Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 104

Thread: Q-5 Fantan

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Fort Bragg California
    Posts
    464
    China also recently flew the two seat Q-5J Fantan.This is a combat capable trainer version.This could also be the basis for a more advanced two seat night/all weather model.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,136
    This was posted some time ago at the CMF ... unfortunately one page is missing !

    Maybe it could help ....

    Cheers, Deino
    ...

    He was my North, my South, my East and West,
    My working week and my Sunday rest,
    My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
    I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

    The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
    Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
    Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
    For nothing now can ever come to any good.
    -------------------------------------------------
    W.H.Auden (1945)

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    318
    The A-5C appears in the old video game "F-22 Raptor" (Novalogic). I fought them so many time... no match against the Raptor!

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, PRC
    Posts
    3,220

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Chan
    Is "10660" a real PLA/PLAAF/PLAN serial number?
    Haven't found a photo of the real 10660 Red yet, but the
    closest that I found is a photo of the real 10661 Red, at
    http://tuku.military.china.com/milit...-02-23/397.htm
    Republic of Korea Air Force KF-16 missing photographs

    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-databas...irforce/ROKAF/

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    1,102

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, PRC
    Posts
    3,220
    That's a screen cap of a virtual Miss 10262 Red.
    Is she in BF2 also?
    Anyway.
    I'm looking for a photo of the real Miss 10660 Red.
    Republic of Korea Air Force KF-16 missing photographs

    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-databas...irforce/ROKAF/

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,026
    Cool drawings.

    What game is that screenshot from?
    Fox-4!

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, PRC
    Posts
    3,220
    Battlefield 2: Armored Fury (Windows: Electronic Arts, 2006.03.28)

    http://www.ea.com/official/battlefie.../euroforce.jsp
    http://www.totalbf2.com/game/af/vehicles/
    Republic of Korea Air Force KF-16 missing photographs

    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-databas...irforce/ROKAF/

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,149
    The Q-5 is in BF2? I don't have the game but I thought the Chinese forces only had the J-10 and Su-27.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, PRC
    Posts
    3,220
    I don't have the game either, but I'm keeping track, off and on, of the vehicles in it and its add-ons: Special Forces, Euro Force, and Armored Fury; if just because its forces include the PLA (s_cks).
    And I've been writing, off and on, about them in the Real World Vehicles FAQ, as seen at
    http://faqs.ign.com/objects/677/677882.html
    http://www.cheathappens.com/show_download.asp?id=18554
    if just because I was disappointed by the Real World Vehicles FAQ that someone else wrote for Battlefield Vietnam.
    (Yes, what with gawking at virtual military aircraft, I've no life.) 8b

    The Q-5 is in the Armored Fury add-on, AFAIK.
    Republic of Korea Air Force KF-16 missing photographs

    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-databas...irforce/ROKAF/

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, PRC
    Posts
    3,220
    My dumb question of the week, WRT the Q-5:
    What/why are those red half-circle marks on the wings and sides?
    Republic of Korea Air Force KF-16 missing photographs

    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-databas...irforce/ROKAF/

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Chan
    My dumb question of the week, WRT the Q-5:
    What/why are those red half-circle marks on the wings and sides?
    Those are visual cues on the wing roots and fences. Most likely used for formation flying. The large wing fences can confuse depth perception from a wingman looking from the side so the half-circles are painted to allow the wingfences to be distinguished from the body of the plane.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,026
    I hate to change subjects, but what is the deal with the latest Q-5 variants such as the J model? Is it in service? How many?

    What about the Q-5D and E? How many of those have been made?
    Fox-4!

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,149
    Quote Originally Posted by PhantomII
    I hate to change subjects, but what is the deal with the latest Q-5 variants such as the J model? Is it in service? How many?
    The two seat Q-5J prototype only flew last year. It's future is not very certain. People say it is just one of many proposals from China's many obsolete assembly lines to keep them running. Overcapacity is a serious problem.

    Most likely, there would be a few dozen made as trainers or perhaps a few PGM deliverers taking advantage of the second pilot. But the range and load of the design are way too limited.

