lightning f57
Trusted Member
Will the KJ-500 have this capability?
PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion
- Thread starter amuqeetk
- Start date
- Status
hasssanali8998
Elite Member
pretty sure Erieye sent the guidance to j10 and j10 sent that information to pl15e
Michael
VIP Member
Technically, the KJ-500A, J-10C, and PL-15 possess full CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability) capabilities.
In reality, for the PAF (Pakistan Air Force), this depends on the licensing agreements at the time of export.
Full CEC capability is highly classified information. No country would allow the export of such complete capabilities. However, based on the relationship between China and Pakistan, the export of partial capabilities might be permitted.
The Erieye inherently lacks CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability). It cannot achieve this effect with any fighter jet. This is not a problem that Pakistan can solve. Even if the Erieye AEW&C were completely handed over to China and thoroughly modified by them, this capability could not be achieved unless all the internal systems were replaced. But then it would no longer be an Erieye.
In short: The Erieye system inherently lacks the fire control capabilities necessary to guide any type of missile.
The Link-17 data link and a CEC-level data link are not the same thing.
Last edited:
Shui
Registered Member
Check this out, it's very informative, according to them J-10CE and the sales is very flexible and customizable, data link, level of avonics, package, all depends on customer's need, he mentioned there are countries with existing system and ofc they don't want to ditch, it's very logical, it's very Chinese style way of doing bussiness.
rafale
Registered Member
I think both of you are confusing on what guidance means....
PL15 has dual data link. ERIEYE can surely track a target and provide that update to PL15 as "mid course update", that is, it can provide bouts of target updates rather than being able to provide continuous update.
Michael seems to be talking about latter.....in which case the AESA radar that is tracking the target will be providing the original, raw source data directly to the missile rather than conversion. This prevents delays in the transmission since PL15 is going to be in the air for seconds, not minutes or hours. So the faster you can provide the data and more frequent, the more accurate it can stay on track and get the best out of its kinematic performance envelope.
niubi
Registered Member
Bro the KJ-500 is one of the newest PLAAF AWACS aircraft.
CEC in PLAAF units were already done with J-16 and J-10C level with KJ-200 back in 2010s.
Since J-20 was introduced into PLAAF service in 2017, the first tactic for J-20 integration into PLAAF involved J-20 feeding target data to J-16 carrying long range missiles. J-20 flew forward and fed targets with their radars off (enemy's radars off and only their RCS expose them) and maybe around 1m^2 RCS hundreds of km away from J-20 and J-16 flying well behind J-20 can target those with missiles like PL-17.
Then they played with the reverse where J-20 radar is kept off even though it is LPI modes but we are talking against USAF so all tasks need to be explored thoroughly. This was a better tactic ironically because J-16 believe it or not, was flying with better eyes than J-20 in some ways.
Where J-20's radar was engineered for LPI and performance, J-16's radar was engineered knowing it will be spotted. The J-16 is not stealth and not only that, has quite a large RCS. It's radar doesn't need signal emission management cleverness, it was designed just to project pure power to burn through jamming as far away as possible and see everything from as far away as possible. No compromises for ninja modes like J-20's radar.
J-16 flying as eyes was better because J-20 became a more deadly killer, J-16 feeding data on targets 300km+ away and J-20 flying ahead much closer to targets and firing PL-15 or PL-16 now from less than 100km away from target. Well within NEZ of PL-15 and still far away enough for J-20 to remain undetected particularly when it's only passively getting target's data from J-16.
With KJ-200 this was already the primary purpose of aircraft like KJ-200 to be a part of CEC network, not directly missile guidance since modern Chinese missiles are basically fire and forget. Even if launching aircraft is gone, missile's AESA seeker activates.
KJ-3000 will be the new main beast with plenty of power to burn but the question of CEC in the air was around since KJ-200 and even J-16 + J-20 fighter to fighter pairings had CEC. No need for AWACS.
