www.China-Defense.com

One of the great deficiencies of the PLAAF is the lack of a true long range deep penetrator strike force. An SU-27SK is still valuable on the air superiority and interception role, but the PLAAF has more than enough fighters that could do this job, not to mention it's a job that a SAM system could do better on a cost basis. It is the deep interdiction role that the PLAAF seriously lacks, and this is where the Flanker, in its SU-30MK guise, could best fill this gap.

In the future, China should continue to produce the Flanker under license, but under certain conditions. The SU-27SK should not be renewed, but all emphasis should be on the SU-30MK. It's been shown that two crews are better for multirole due to the better work distribution and situational awareness, so the focus of the license should be the dual seat SU-30MKs (also called SU-35UBK) as opposed to the single seat variants. If possible, all remaining unbuilt SU-27SK should be converted to the SU-30MKK instead, equipped with better ranged, Chinese ordinance compatible radars.

As a license however, China should be allowed to fit the SU-30MK airframe with the equipment it desires, and not just radars, but also a glass cockpit using MFDs of its own design and manufacture and even domestic engines. Likewise, if support for indigenous weaponry does not improve, this will restrict further SU-30 deployment in the future, and the PLAAF should turn its interest and priorities for to the J-10 in the multirole, and more advanced variants of the JH-7 in the deep strike role.

Should China adopt the SU-35/-37 standard with its canards and TVC on the SU-30MKKs? The PLAAF high command had been skeptical of adopting this aircraft for its complexity, which increases its cost and production. There was a good reason why the PLAAF picked the SU-30MKK as it is---they got it sooner, cheaper, and more of them to boot as well.

Yet one cannot ignore that even the J-10 is becoming a more sophisticated aircraft than the J11 or even the SU-30MKK. The J-10 has canards, digital four way FBW, and might even have TVC, so why can't the SU-30MKK? In air combat, every ounce of maneuverability is survival, and things like canards and thrust vector engines can make the crucial difference between dodging a missile or dying from it. For the additional cost, you can substantially increase the survival of your investment. These improvements are necessary in order to keep both the J-10 and J-11 viable against aircraft such as the JSF.

Even with volume amortization and being relatively cheap compared to Western fighters, the Flanker takes quite long to build and it cannot hope to replace vast numbers of Chinese aircraft facing retirement in the next decade. They will serve as the 'elite' and cheaper, smaller fighters will have to fill as cannon fodder. Still in the upcoming years, it's not inconceivable to see about 300-400 of them.