J-15 vs Su-33 vs Mig-29K, How Things Have Changed

J-15 vs Su-33 vs Mig-29K

This past week, there was an article on People's daily called China's J-15 fighter superior to Russian Su-33.

I had a couple of thoughts reading through it. My first thought was that finally China is actually defending itself against some of these Western and Russian accusations. It drove me crazy back in the days to see Russian media quoting different people blasting China for copying its weaponry and for making excuses for not fulfilling contracts like the one for IL-76/78. Through all of that, there was nobody from AVIC1 or PLA that spoke against some of those claims. The only times I heard official denials were regarding claims of China selling J-10s to Iran and purchasing Su-35s from Russia. Those were clearly crazy rumors that spread because China did not step in earlier to deny these things. Going forward, I hope CMC/PLA puts a stronger PR effort out there to defend itself against some of the Russian claims.

My second thought was that while it was good to see China defending against Russian claims that a copy can never be better than the original, it should be obvious to everyone that J-15 is a superior fighter jet to the original Su-33. However, it's really not saying much, because J-15 is being compared against something that was developed in the late 80s. If after 20+ years, J-15 is not better than Su-33, then SAC should stop developing and producing aircraft. Compared to the original Su-33, J-15 include: 

> Having multi-role capability and can fire wide range of AAM, AShM, ARM and ground attack weapons.

> Having a more powerful and multi-role fire control system (probably using an AESA radar)

Having more powerful IRST/FLIR system, EW suite, RWR and MAWs.

> Having more modern avionics with modern data bus, mission computers, holographic HUDs, modern MMI and fiber optic wiring. 

> Using more composite material and lighter electronics to give better T/W ratio 

Now, if the Russians had invested in modernizing Su-33, it could do all of the above. Although, we could argue whether it has the same wide range of ground attack weapons as China or if the sensors/avionics is as advanced or more advanced. It has chosen not to, because it has picked Mig-29K has the future naval fighter.

There are many reasons why it made more sense for the Russians to go with a modern Mig-29K instead of Su-33. My opinion is that India had already paid for the development of a modern Mig-29K as part of its effort to develop a 3 carrier fleet. At the same time, China had rejected Russia's 3 step proposal of first taking the original Su-33s, then upgrading to a multi-role version with Su-30MK2 sensor/weapon suite and eventually upgrading to a final version with PESA radar. As a result, it made more sense for Russia to go with the already developed naval aircraft with production lines rather than re-opening the production lines and pay for the development cost of a modern Su-33. At the same time, Mikoyan needed these orders a lot more than Sukhoi (which has a long backlog of domestic and export orders). 

Looking back, I think that China obviously made the right decision to develop J-15 on its own with some help from the purchase of T-10K-3. The experience from developing naval version of J-11B will help SAC develop next generation of naval aircraft like a naval version of J-31. At the same time, there was no reason for China to pay the Russians to develop modern version of Su-33 if it could develop a modern version of J-15 by itself. It's similar to my last post about China's choice of purchasing MKK rather than getting involved in a long running project like MKI. Imports from Russia are always considered interim solutions. If domestic options can be developed in time, there really is no reason to get involved in a foreign project and pay for the development cost.

Looking ahead, I think China is also better off with a J-15 class fighter than a Mig-29K class fighter. There was a competition between SAC and CAC over the first generation of a naval fighter jet. Flanker variant won over the J-10 variant because it was considered to have better multi-role capabilities. The current version of J-15 is already a multi-role aircraft. In the future, we could see different versions of J-15 like a single-seat buddy-to-buddy refueling, a two-seat EW version like Growler or a two-seated mini AEWC & amp;C version. These are not things you can do with a lighter naval aircraft.

How things have changed

Recently, we’ve been hearing from Russians about a proposed sale of 24 Su-35s to China. As with every other time, a lively debate re-ignited on Sinodefenceforum on whether or not this will/should happen. I got to be so annoyed with the endless debate on this topic that I stopped the thread until confirmation of actual sale happening.

Thinking back to the early days of joining sinodefenceforum (around 2005), it’s really interesting how much things have changed and how much my perspectives have changed over the times. Back then, J-10 had just joined services and Su-30MKK was considered the most powerful fighter jet in PLAAF. There was much discussion started by Indian posters online regarding the superiority of MKI over MKK. 