Last edited:
niubi
Registered Member
On the slight off topic conversation on radars, it is worth noting that PLAAF decided to go two routes simultaneously with fighter radars and in its recognition of the Flankers pure brute force energy reserve (fuel capacity and two high thrust turbofans with some great internal volumes for APUs) the modern PLAAF flankers which there are at least two different batches of J-16s not counting EW dedicated J-16D, all of them focused on being loud and proud. They know they can't hide so they are tasked with making noise and attracting attention.
J-10C is actually relatively low RCS, actually slightly lower RCS than Rafale and Typhoon thanks mostly to DSI intakes which actually makes a fighter reduce its RCS more than people assume. Boundary layer splitter plates for non-DSI intakes are extremely punishing for stealth. The F-22's main frontal stealth weakness is from its caret intake's boundary layer plates but they got around it with brute force material engineering and optimised its shaping as much as possible.
Long before J-10CE arrived in Pakistan, on two occasions when Pakistan exercised with China, PLAAF brought along modern Flankers (not J-11B) for show once and in demonstrations of what a dedicated modern EW fighter can do, PAF had its heart set on such a platform. On the second occasion, PLAAF flew a modern Flanker (it's not been given exactly what model) that is not the J-16D and this aircraft dominated exercise scenarios whenever it flew. It made Pakistan team anxious about India's Su-30MKI and Pakistan apparently asked about purchasing Chinese Flankers. Only after much reassurance from Chinese side that India's Su-30MKI is absolutely not comparable to the modern Flanker that was flown in the exercise and to not worry.
BTW the times PLAAF brought modern Flankers to these exercises was to get Pakistani pilots a little more used to how Su-30 and Su-30MKI in Indian Airforce would fly. But the electronic capabilities of those fighters are nothing comparable. Only familiarity with their kinematic performance was the purpose. Of course, boys being boys can't refrain from showing a little more with friends.
J-10C is actually relatively low RCS, actually slightly lower RCS than Rafale and Typhoon thanks mostly to DSI intakes which actually makes a fighter reduce its RCS more than people assume. Boundary layer splitter plates for non-DSI intakes are extremely punishing for stealth. The F-22's main frontal stealth weakness is from its caret intake's boundary layer plates but they got around it with brute force material engineering and optimised its shaping as much as possible.
Long before J-10CE arrived in Pakistan, on two occasions when Pakistan exercised with China, PLAAF brought along modern Flankers (not J-11B) for show once and in demonstrations of what a dedicated modern EW fighter can do, PAF had its heart set on such a platform. On the second occasion, PLAAF flew a modern Flanker (it's not been given exactly what model) that is not the J-16D and this aircraft dominated exercise scenarios whenever it flew. It made Pakistan team anxious about India's Su-30MKI and Pakistan apparently asked about purchasing Chinese Flankers. Only after much reassurance from Chinese side that India's Su-30MKI is absolutely not comparable to the modern Flanker that was flown in the exercise and to not worry.
BTW the times PLAAF brought modern Flankers to these exercises was to get Pakistani pilots a little more used to how Su-30 and Su-30MKI in Indian Airforce would fly. But the electronic capabilities of those fighters are nothing comparable. Only familiarity with their kinematic performance was the purpose. Of course, boys being boys can't refrain from showing a little more with friends.
niubi
Registered Member
Yeah on that other topic about CEC between Erieye, J-10CE and PL-15E, it is possible to consider it a CEC between the three platforms where J-10CE radars off, Erieye watching all and providing target information to J-10CE which fires off PL-15E even in general vector of threats. They can go active themselves and search then perform some handshake checks with fighter (not Erieye because non direct communication available between PL-15E and Erieye).
But it's a question whether J-10CE and Erieye can datalink to the granularity needed for Erieye to feed targeting data. It's accepted that Link 17 can at least feed the fighter target general vector but J-10CE would then need to switch its own radar on for a guided missile shot.
