakest out of all PLAAF airborne radars.)
China leapt 10 years ahead of Russia, whom they previously were reliant on, in such a short. time
@@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432 You realize the information about the aircraft is available to research, right?
While China does do industrial espionage this probably was far more a thing a decade ago with China now having abilities exceeding Russia in most areas and only slightly behind the US and Europe and ahead of the rest of the world. They've managed to develop apparently decent engines and their electronics probably exceed Russia's mainly because China has the funds and industrial power to actually invest in upgrades and building more than 5 units of current or next gen aircraft.
The SU57 is cool and might be great but with only 10 or so of the things then they're not a major part as opposed to China which has 200 J20s and is building them at a rapid pace. Scale allows for development costs to be spread out and increases the likelihood of receiving upgrades over it's lifecycle.
You only really only need to look at Chinas civilian industry tech which is competitive with all except the bleeding edge tech. Chinas green tech with batteries and solar are significantly ahead. Matching state support with workshop of the world enables a lot of rapid development and actually being able to build the stuff at scale.
The low number of Su57 is due to delays in development of it's new engine, nozzles and related technologies, as Russian Airforce refuses to greenlight full scale production until the plane is completely ready. Until then production is kept at small numbers to further test and refine the plane, and also to keep the manufacturing line running until the final variant is ready.
The same goes for China, they are still in the process of developing engines that is yet to match their Airforce's initial requirement for J20 and J35. The high production rate of J20 then could be result of increasing tensions with US in South China sea so incase of a conflict they are more prepared, either that or as part of strategic deterrence. The completed variant of both Russian and Chinese planes would feature vastly improved new engines and from pictures released online, the engine nozzles would likely look somewhat similar to F22.
@@tofeelornottofeel5446Slight correction here - The desired engine for J20s has always been the WS15, which are in LRIP since last year following a successful test flight. This explains the increase in J20 production numbers as you rightly pointed out given their growing confidence with the platform's capabilities.
PLAAF also seem to have forego thrust vectoring as a requirement even though the acrobatics J10 team equipped with WS10C3 possess the capability.
Lol, China isn't behind Europe. China's only competitor is the US. Not any "European" country.
Their radars are better than the Russians but not by much. In the Aesa department they are way ahead of the Russians. The Russians really have an Archaic military compared to what China and the west can produce.
Su-57s are about 15 or so of combat-coded and combat-proven aircraft. They are CURRENTLY few. But production isn't stopped, acceptance is until new engines are installed. So airframes and all the other systems are being made and assembled. So there will be a fair few more of them. Initial contract of 76 will not be the only one.
美国佬好怕怕既要说威胁也要说不怕
Love the narrator
We will speculate at best up until the first shots of ww3 are fired
The flankers are big; easy to just shove all the j-20 systems into the different airframe.
Beyond the stealth airframe the flankers can be upgraded to j-20 standards
"Without the flanker as a starting point". The Chinese needed to fill a gap and it's been perfect for them. That's all. Just like J-7s before that and others. They have already surpassed the need for Russian equipment now. They could get by with J-10s and J-20s easily. They'll use up their J-16s until this new generation proves itself. I think the learning experiences of producing licensed aircraft is surely invaluable to their research and development but it seems they've gone in a new direction away from Russian engineering. It's the west they are catching up to now not the Russians who have been left behind and out of the loop. China knows Russia would turn on them the instant they would battle an outside adversary. They remember how they ceded upper Manchuria by force in a moment of weakness and how the Tsar treated them. Putin talks about returning to the ways of the Tsars. They know Russia is no ally and they need to stay ahead of them more than any western adversary. China will be ready to take their lands back if Russia should fall.
This will be good to listen to in the car, you don't need to watch just listen
that's actually true hold up
@Global-yt Lots of these videos are good to listen to as a "podcast" type thing without having to go and get spotify. the info is pretty clear
So they are trying to create an R2D2 style AI assistant?
You still haven't told us why it is the best.. all those aspect can be done,,
I don't think the Russians of all people were naive enough to not see this kind of thing coming.