I bugged me a lot back then that Russians are restricting their export of advanced technologies to China. A big deal was made out of the advanced Israeli avionics, TVC nozzle and BARS radar on MKI that were not offered for MKK. Even Su-30MKK3s that were offered to China at that time were using Zhuk-MSE radar instead of phased array radar like Bars. Indians were convinced that their friendship with Russia and European embargo ensures that Russia would never be offering their best stuff to China.

 I still remember thinking to myself and wondering why the only phased array radar offered to China was the Pero antenna on top of N-0001VE radar. I remember being extremely excited when hearing that China was testing out Irbis radar. Finally, I thought China was getting something better than what India received. I was somewhat confused that China never opted for it. That was just one the many cases where it seemed like the Russians were denying their best stuff to Chinese requests. Others included a leasing of Akula nuclear submarine, outfitting of Admiral Gorshkov carrier and even Amur submarine.

It’s funny looking at how my perception of these situations have changed over the past 7 to 8 years as I have seen how things played out and found out more about what went on behind the scenes. Even as recent as 2008, I thought it made sense for China to get a couple of regiments of Su-35s as an interim option until the next generation of fighter jet comes into service. 

I was also in favour of import of Su-33s for a long time just in case that J-15 program hits some kind of snag. Probably the program that caused the biggest delays to PLAAF was the import of IL-76/78. When the original order of 38 of these aircraft were nullified due to the inability of Tashkent plant, we heard that Kazakhstan actually were offering to sell almost everything needed for IL-76 (with the exception of engine probably) to China, since the Russians were planning to move production back to Russia. For whatever reason, either Chinese hesitancy (due to domestic interests) scuttled the deal. These days, China is purchasing revamped/upgraded IL-76s that were in Russian storage as the interim option. Other than this, it seems like China knew exactly what was going on all along. It took what’s immediately available from the Russians and did not buy into any of the plans and development programs that they were offering.

In most of the naval program, it has become apparent in the recent years that Russian shipyards are in a bad condition, whereas Chinese shipyards are capable of cranking out modern war ships. I remember when the Ukrayina (an unfinished Slava class cruiser) was offered to China and it seemed to make a lot of sense at the time for China to purchase it, since they already have 051C using the same air defense system. 

Now, having looked at the development of 052C/052D while also seeing the problems that Sov have experienced with PLAN, it has certainly become inconceivable for China to go for this option. At the same time, China’s success in the Liaoning project along with the Russian struggles in INS Vikramaditya has shown that they made the right choice to go alone. The troubles experienced in the development of Amur submarine have forced Russia into procuring kilo submarines again.

 While at the same time, China has been mass producing 039B while building a mysterious new diesel submarine that is supposedly replacing the old Gulf class test sub. China has taken pretty much all it needed from Russia in its current generation of surface combatants and moved on to a newer generation of ships. It would make more sense now for the Russians to purchase ships from China rather than vice versa.

In aerospace world, much of the myths from back in 2005 have also been rejected. All along, it seemed like China looked at Su-30MKK as an interim solution in developing an offensive platform with mature technology while indigenously developing domestic options like J-11B. While the Chinese flanker program has suffered setbacks such as the delays in FWS-10 project, SAC has now turned it into a success with the recent progress in J-15, J-15S and J-16. 

As time goes on, it makes less and less sense for China to purchase Su-35 or other Russian options. It seems to me that China realized very early on to not fall for Russian sale pitches and only go for systems that are already mature. In the long term, it relied on its own defense industry for developing new weapon systems rather than Indian method of relying on co-production of imported technology. Even though we do not hear about it, PLAAF always had a plan of how it was good to develop a strong domestic military aviation industry. 

Its goal in original dealings with Russians was to use foreign technology to develop domestic industry rather than just getting finished products. China’s fourth generation aircraft programs no longer need any Russian assistance. In areas such as UAV and ground attack weaponry, China has already surpassed Russia. In the race to next generation fighter jet, China is at least on par with Russia in the development process. The only major areas it remains to be behind Russia are engine production, transport helicopters and military transport. And as we can see, those are pretty much the only items that China still purchases from the Russians.

Since 2005, China has experienced generational improvements in different defense areas. It is hard to see same level of improvement in the next 7 years. I have learnt to not speculate too much about the future, because I end up looking quite foolish in the process.

Northrop Common Imagery Processor Successfully Handles New Global Hawk Data On Test Bed

Northrop Grumman Corporation’s (NOC) Common Imagery Processor (CIP) has demonstrated an important new capability by processing Global Hawk Block 40 data on the Distributed Common Ground System — Imagery (DCGS-I) test bed.