Either way it's definitely some degree of CEC but unlikely to be the degree at which Erieye is providing missile with direct targeting just because Sweden and China do not have this exchange. Even getting a fighter to fire a missile is pretty difficult and requires full "code" of fighter's sensor suite and the missile's. It takes years to do this with planned weapons for aircrafts. Doing this purely digitally for two platforms that are NATO and Chinese and have never had either side share any code is probably impossible.
Why these modern missiles are so much more deadly is partly due to better software. Missiles can be fired blind but they are actively "thinking". They know some information about target beforehand. It's why PL-15 has a climb angle that probably isn't 45 degrees since real world optimal is not a infinitely small particle model. It has aerodynamic profile for max ballistic range and "knows" when target does usual tactics to throw off tracking or trying to defeat missile kinematically. Missiles are smarter because the softwares are created knowing all those tactics. You can program your way out of it and if India has half competence, it can create missiles with similar software. If target reduces altitude, do not follow the usual floating intercepting method, consider parameters within kinematic intercept zones and maintain maximum kill coverage but reduce altitude if this coverage begins degrading, things like that. It's so fucking easy just simple second year university maths and physics honestly.
It's safe to say the countries like China USA France etc can make missiles that have perfectly optimised range maximising software and all of them will be identical because the maths and physics is identical. Your physics is just a question of the aerodynamics, energy potential of your fuel composition, your rocket and things like how it fires, when and what impulse etc. All within finite and easily measurable and definable. Hence it's safe to say the similar sized missiles will perform almost identically well unless someone just has much better fuel composition and rocket engine.
Yasser76
Elite Member
Very informative past few posts, I learned a lot. Thanks
niubi
Registered Member
Recently the Chinese showed a video of some fighter I think it might have been J-20? firing a PL-10 short range air to air missile and firing it first off the rail before it is fed any target data. The idea and this is actually nothing new, is that missiles can be fired and then fed target data either using its own seeker, using aircraft's sensors with two way comms (all modern Chinese missiles are dual direction communication like Beidou/Compass to land unit which back then was new in the world).
Previously aircrafts needed to "program" the target data into missile before firing off rails. Now it's all digital or whatever way is most suitable. It can do everything.
Long range missiles can do this even better. You can know from your AEWC that there are targets in this vicinity and flying that vector. You get confirmation of engagement and you can shoot off a few missiles at 50 degrees and mach 1.6 initial speed or whatever. Missile's aim is to max its energy regardless until it is told more information.
PL-15's trick where any person who knows some basic physics knows is to get high. Convert its initial energy to potential energy to use later on and it has at least one more boost up its sleeve for when it gets close to target so it can accelerate to mach 3+ again.
At some moment whether its given by AWACS or fighter or drone or satellite, it gets more precise target information, it formulates an optimal kill strategy. It understands the enemy aircraft if it gets that data and knows its kinematic performance windows. Let's say at this time it gets proper fire control coordination from fighter or its own seeker if it doesn't want to approach in stealth and enemy fighter only has warning informing it's been painted by fire control radar. With modern Chinese 3rd gen and up AESAs honestly most fighters outside of F-35 and latest US fighters won't even know it is being continuously lit up by FCR.
As missile homes in, fighters will use typical tactics of flying low to use terrain masking or hoping missile is stupid and has floating interception method and flies into ground. No PL-15 and most modern missiles are much smarter. It knows not to even follow low and lose its energy. It'll stay high and will kill you later. It calculates exactly how far away you can possibly get and will always maintain a geometric window where it hits you with energy to spare. If it calculates that you're too far away and low, it'll trade altitude for speed and make sure the fighter stays within physical possible intercept window. It'll optimise this energy balance throughout because it knows what the target is capable of pulling. There are no tricks you can do.
It is now not the 4th gen or 4.5 gen BVR energy maneuvers any more. It is back to pure energy totals and you now have to stay well outside of NEZ because you can't trick it and gain advantage by fooling radars anyway because they are not pulse doppler types anymore. You can't drag the missile low hoping higher air density drags the missile of its energy and then climb to trade fighter's fuel for survival. The missile will watch you do stupid shit like that at the same super high altitude ballistic trajectory and calculate all those parameters mentioned.