Excellent documentary. Well-infomed, well-researched, well-executed without any loss on artistical quality and without any visual inconsistencies.
Good job! 👍
It's good enough. If you put 300 pretty good planes upp there every opponent will have a hard time. They are probably pretty good. Fully comparable to early F-15E's. The more modern Stealth planes are more likely wish copies of western planes. ie. not yet up there . But soon. 10-15 years from now there will be a Chinese plane comparable with western.
Resulta evidente el desconocimiento general sobre las características del radar su35s ruso.... primero los su35 de exportación osea el su35E como el que tiene china obtienen un derivado pero no el producto como el que usa la fuerza aérea rusa...aquí les va unos datos ........ características tácticas técnicas del radar no35 irbis.......Rango de funcionamiento de la radiación del radar: X, rango de frecuencia f= 8 - 12 GHz, longitud de onda de las señales de radar λ=3 cm
Diámetro del reflector de antena (rejilla): 900 mm
Número de EPI en el reflector de la antena (elementos transmisores y receptores, es decir, cambiadores de fase): 1779
Envoltura de radar (cono de observación): 240° (+/-120°) en azimut y elevación en total con desviación del reflector de la antena en la junta electrohidráulica de dos etapas a lo largo del eje vertical y rodando a lo largo del eje longitudinal. En posición fija, la envolvente es de 120°(+/ -60°) por acimut y elevación, y el escaneo en esa envolvente se realiza en tan solo unos segundos. [ 14 ] Una junta electrohidráulica giroestabilizada de dos etapas permite un cambio rápido de polarización, vertical a horizontal y viceversa..
Potencia media del transmisor principal en el modo de funcionamiento de alta frecuencia de repetición de la señal: 5 kW
Potencia máxima de pulso del transmisor principal en el modo de funcionamiento de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal: 20 kW
Potencia media del transmisor auxiliar en el modo de funcionamiento de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal: 2 kWEn regímenes VV
arreglar
Para el modo de operación de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal, el modo de combate PPS-DO (hemisferio frontal - detección adicional), en zonas de escaneo de 10°x10° o 20°x5°, es decir, 100 esquinas cuadradas = 450 km.
Para el modo de trabajo de alta frecuencia de repetición de señal, modo de combate PPS = 400 km, en la zona de escaneo 30°x10°, es decir, 300 esquinas cuadradas,
Para el modo de trabajo que combina frecuencias altas y medias de repetición de señales, el modo de combate AVT-Automat (PPS-ZPS) = 300 km, en la zona de exploración 300 esquinas cuadradas.
Para el modo de trabajo de frecuencia media de repetición de señal, modo de combate ZPS=150 km, en la zona de exploración de 300 ángulos cuadrados. En modos VZ
arreglar
Para modo de trabajo de baja resolución - 3 m (modo de combate KRL - mapeo de haz real) = 400 km.
Para el modo de trabajo de resolución media-2 m (modo de combate DOL-cartografía con estrechamiento Doppler del haz)=300 km.
Para modo de trabajo de alta resolución: 1 m (modo de combate KAC - mapeo mediante apertura sintetizada) = 200 km.
Distancias de detección y seguimiento automático de aeronaves en PPS (ángulo 0/4-1/4,+/15°=30°), en el contexto del espacio libre y dependiendo de su RERP (superficie reflectante efectiva de radar) en el X- rango de radiación del radar: ..Para RERP 0,01 m² = 100 km
Para RERP 0,1 m² = 160-180 km
Para RERP 1 m² = 270 km
Para RERP 3 m² = 400 km [ 15 ]
Selección de objetivos aéreos por tamaño de RERP: 0,01 m²-1 m² = Objetivo pequeño, 1 m² -10 m² = Objetivo mediano, 10 m² y más = Objetivo grande......
It is you who is purposely misreporting information, and failing to see the nuance behind the claimed figures.
1. The Su-35 detected a target out to 400km through a narrow-beam search, not volume search.
2. During a normal search, it can only detect such a target from 200km.
3. Keep in mind, this is detecting, not tracking.
4. There is a flight video from I dis that has them testing the Irbis-E. In the video, the Su-35 was only able to track the target at 100km, and this was for a single target in an environment with no jamming.