    What about the Q-5D and E? How many of those have been made?
    There is also the F. There are probably 200 or less of these late models with the majority of them being the D variant. Series production has supposedly ended for all Q-5s.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, PRC
    Posts
    3,220
    http://military.china.com/zh_cn/bbs/.../12520090.html

    Five pages of photos of the PLAAF Q-5 office (cockpit).
    Instruments are labelled in Chinese. 8)

    (When the computer game Battlefield 2: Armored Fury comes out, I wonder whether the virtual Q-5 office is also labelled in Chinese?)
    Republic of Korea Air Force KF-16 missing photographs

    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-databas...irforce/ROKAF/

  16. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, PRC
    Posts
    3,220

    Thumbs up Rest In Peace

    LU Xiao Peng.
    Chief designer, Q-5 and variants.
    Republic of Korea Air Force KF-16 missing photographs

    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-databas...irforce/ROKAF/

  17. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Fort Bragg California
    Posts
    464
    Quote Originally Posted by PhantomII
    I hate to change subjects, but what is the deal with the latest Q-5 variants such as the J model? Is it in service? How many?

    What about the Q-5D and E? How many of those have been made?


    From what I've heard,with the retirement of the JJ-6 Farmers,they decided to make a trainer of the Fantan so as they could continue training pilots on the type sice before they'd used just the standard two seat J-6.They're also looking to expand this into the type being used,as mentioned before,as an LGB dropper and all weather model.

  18. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    417
    More later...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	147.jpg 
Views:	103 
Size:	171.1 KB 
ID:	118357   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Q-5 17082_13.jpg 
Views:	989 
Size:	65.1 KB 
ID:	118358   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Q-5 17082_16.jpg 
Views:	977 
Size:	61.0 KB 
ID:	118359   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	23299.jpg 
Views:	162 
Size:	141.1 KB 
ID:	118360   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	11264.jpg 
Views:	117 
Size:	42.1 KB 
ID:	118361  

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1076x.jpg 
Views:	99 
Size:	127.4 KB 
ID:	118362   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	124.jpg 
Views:	1011 
Size:	25.2 KB 
ID:	118363   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	3117.jpg 
Views:	971 
Size:	21.9 KB 
ID:	118364   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	8057.jpg 
Views:	974 
Size:	23.4 KB 
ID:	118365   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	A-5series-7.jpg 
Views:	985 
Size:	37.8 KB 
ID:	118367  


  19. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    7,172
    Nice pic on Q-5 80572 (7th Division PLANAF?). It appears the plane has radar and could carry antiship missiles. It must be a prototype but it has operational colors and unit.
    pb::

  20. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,026
    Wasn't that a test bed for a possible upgrade allowing the Q-5 to use the C-801 anti-ship missile or something? Q-5B maybe?

    By the way crob can I ask a favor? Assuming the Q-5D is the most numerous of the newer production models in service, could you provide a list of the weapon types that they are capable of carrying and what stations they carry them on? I know it's a lot, but good information on the Q-5 is hard for me to come by and you're one of the better sources on Chinese stuff there is.
    Last edited by PhantomII; 26th March 2006 at 03:30.
    Fox-4!

  21. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    1,102
    .


    With all the commotions about foreign assitances, here
    are what might have been the next generation of Q-5s. And, that belly intake?
    It clearly have this almost J-10 genises to it doesn't it?


    三机部对这种新型飞机非常重视,并很快于1976年6月召集所属各部 设计人员
    到北京,要求他们在最短的时间内提出设计方案。根据三机部下达的设计要求。沈阳飞机制造厂
    和 南昌飞机制造厂很快提出了自己的方案,其中,南昌飞机制造厂提出强一6设计方案,沈阳飞 机 制
    造 厂则提出了歼轰一8
    设计方案,西安飞机制造厂则稍后提出了“飞豹设计方 案。

    http://military.china.com/zh_cn/dljl...2893762_1.html
    (Toatal 2 pages)

    沈飞的歼轰一8,就是歼一8的对地攻击改型。起先,三机部是
    倾向于沈阳提出的歼轰一8方案的,但由于此时歼一8原型机尚未定型,该方案
    在 实际运作中的风险系数过高,因此歼一8轰方案最终被否决。

    强6是在米格一23MC的基础 (modeled after) 上发展而来的,当然
    同样采用了悬臂式 单翼结构的可变后掠翼的布局,这种结构阻力小,稳定性好,适
    合于飞机的 高速突防,并为对地攻击武器提供了一个理想的发射平台。


    The Q-5 was nice, but the Q-6
    would've been even nicer and the JH-7
    (FBC) would've been better still...

    .
    Last edited by edisonone; 26th March 2006 at 14:01.