A live flight event late last year marked the first time that Global Hawk Block 40 data was successfully received, processed and disseminated on the DCGS-I test bed using the CIP. After the Global Hawk platform transmitted the newest Block 40 concurrent modes data to the test bed, the CIP processed and transmitted this data to other downstream ground station components for viewing and exploitation.

As the primary sensor processing element of the DCGS-I test bed based in China Lake, Calif., the CIP accepts airborne imagery data, processes it into an exploitable image and then outputs the image to other elements within the test bed. The CIP is the standard image processor used by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). The CIP also helps coalition partners to consolidate redundant and stovepiped processing systems.

The CIP’s latest software allowed for the newest synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery mode to be processed while simultaneously passing the ground moving target indicator data on to another system for processing. The CIP is the only platform capable of processing concurrent SAR data.

“Northrop Grumman continually provides soldiers an upper hand through the CIP’s innovative imagery capabilities that process images quickly and efficiently,” said Ed Bush, vice president of Northrop Grumman’s C4ISR Networked Systems business unit. “Additionally, the program reflects our open architecture approach and quick fielding of integrated software-based systems through the use of commercial and government off-the-shelf components.”

The CIP has been involved in numerous integration and test activities for many platforms and sensors. This includes Empire Challenge, an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance demonstration that promoted interoperability between U.S. and coalition Distributed Common Ground System assets.

Since 2000, the CIP has applied its critical ability to ingest data via the Common Data Link to serve as the main imagery processor of the DCGS-I test bed. The DOD uses the DCGS-I test bed to evaluate new intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance technologies in an operational environment. The test bed has been an active participant in ongoing block upgrades for the Northrop Grumman-developed Global Hawk unmanned aircraft.

Additionally, Northrop Grumman offers the virtualized Common Imagery Processor, also referred to as vCIP, a cost-saving, software-only processing upgrade to the CIP. Already owned by the U.S. government, this architecture allows processing capability to be hosted on a customer’s Linux computer environment and eliminates new hardware costs. Software functionality includes all current sensor processing modes and enhancements already available in the CIP software baseline along with the latest compliance registration afforded by the Joint Interoperability Test Command.

Northrop Grumman is a leading global security company providing innovative systems, products and solutions in unmanned systems, cybersecurity, C4ISR, and logistics and modernization to government and commercial customers worldwide.

4/87 FSX JET FIGHTERS - Targeted Industry - High Technology - Industrial Policy

Although the agency has never made the specifications public, a five member group of Japanese aircraft makers headed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries seems to have all the inside information. Last January 1986, the group organized a Joint Civilian FSX Research Committee and in April 1986 issued a recommendation that the Defense Agency should allow domestic aircraft makers to undertake the FSX project. A model of their proposed FSX was even shown on TV. Judging from these developments, one can only assume that the Air Self Defense Force had secretly passed the required FSX performance data to the relevant domestic aircraft manufacturers. On the question of where to buy the aircraft, the issue boils down to this: if cost efficiency is the only consideration, the most economic way is to purchase a ready-made aircraft with compatible capabilities abroad. However if the argument is that it is absolutely necessary to nurture fighter manufacturing capability in Japan, there is no alternative but to build the FSX at home. JAPAN TIMES 7/13/86 p.16 

Lt General HIdeyuki Yoshioka of TRDI

Osamu Kaihara, former secretary general of the National Defense Council (now the Cabinet Security Affairs Office.)

In the opinion of this publication Japan has decided that it is absolutely necessary to build fighter manufacturing capability in Japan. The reason for this we do not venture, but arguments of domestic production in terms of cost efficiency are not convincing. As we have stated in our past few issues, we believe that the reason for the constant delay in the selection of the next generation support fighter for Japan, the FSX, is that the Japanese government has been waiting for a period of political calm between the US and Japan before it announces what it really wants to do--despite PR to the contrary--select an all Japanese made aircraft. At a time when the Japanese government has just announced a massive "go-it-alone" space program for Japan, that it would seek its own development of jet aircraft seems consistent policy making. In both industries the Japanese piggybacked their way to advanced technologies on the back of the Americans. The Americans made their technologies available to the Japanese, but many, including this writer, doubt whether the Japanese would return the favor to the Americans. Indeed the Japanese have announced that they will not provide certain rocket technologies to McDonnel Douglas, and are closing out all foreign firms from participation in their TRON computer operating system.

