The J-16 | Is it the best Flanker?

In recent years, two Chinese fighter aircraft  have emerged which have caused a stir in the West. The first is the fifth generation J-20  ‘Mighty Drgon’, a rival to the F-35, F-22, and Su-57. The other is the J-16, a familiar  looking multirole aircraft.

Based on the Flanker, it’s designed to match and outperform  western designs, like the Super Hornet, and its Russian equivalents. The online chatter  is increasingly touting this Chinese fighter as the ‘ultimate flanker’. But is this true? 

Today, let’s have a look at the J-16. Before diving in, it is important to  note that only a few details regarding this aircraft can be confirmed as fact,  and most of what we are working with is speculation. As we have discussed in  our other videos on PLAAF designs, China is arguably the most difficult country to  find solid information about such aircraft – at least from a western perspective.

The language  barrier and more importantly the rigid internet security in the country prohibits us from  pinning down a lot of information. Only the Chinese designers themselves - and perhaps some  western intelligence agencies - have the full picture of these aircraft and capabilities.  Nevertheless, let’s work with what we have.

Technically the J-16 is still a Flanker  derivative, since it shares a similar airframe, hence its NATO reporting of ‘Flanker-N’.  The aircraft bridges the gap between the Su-30 derivatives, and the Su-35S air  superiority fighter. In a previous video, we noted the advantages the Su-35S  has over both the newer Su-30SM3 and older Flanker variants when it comes  to air-to-air capabilities.

In essence, our conclusion was that the Su-35 is  indeed the ultimate flanker within the realm of pure air-to-air prowess, whilst the  Su-30SM2 is likely Russia’s best multi-role strike aircraft – maybe an equivalent to  the latest Super Hornet or Strike Eagle. It is important to note that the PLAAF  and PLAN do field both the advanced Su-35, and two variants of the Su-30; the Su-30MKK or  Flanker G (a Chinese modified export variant from the late 90s), and the Su-30MK2 or Flanker  G+ (a heavily upgraded export model intended for maritime use). All three of these aircraft, or at  the very least the Su-35 and Su-30MK2 are highly adept for modern combat.

Nevertheless, China has  continually pushed for its own native derivatives. There are five key Chinese domestically produced  derivatives of the Flanker, all produced by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation. The first was the  J-11, based on the Su-27UBK.

Beginning in 1997, Russian Flanker manufacture KnAPPO sent assembly  kits to China. By December 1998 the first airframes were complete, but Russian engineers who  visited were shocked at the poor assembly quality and had to help rebuild them. However, by 2000,  the same engineers reported the entire Chinese production process had improved dramatically;  it was now both highly efficient and open to integrating domestically built technology.

The  Russians agreed, and in 2000 the newly named J-11A was put together, still heavily reliant on Russian  technology, it did integrate Chinese avionics. By 2004 China was producing its second primary  variant of the Flanker- the J-11B or Flanker-L, a multirole variant with the goal of moving  away from reliance on Russia. Despite breaching intellectual property agreements with Russia,  the project moved ahead, using the Su-27SK as its basis.

These production aircraft would  also serve as a type of testbed, with huge upgrade programs regularly occurring to overhaul  systems with more and more Chinese tech. By 2011, the J-11B was using 90 percent Chinese systems,  and by 2014 it was using the WS-10 Chinese engine. In 2006 a third major derivative would be  built.

Supposedly purchasing an incomplete Su-33 from Ukraine, Shenyang began  development of a naval-based aircraft. The result was the J-15 Flying Shark,  or Flanker-X2. Much like the Su-33, it is a carrier-capable multirole aircraft and  has become the primary fighter for the PLAN.

In 2018, the fourth major  derivative began testing; the J-15D, a twin seat carrier-based  derivative of the original J-15, which would have a focus on electronic  warfare, drone control, and possibly recon. Then we come to the fifth major variant - the J-16 Flanker-N. It would be a twin seat design, feature multirole capabilities, and aspire to  outperform the J-11 in air-to-air, and the J-15 in air-to-ground and electronic warfare roles. 