@voidtempering8700 primero y error más común es el vídeo que viste se trata de avión de pruebas su30mk2 blue..en 2006 con el primer prototipo de irbis con una potencia nominal de 1kw...el irbis entro en servicio en 2010 en los primeros su35s con una potencia nominal media de 5kw y max de 20kw...segundo uno de las ventajas del radar irbis es que está montado en auxiliar hidráulico en movimiento vertical y horizontal por lo que en modo de escaneo estrecho 10 x10... Puede mover la antena como un radar mecánico y lograr una gran eficiencia con mucha potencia en ángulo alto... generalmente trabajan en el modo pps de 30x10 en alta frecuencia y en pps y zps combinando alta y media frecuencia...ambos con alcances cercanos a los 400km frente 3m2 ...mientras mueve la antena el actuador hidráulico cubriendo ángulos muy anchos ....en resumen puedes elegir que sub modo en dependencia de la misión ..regulando la potencia sin perder cobertura de radar...los resultados están en Ucrania...el su35s tiene récord en distancias de derribo varios por encima de 100km incluyendo uno a 177km en modo look down...
@@adriveranes9454 ".both with ranges close to 400km versus 3m2...while the antenna moves the hydraulic actuator covering very wide angles...in summary you can choose which sub mode depending on the mission":
This is the case for all radars, in fact, you don't even need an actuator to cover the entire frontal arc, but it does help with notching, since the higher angle can be more effective at guiding a missile. Secondly, this dos not address anything I said.
Additionally, as I mentioned before, the Su-35 achieved that range through a narrow search, not to mention it had support to boot, it was a cued search from a supported aircraft. That is not an indication of its normal detection range, that is its max detection range under favorable conditions.
"the su35s has a record for several shootdown distances above 100km, including one at 177km in look down mode". What is your source for these claims, and have they been verified?
Lastly, as I mentioned before, this is a jamming free environment. Unlike in Ukraine, any modern conflict would be full of jamming equipment on both sides.
The fact that you concede that this is a lot of speculation earned you a sub. Good, responsible work.
Re:EF-18G I can recommend the Channel Growler Jams
中国的军事迷能分辨j11，j15，j16，su27，su30，但是这对其他地方的军事迷来说很难。
because all chinese look alike to non chinese, and vice versa.
so does china supply jet parts to russia? during this war?
Think a few comments here. The first is that people underestimated Japan and especially its Air Force pre WW2 which was a massive mistake. The second re: China / West is that China has (had) the challenge of foreign powers moving up its coastline (for motivation) while the west had the challenge of how to maximise its monetisation from respective Governments. Hopefully a light bulb is going on now!
SU30SM2
if they are so cool why the mighty dragons ain't got no engine?
9:20 EA-18G combat capabilities and radar countermeasures strategy analysis/ EA-18G作战能力及雷达对抗策略分析.
Its so powerful I like it
Apart from the 5th generation fighter jets, there is no better than the Flanker! Beautiful, mean, capable, dominant war machine masterpiece!
😂😂😂 Why is it that the military's view of China (be it aircraft carriers, fighter planes, tanks, etc.) is always said to be stolen and copied... but when it comes to rockets there is no such narrative, why is that ? because China is not part of the MTCR 😅😅
@glum I don’t know if it was stolen tech, but we saw a chinese missile fall apart and look like streaks of meteors a few nights ago. 😮
@TheDaysOfGlory Lol... Your story is different from the story of military general Osaf/Olaf (Israel) about Chinese missiles...
The short answer, no one knows. None of the Chinese equipment has been used in combat so it's really anyone's guess. Its also questionable if it can keep up with the tempo of battle too, so not only is it of unknown quality, its duration is equally unknown.
The last part is about the pilots. Seeing that in the CCP Military, devotion to the Party is more important than anything else, the quality of each pilot is unknown. So the plane is only as good as the person flying it.