May 2025 fight revealed export version of 2015 era missile can kill at 200km. Unthinkable in the past for missile that is not much bigger than AIM-120 or R-77. You can bet American and European missiles are pretty good. Meteor is not quite as good in this way actually because it flies more horizontally where missiles like PL-15, PL-16 and AIM-260 are basically ballistic missile trajectory to create these crazy long ranges. Just very obvious software updates.
Previously aircrafts needed to "program" the target data into missile before firing off rails. Now it's all digital or whatever way is most suitable. It can do everything.
Long range missiles can do this even better. You can know from your AEWC that there are targets in this vicinity and flying that vector. You get confirmation of engagement and you can shoot off a few missiles at 50 degrees and mach 1.6 initial speed or whatever. Missile's aim is to max its energy regardless until it is told more information.
PL-15's trick where any person who knows some basic physics knows is to get high. Convert its initial energy to potential energy to use later on and it has at least one more boost up its sleeve for when it gets close to target so it can accelerate to mach 3+ again.
At some moment whether its given by AWACS or fighter or drone or satellite, it gets more precise target information, it formulates an optimal kill strategy. It understands the enemy aircraft if it gets that data and knows its kinematic performance windows. Let's say at this time it gets proper fire control coordination from fighter or its own seeker if it doesn't want to approach in stealth and enemy fighter only has warning informing it's been painted by fire control radar. With modern Chinese 3rd gen and up AESAs honestly most fighters outside of F-35 and latest US fighters won't even know it is being continuously lit up by FCR.
As missile homes in, fighters will use typical tactics of flying low to use terrain masking or hoping missile is stupid and has floating interception method and flies into ground. No PL-15 and most modern missiles are much smarter. It knows not to even follow low and lose its energy. It'll stay high and will kill you later. It calculates exactly how far away you can possibly get and will always maintain a geometric window where it hits you with energy to spare. If it calculates that you're too far away and low, it'll trade altitude for speed and make sure the fighter stays within physical possible intercept window. It'll optimise this energy balance throughout because it knows what the target is capable of pulling. There are no tricks you can do.
It is now not the 4th gen or 4.5 gen BVR energy maneuvers any more. It is back to pure energy totals and you now have to stay well outside of NEZ because you can't trick it and gain advantage by fooling radars anyway because they are not pulse doppler types anymore. You can't drag the missile low hoping higher air density drags the missile of its energy and then climb to trade fighter's fuel for survival. The missile will watch you do stupid shit like that at the same super high altitude ballistic trajectory and calculate all those parameters mentioned.
May 2025 fight revealed export version of 2015 era missile can kill at 200km. Unthinkable in the past for missile that is not much bigger than AIM-120 or R-77. You can bet American and European missiles are pretty good. Meteor is not quite as good in this way actually because it flies more horizontally where missiles like PL-15, PL-16 and AIM-260 are basically ballistic missile trajectory to create these crazy long ranges. Just very obvious software updates.
falcon34
Registered Member
Alan warnes article explained this quite well he was quoted with near real time flow info from eriyes to other assets which means write feeds data through link 16 to some other node and that node through link 17 sends it Jeff's and J10Cs.
Or maybe eriye has link integrated because the long range kills that happened on may 7 wasn't the work of j10 radar, they were flying at least 50-70 kilometers inside pak airspace or even more to avoid indian meteors
Oscar
Moderator
All processing from Erieye goes to PAF nodes on ground other than F-16.
Raider 21
Moderator
- Status
Users who are viewing this thread
Pakistan Defence Latest
Country Watch Latest
-
Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds (179 Viewers)- Latest: Persian Gulf
-
-
-
-
Breaking: First F-47 Sixth-Gen Fighter Already Being Built, Expected to Fly in 2028 (1 Viewer)- Latest: AZ_HighCountry