Placing the J-16 in a rather unique position. The developmental history of the J-16 is  not clear, but it likely took its maiden flight between 2011 and 2012, with  the intention of replacing the twin seat J-11B. Two primary variants  would emerge.

The standard J-16, or J-16A , primarily a multirole aircraft,  and the J-16D, an electronic warfare platform. Early on the J-16 was perceived as the ultimate  ‘do everything’ fighter by commentators, but this was probably overly optimistic. The  J-16A is clearly a multirole design, however its development seems to follow the same principles  as the Su-30 in Russia, and the Super Hornet in the US (And probably a reasonable comparison with  the F-15E).

It’s unlikely to outclass everything that’s thrown at it, but rather it offers pilots  a flexible platform for a wide variety of tasks. The J-16D is also a multirole aircraft,  with the key difference being a focus on electronic warfare. It will probably  operate in a similar capacity to the J-15D, and thus most comparable to the EA-18G Growler.

As of 2024, it was reported that 350 aircraft had  been built, and that production was continuing at this rate. The production aircraft is outwardly  very clearly a Flanker, yet Chinese under the  skin. Interestingly the aircraft emerged during  a period of tension between Russia and China, over IP infringements with the Flanker.

The  Russians were aware that the Chinese were breaching their agreements, and the level of  modification done to the J-16 demonstrates the illegal latitude the Chinese took. Basically  the Chinese build their own Flankers now, and there’s probably not a lot  Russia can, or would, do about it. The Chinese seem particularly proud  of the J-16s electronic systems they have developed.

Such development has been an  important focus for Chinese aerospace lately; in our other video on the J-20, we noted that  China (and South Korea with their KF-21) has put an emphasis on developing both single seat  and twin seat aircraft specifically to integrate more advanced digital networking systems. These  include a more advanced datalink system that links air and ground assets, shares information,  transfers target acquisition data, as well as more advanced features like onboard drone control using  standard drones, drone commanding for automated or loyal wingman-type drones, and control over  advanced digital systems once relegated to large ground-based computers or ELINT aircraft. We are taking the following story with a grain of salt, but there might have been a demonstration  of the Chinese countering an American EA-18 Growler.

Chinese officers from the Navy claim  that in 2022 during the Pelosi visit to Taiwan, when US carriers were deployed to the region,  they encountered heavy jamming from US Growlers, and this was extremely effective at masking  aircraft from radars completely. Essentially, Chinese aircraft and ships would drop  lock on US aircraft once jamming began. However, in December 2023, a similar  incident supposedly took place.

A US and a Chinese naval group encountered each  other in the South China Sea. The US sent out Growlers and Super Hornets to watch the Chinese,  whilst the Chinese began locking up the aircraft and the Growlers started their electronic jamming  – all rather routine for such an encounter. However, this time the Chinese radars reattained  their lock on American assets, somehow burning through the Growlers electronic efforts.

Chinese naval officers claimed that they had successfully integrated AI algorithms that  presumably help with data analysis to speed up burn-through time on jamming signals, and that  this can in some way be expanded and exploited by pilots in the J-16. Again, we take this  information with a grain of salt. There were two Chinese researchers who published a paper in July  2024 analysing this encounter and insinuate that an AI system was used to network all available  sensor information, including multiple radars, receivers, and so on, and crunches this data  to generate an image of the battlespace.

All information is then shared via a networking  system to air, sea, and land assets to form a more cohesive picture. This isn’t anything new, the  US has been doing this for some time, but Chinese advancements may be levelling the playing field  in this regard. It’s particularly interesting from the perspective of the J-16 directly competing  with the Growler in the electronic warfare space.

There are some other speculations about the J-16  and electronic warfare. The first is interlinking with the KJ-500 - Chinas primary AWACS aircraft.  Some commentators believe the J-16 doesn’t yet have this feature, but we would say it is  probably the one feature it almost certainly does have.