So you are going into battle with three very big Question Marks and the answer is no one knows until it happens. It could be a situation like the Zero in WW II where it was better than expected at first but had massive design flaws. It could be a flying turd that isn't as good as the Russian platform it is based on. It could be a flying liability for China. No one knows. 🤔
great comment
@privatedata665
Thank you.
My gut feeling is that China would take massive casualties if they tried for Taiwan and the US, Korea, and Japan got involved. I think at the start they would have success but eventually all this untested equipment would probably break down under the tempo of combat. Some vehicles will be absolute junk, so will be alright, and a few will be pretty good but those vehicles will not be enough to compensate for the junk and the "meh" equipment.
The United States is far more agile in planning and then changing tactics in the fly than China will ever be, so the casualties China would endure would be far worse than Russia in Ukraine. China cannot really launch human wave attacks like in Korea so you won't see hordes of Chinese running across the Taiwan Straight. That's kinda a funny thought.😆
The other side to this is that Han Chinese (the demographic that lives in the coast and is basically the top group of the CCP as well as what most people think when one says "Chinese") are basically dwindling from a population standpoint. It's known that the CCP has "miscounted" their population so there are at least 300+ million people (almost an entire United States worth of population) that are not really there. Add to the fact that the CCP Military is really more of an internal/domestic force rather than an expeditionary force and the cards are stacked against China.
Losing hundreds of thousands of military men and then having all the internal issues they have (Uighurs, Mongols, Tibetans, Koreans, Siberians, etc...) and a large scale war with a grab for Taiwan is really the start of the CCP's implosion and a Civil War.
So how good does Chinese Military hardware work fighting Western hardware is a moot point. Again, my gut feeling is it will be like the Zero in WW II, it will be a big to medium headache at first but because Western pilots are more flexible and usually have more hours in the cockpit, my guess is that eventually it will be neutralized.
The way that the CCP Military is arranged, it's not going to be agile or resilient enough going toe to toe with the US, let alone the rest of the other countries. Add to that the economic sanctions slapped on it by the US, Australia, and the EU. All that the US, India, or Australia has to do is basically block any Chinese oil shipments from going through the Straits of Malacca and China is starving for gas and oil in a month. So yeah, one plane isn't going to be able to undo all of that.🤔
At 17.32 - A2A kill - you get things wrong again, dude: the world record set for the longest air-to-air confirmed kill "the R-37M took down the Ukrainian Sukhoi-27 from a range of 217km (about 140 miles) - the R-37M was fired from Russia’s fifth-generation fighter the Sukhoi-57 Felon"
Dude, is MORE THAN DOUBLE of what you say here, lol ! Read about such things before uploading, to avoid making a fool from yourself...
To your education, learn about the R37M max range, who is some 400km - and is considered by many the world's best A2A missile, with no equivalent in the world, for BVR distances.
"The R-37M LRAAM Set the Record for Longest-Range Air-To-Air Kill in Ukraine" ( US & UK source)
The Gordon Ramsey of the aviation history
shitty shiit of aviation history
Yes, I think it is da best flanker. Best Avionics, Missiles.
Amazing display of advanced military machinery in action, truly impressive!
The best versions of the Su30s are the Indian Su30MKI - with its incoming *Super Sukhoi* upgrade. It uses engines from the Su57 which are the AL41,Virupaksha AESA Radar (more transmit receive modules on the AN radars of the F22),New IRST (america is behind the rest of the world in IRST tech by 10 years) Israeli/Indian mission management system and additional hardpoints.
edit
I forgot to mention a new glass cockpit
No its not, F-35 uses a very advanced IRST system which is part of its EOTS system better then what Su-30MKI uses
Yes, Endia is supar-powa. No doubt.
No,as a Indian it is not
Al 41 was rejected,
Virupaksha supposed to have 1800 GAN t/r modules but right now it is still under devlopment, the radar we currently have has 800 GAAS t/r far inferior SAR resolution
As far as irst is concerned usa is far superior than any other nation, probably in early 1990 they were inferior, but now they are not
Also the engine u are talking about is al41f1-s which has a max Thrust of 137kn wet, while su 57 used al41f1 with 147 kn wet Thrust
@@tweedy4sgatleast better value for money than overpriced american cr*p