In terms of Japanese willingness to share their technology, after having developed their own aircraft industry from American licenses, the following, from Japan's leading business daily may be of interest:

Behind this attitude is the confidence of the Japanese aircraft manufacturers that they can beat the Americans in the latest technologies required for the FSX such as stealth technologies and CCV technologies (permitting aircraft to turn or rise or fall without banking). The idea is to limit American participation to engines or some devices to be installed. The view is strongly held that "the Self Defense Agency itself is leaning in this direction"...What they are thinking is that officially ( superficially--tatemae) "the Americans will develop the plane and the Japanese will build it." In reality however Japan will develop it, but for purposes of appearance license royalties will be paid to the Americans. In this way the trade problems can be avoided. In that case however, the stealth and CCV technologies will belong to the Americans. In that case, the Japanese are warning (keikai) "the real objective of the Americans is to get their hands on the latest technologies necessary for their next generation fighters, the ATF (Advanced Technology Fighter), which is currently under development."

NIHON KEIZAI. 6/1/87, p.35.

Why are the Japanese alarmed at the Americans getting their hands on technologies they plan to use in their FSX? They have certainly received massive amounts of technology from the Americans at bargain basement prices.

There a number of areas where tne Japanese claim to be ahead of the Americans:

---First of all is in composite materials, such as carbon fibers, which would be an essential element in stealth technologies. Fuji Heavy Industries has already reportedly installed numerically controlled laminators and filament winders at its aircraft factories in anticipation of the project. The Japanese note that even the composite materials used in the F-15, built by McDonnell Douglas, are made under a license from Japanese firms. Moreover, 40$ of the weight of the FSX aircraft is expected to be made from such composites.

---The Japanese also claim to be at least five years ahead of the US in active phased array radars, which the US plans to install in its Advanced Technology Radar, which is now under development.

---In April 1987 the Japanese Self Defense Agency installed the radar for a year of testing in its C-l aircraft. The Agency has also installed a new electronic control system in its F-15 aircraft.

---In conjunction with Mitsubishi Electric the Defense Agency has recently developed a super LSI chip for jet fighters which will be able to make one million calculations per second, even under the massive stress conditions found in jet aircraft. It plans to install the chips in jet fighters in 1988 for testing purposes and will certainly use them in the FSX fighter. It claims that the US is also working on a similar chip, but it is still under development.

In preparation for the development of the FSX aircraft, Japan has also entered upon a major renovation effort for its F4EJ Phantom jets. The renovation effort aims at improving look-down radar, and antiship missile capabilities. Specifically, improvements will be made in: fire control systems, missiles, flying capabilities, enemy detection, and radar warning, Although many electronic devices will be produced under license from the US, system development will be totally handled by the Japanese. Indeed, the Americans are pressing the Japanese to buy entirely new planes instead of making expensive renovations. Renovations are expected to cost 1.8 billion yen per plane for 100 planes. But as the Japanese note:

Air force experts emphasize that "major renovations are exactly the same as making an entirely new system." Thus it can be said that the side benefit of renovating the F4EJ is technological development, not just military applications, is important indeed. NIKKEI SANGYO 7/27/87 p.3.

In fact, the most commonly used argument by the Japanese industry, in pushing their case for totally Japanese development of the FSX (in addition to the simple argument that because its defense we should only build it ourselves) is the opportunity this would present to develop new advanced technologies--in short another targeted high technology industry at government expense. In fact, according to the 110 corporate member Japan Weapons Industry Association "We would like to have this plane made in Japan so that the technology will stay in Japan." (NIKKAN KOGYO. 6/3/87, p.9)

It is only because some members of the US government have made it a trade issue that the Japanese have delayed the decision. It is only because the US trade deficit with Japan has not improved, despite a myriad of market opening packages and a massive strengthening of the yen, that the Americans have raised the issue as a test case of Japan's market opening policy. In the case of currency revaluations and market opening packages, a myriad of small factors can and have been used to obscure why there has been no improvement in the trade statistics. With respect to these jet fighters however, the issue is clear. American fighter planes are premier examples of American high technology. and the Japanese have nothing to match them. Here Americans can offer a superior product at a cheaper price (which the Japanese use to justify their trade surpluses) and as a big ticket item they could make a big dent in America's trade deficit. But as is the usual case when high technology is involved and Americans have superior products, whether it be supercomputers, space programs or airplanes, the Japanese make a mighty exception to the principles of free trade upon which its own economy has flourished (the better product at the cheaper price wins). A nation with minimal defense spending, which has flourished under a defense umbrella paid for by the American government, will not purchase defense products from the Americans, by insisting on either producing them in Japan under license or, more recently, works to develop competing products which are often then sold at cheaper prices to undercut the American firms--witness supercomputers. The Toshiba scandal also fits in perfectly with these types of commercial practices.