Designers are unlikely to prioritise  air-to-sea integration before AWACS linking, especially today. In modern air combat, data  streams from AWACS aircraft are crucial, and we can presume this would be top priority  from the datalink side of development. Another focus is likely the successfully  countering of naval air defences.

Perhaps the primary threat to naval aircraft is anti-air  coverage from an opposing navy. Some modern warships possess radar systems better than those  found on standard ground-based surface-to-air missile systems, and their coverage in the open  seas is not obscured by terrain. China realises that some of the most crucial confrontations  in a major war would be over the ocean.

For pilots today, a contested ocean is arguably  more dangerous than a contested land region; navy ships can saturate a large area with  air defences, and without terrain masking and corrected for atmospheric conditions, can  receive extremely accurate returns from radars. Aircraft can attempt to counter this with stealth,  long range standoff anti-ship or SEAD weapons, or electronic warfare. The latter is the  most advantageous, as it is cheaper than developing a dedicated stealth fighter and  can be scaled to accommodate new systems.

Still along the lines of electronics, it  has been reported that a J-16D was tested with an AI weapons systems officer. With just a  single pilot in the front and an empty backseat, the tasks of the Weapon Systems Officer were  handled by an AI, which could also process other data in a way that a standard WSO couldn’t  possibly do. An interesting, but not surprising, development, and something we’ve seen the US  also working on.

Given a twin-seat aircraft, we assume the ultimate situation would  be a human WSO with AI assistance, essentially providing the equivalent  of a 3-man team in a single aircraft. One of the key differences between Chinese  military aircraft development and other major powers such as Russia and the US, is  experience. The major western powers and Russia have pioneered modern fighter aircraft,  including the engines, radar, missile systems, and all the peripheral support equipment. 

These aircraft come from decades of experience, where as China is playing catch up as  it’s lacked such a depth of experience. An important area is the production of reliable  jet turbines, something which the US, UK, and Russia can do because of decades  of experience, yet China struggles. For this reason, it is impressive what China is  doing, but will their designs have the rigidity, strength, longevity, and reliability that comes  with experience?

China is notorious for having the highest level of academic forgery in  the world and no doubt this spills over into the world of military aviation. Reverse  engineering existing designs is likely a key leap-frog strategy for the CCP and any Western  criticism is a small price to pay to gain the upper hand on the battlefield. After all, this is  the country that gave us Sun Zhu and the Art of War – they play a different game to the west. 

This is a smart leadership using everything at their disposal to advance as quickly as  possible to meet western military standards. Chinese aircraft development and turnover  is still happening at Cold War speeds - both impressive and problematic. We look back  at the early Cold War era as a golden age in military aviation development, where  technological leaps were the primary driver, not necessarily reliability or longevity.

Also,  the economy of the US during the 50s and 60s allowed for far greater risks to be taken  in aerospace; China today may have a better economy than mainstream western sources claim,  but it is doubtful that it is anywhere close to the strength of 1950s America – nevertheless, it  seems to be on a similar developmental trajectory, albeit with the advantage of existing  superior designs like the Russian Flanker. In terms of specifications and capabilities,  the J-16 does have some notable differences to other Flanker derivatives. It is currently  powered by two natively built WS-10B engines, one of China’s primary domestic fighter  engine, producing 33,000 pounds of thrust.

These engines were initially based off  the GE F101, and early versions were noted as being unreliable after long use  - something we have noted in other videos about Chinese fighters - however the Bravo variant  has supposedly overcome a lot of these challenges. Performance wise, the J-16 has a max speed of  Mach 2. 0, and a service ceiling of 57000 feet.

Another difference to other Flankers is weight.  The J-16s empty weight is 38,600 pounds, with a max take-off weight of 77,000 pounds. This  empty weight is lighter than the Su-35, which weighs in at 41,800 pounds.

This  was achieved with composite materials. The aircrafts combat range is 1500km,  and its ferry range is 4500km. When it comes to weapons, it shares some  commonalities with other Flankers.

For example, it has 12 external hardpoints, allowing it  to carry a significant load-out if needed. This has always been a strength for these Sukhoi  designs. The Chinese have, however, attempted to turn the aircraft into a platform for domestically  designed weaponry.

The J-16 likely has the most impressive arsenal of any aircraft in the PLA  Air Force because of this focus on integration. For air-to-air engagements, the J-16 fields  several legacy Chinese domestic missiles; the PL-9 (an infrared missile comparable  to older variants of the Sidewinder) and the PL-12 (an active radar missile comparable  to the AMRAAM). It also integrates two rather unique domestically built missiles; the first  is the PL-10, a short-range missile which can be employed using classic infrared  homing, or combining infrared signature data with optical shape detection for stronger  immunity to countermeasures.

It also integrates active radar to provide ‘lock-on after launch’  capabilities. This missile is comparable to the IRIS-T or Aim-9X, integrating the ability to  slave the seeker head to a helmet mounted display, and lock targets in off-boresight acquisition,  supposedly beyond 90 degrees from the HUD. The second is the PL-15, which has been described  as a type of long-range active-radar-guided standoff weapon, much like Russia’s R-77-1, or  the US AIM-260.

Equipped with a micro AESA radar, the missile can be employed actively without a  data stream from the aircraft - like most Fox-3 missiles today - however it can be launched in a  passive tracking mode. It is unclear whether this passive mode refers to a standard track-while-scan  soft lock, which requires the firing aircraft to hold lock (which wouldn’t be particularly  surprising) or whether the missile will have the ability to passively track targets without  requiring guidance data from the host aircraft. If it is the latter, that would be a major advantage,  and this seems to be in line with what Chinese designers have been obsessing over for years. 

The classic disadvantage with track-while-scan acquisition is that once the firing aircraft  breaks lock with its targets, the fired missiles will switch on radars to active mode,  which alerts enemy aircraft of their presence. The claim is that the PL-15 is Mach 5 capable,  and operable up to a range of 200km. In Ukraine, we have already seen an air-to-air kill at  100km using what was reported to be an R-77-1, whilst Ukrainian pilots have also complained  about having to pull back from operations to counter R-37 hypersonic missiles  being launched at similar ranges.

Thus we know that these longer-range missiles are  now being employed on the battlefield. However, it is obviously quite a jump from a  100km capable standoff missile, to 200km. Over the past decade China has  had success in designing highly advanced long-range missiles (including hypersonics  and other kinetic energy weapons) and may have had equivalent success in  the world of air-to-air munitions.

In terms of air-to-ground, it seems the  J-16 sports a variety of laser guided, unguided, and perhaps GPS guided  bombs, air-to-ground missiles, rocket pods, anti-ship missiles, and  anti-radiation missiles. Also the J-16D comes equipped with distinct wingtip  mounted modules for electronic warfare use. There is not much confirmed information  about the J-16s radar.

In its role, it should preferably have a radar that  can at least match the Super Hornets, since that will be its most likely adversary.  Whether or not this is the case is anyone’s guess. It is claimed that China’s modern AESA  radars use gallium nitride compounds rather than older gallium arsenide, giving  a higher power density.

It is possible but note that US manufacturers - who are far more  experienced than those in China - have themselves not fully embraced gallium nitride. Interestingly, someone online has noted that anyone can purchase gallium nitride transmit-receive modules from Alibaba for consumer purposes. This probably doesn't directly translate to successful military application, but it does suggest that Chinese manufacturers are quickly adopting what they think is the next step up in radar technology.