As mentioned at the outset, the Japanese manufacturers have somehow obtained the specifications desired by the Defense Agency. American competitors have not been so lucky. Yet they have been charged with deficiencies for not meeting specifications that are not shown to them. Indeed, what limited specifications they have seen came only after substantial pressure from the US government that American manufacturers be given a chance. Yet the feeling of the American participants at a seminar to let them submit competing proposals, was that the entire effort was only a new procedure--the decision had already been made. Indeed, according to US military experts, the specifications for the new plane do not meet the defense needs expected of Japan--to counteract in a defensive manner, a Soviet entry into Japan. In fact, the US military has warned Japan. (according to the JAPAN TIMES) that the proposed plane would violate Japan's constitution, permitting military spending only peaceful or defensive purposes. In other words, the proposed plane goes beyond defensive purposes.

In the most recent case the final decision has been delayed to August or September 1987, a full year delay in making the decision. A number of missions from the US government and industry have visited Japan, pushing their case for buying American. Even Secretary of Defense Weinberger visited Japan in late June 1987 primarily to push the case. Representatives of the American industry have visited their Japanese counterparts repeatedly to also push for joint development project to improve on existing American planes. They note that Japan plans to produce only about 100 of the planes at a rate of about 10 per year. The Japanese could not possibly produce the planes at rates cheaper than in the US where they are mass-produced. The appreciation of the yen has made American products even more competitive. But the Japanese consortium (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Fuji Heavy Industries, Kawasaki Heavy Industries. Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries and Mitsubishi Electric Corp) still insist that they can produce the planes cheaper at 5-6 billion yen. Of course in a government financed project, backed a highly supportive and not very open government, means can be found to find additional funds for this group, Japan's core military industrial complex, via payments on other projects for example. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, the prime contractor, has proposed that American participation be limited to only wind-tunnel testing and computer simulation. At a minimum the Americans want joint development of a new plane centered around an existing American plane. But according to an official of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries:

This is a matter of defense, so domestic development is the first priority and joint development under Japan's control is the second. JAPAN TIMES, 6/26/87, p.6.

The FSX plane is to replace the F-l support fighters the Japanese military have. The Japanese have only 75 of the planes and another 93 F-15 fighters produced under license from McDonnell Douglas. This shows the limited size of the Japanese market, making production of an airplane for only the Japanese market highly uneconomical, but only if it is limited te the Japanese market. Indeed some newspapers note that the Ministry of Finance and the Foreign Ministry are opposed to independent development in Japan as the massive expense is not worth spending on only 100 planes.

But it appears that the Japanese have already made their decision and are only waiting for the most opportune moment to spring it on the Americans:

The Defense Agency plans to hold a final round of consultations with the US Department of Defense in August before the government makes a final decision on the next support fighter for the Air Self Defense Forces agency sources revealed Sunday...The panel, headed by Naoaki Murata, the counselor at the secretariat of the Defense Agency director general. is reportedly leaning toward developing an entirely new fighter instead of buying an existing US model. "It is essential that we don't give the American side cause for undue optimism," one official in charge of the FSX project said. JAPAN TIMES. 7/20/87, p.2)

In a May 1987 meeting with Secretary of Defense Weinberger, Japanese Diet member Joji Omura, former Director General of the Self Defense Agency stated: With an all Japanese plan (i.e. totally made in Japan) as a pivot. we are selecting a final model. In any case, we hope to get US cooperation in view of the Japan-US Security Pact and particularly from the standpoint of interoperability. Defense and trade should be discussed separately. JAPAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL. 5/30/87, p.18.

The last statement, about the separability of defense and trade, is the centerpiece of the Japanese argument. Indeed, the issues must be kept separate to support their position. To look at them together makes the relationship between the two nations clearly ludicrous. That the world's largest debtor should continue to underwrite the defense of the world's largest creditor is something that has never happened before in man's history. Never.

THE JAPAN LAWLETTER, April 1987. By Roderick Seeman

Bangladesh Air Force's F-7MB, F-7BG, F-7BGI Fighter Aircraft's Photos

Mitshubishi ATD-X ShinShin - Real Photos