It is also  speculated that the J-16s radar will be a larger, more advanced, variant or iteration of that  used in the JF-17. This may not be true, since the JF-17 is an export fighter, and probably  doesn’t have the latest Chinese technology. Even so, the speculation is  that the JF-17s radar has a synthetic aperture resolution of below 1  meter, and so the J-16s radar (possibly twice as large and more advanced) would  likely have an even greater resolution.

When it comes to radars, the bar has  been set pretty high by the latest western designs. The APG-81 used in the  F-35 has a particularly high fidelity, with official images showing trucks in a field,  even rendering the tire tracks visible in the grass. This suggests a synthetic aperture clarity  of around 20 centimetres.

Could Shenyang match this? It is possible, but the F-35 has set  the bar extremely high from what we’ve seen. Beyond radar, the J-16 integrates other  sensor systems.

As with most Flankers, it features an electro-optical system for target  acquisition. This system is natively built into US fighters and common on Russian and European  designs. In the past this was good primarily in visual range situations, however over time  the capability of EO systems has improved.

On the Typhoon, for example, it is said to be  able to acquire aircraft at 100km, and the Su-35, supposedly, can spot and  track targets over 50km away. The obvious advantage here is that  the EO systems allow for target lock without giving the target the heads up  via their radar warning receiver alerts. On that note, in terms of radar warning receiver  capabilities, the J-16 seems a bit different.

Most modern Flankers, as well as the Su-57, integrate  threat warning suites which are combined into a single sensor system. The Su-35S and Su-57 use  missile approach warning system (or MAWs) that cover a large portion of the airframe, and can  detect objects optically, through infrared or through other imaging envelopes. European fighters  also use a similar system, with decent coverage around the airframe.

The J-16 on the other hand  seems to have only rear MAWs coverage, presumably because infrared threats would primarily  present themselves from behind the aircraft. The US is slowly integrating the new  Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability system (or EPAWSS). This system allows for  360-degree radar warning receiver coverage, with an accuracy of detection of a few  degrees - some claims have it as low as 1 degree.

Classic radar warning receiver  accuracy of tens of degrees has usually been fine when trying to escape threats, since  the general direction is all that is necessary, however the EPAWSS system gives pilots the  ability to actively counter these threats. We can imagine that Growler pilots, or those  in other electronic warfare capable aircraft, could use this hyper-directional information  to direct electronic warfare systems for jamming and supressing enemy defences. In fact,  a claimed use of the EPAWSS is direct integration with air to ground weapons,  presumably allowing radar warning receiver data to be directly translated into  a computer calculated release point.

We can speculate that the designers  at Shenyang, and their contractors, are working on a system similar to  EPAWSS for integration into the J-16, and possibly the reason the J-16 seems to have  less of a focus on optical and infrared systems. When we ask the question “Is the J-16  the ultimate Flanker? ” there’s a lot to consider.

It is highly possible the  J-16 is better than the Su-30 variants, and closer to the Su-35 in terms of pure fighting  ability, thanks to the use of composites and newer digital systems - which is remarkable, if true,  given that the J-16 is a multirole aircraft. The Chinese have made great advances in the  digital space, they excel in replicating existing designs and adding improvements,  and are rapidly gaining ground. But maybe, the reason the J-16 may be one of the best  Flankers is because it is a Flanker to start with.

Without the Russian Flanker as a starting  point, it is debatable whether Chinese designers could have created an equivalent  native aircraft from scratch. Nevertheless, the J-16 is surely an impressive aircraft, maybe  not the most dominant Chinese fighter (that’s probably the J-11D derived from the Su-27)  but certainly a good all-round multi-roll aircraft - rather like the Super Hornet, and the  J-16D clearly a competitor to the EA-18 Growler. It will be interesting to see what China  does with these new Flanker derivatives.

We speculate that Shenyang will move more towards  a US-based approach to air combat and air power, being more digital and network oriented.  This will be interesting to see - essentially Flanker airframes with American style  systems. But only time will tell.

Thanks for watching, and if you  appreciate what we are doing, please subscribe and support us by  checking out our merchandise shop.