  22. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,136
    Quote Originally Posted by crobato
    Nice pic on Q-5 80572 (7th Division PLANAF?). It appears the plane has radar and could carry antiship missiles. It must be a prototype but it has operational colors and unit.

    That's right !!! Even if this picture is not new, but until now I always thought the specialised naval-version Q-5B (as seen in prototype form in the same post above) never entered operational use ... nor that there was ever an improved machine other than the prototype !

    Thanks, Deino
    ...

    He was my North, my South, my East and West,
    My working week and my Sunday rest,
    My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
    I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

    The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
    Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
    Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
    For nothing now can ever come to any good.
    -------------------------------------------------
    W.H.Auden (1945)

  23. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,026
    Interesting that the Q-5E is said to carry the targeting pod while the F carries the two LS-500J LGB's......

    Why not have one designation and in practice have one aircraft carry the pod while another carries the two bombs.

    Of course self-designation is even better. Does the weight of the pod and two LGB's not allow the Q-5 to take-off? Surely that's not the case.

    Seems like smaller LGB's like those in the 250-kg class should be used for an aircraft like the Q-5. (i.e. as seen on Super Etendards with the GBU-12). A load of perhaps four LS-250J's (?), two tanks, one designator, pod, and two AAM's for self defense would be perfect.

    Alternatively I guess two LS-500J's, two smaller outboard tanks, and one targeting pod would work.

    Anyone have theories on why two variants for this LGB delivery system?

    Is the pod the same as the Blue Sky pod supposedly carried by the JH-7 and possibly J-10?
    Fox-4!

  24. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    1,102
    Quote Originally Posted by PhantomII
    Interesting that the Q-5E is said to carry the targeting pod while the F carries the two LS-500J LGB's......

    Why not have one designation and in practice have one aircraft carry the pod while another carries the two bombs.

    Of course self-designation is even better. Does the weight of the pod and two LGB's not allow the Q-5 to take-off? Surely that's not the case.

    Seems like smaller LGB's like those in the 250-kg class should be used for an aircraft like the Q-5. (i.e. as seen on Super Etendards with the GBU-12). A load of perhaps four LS-250J's (?), two tanks, one designator, pod, and two AAM's for self defense would be perfect.

    Alternatively I guess two LS-500J's, two smaller outboard tanks, and one targeting pod would work.

    Anyone have theories on why two variants for this LGB delivery system?

    Is the pod the same as the Blue Sky pod supposedly carried by the JH-7 and possibly J-10?
    Why, you unpatriotic Islander you ! Why embroil yourself in
    the Q-5 when you don't need to? I mean it's not as if it's going to cross
    the TW Straight and fly staright into your home town you know - not when there's something
    that's this dangerous sitting around your neck of the woods.

    http://military.china.com/zh_cn/bbs2.../13184516.html

    So sleep tight my friend and don't worry about the Q-5s.
    Because, once CSB gets kicked out of office and MYJ takes over,
    the two airfoces will likely buddy up with each other and diplomatic visits
    between the two airforces will likely be the calls of the day.

    So eat your heart out guys. TW is no push over !!!!


    .

  25. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by PhantomII
    Interesting that the Q-5E is said to carry the targeting pod while the F carries the two LS-500J LGB's......

    Why not have one designation and in practice have one aircraft carry the pod while another carries the two bombs.

    Of course self-designation is even better. Does the weight of the pod and two LGB's not allow the Q-5 to take-off? Surely that's not the case.

    Seems like smaller LGB's like those in the 250-kg class should be used for an aircraft like the Q-5. (i.e. as seen on Super Etendards with the GBU-12). A load of perhaps four LS-250J's (?), two tanks, one designator, pod, and two AAM's for self defense would be perfect.

    Alternatively I guess two LS-500J's, two smaller outboard tanks, and one targeting pod would work.

    Anyone have theories on why two variants for this LGB delivery system?

    Is the pod the same as the Blue Sky pod supposedly carried by the JH-7 and possibly J-10?
    I'm pretty sure they are different. blue sky is by 607, the FLIR/LT pod is by 613
    This is the new FLIR/LT pod used for LGBs
    http://mil.jschina.com.cn/huitong/missiles/FLIR.jpg
    blue sky
    http://images.qianlong.com/mmsource/...illantian3.jpg

  26. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,026
    Blue Sky reminds me of LANTIRN...

    In any case does anyone have photos of a Q-5 bombed up with LS-500J's?
    Fox-4!

  27. #57
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by PhantomII
    Wasn't that a test bed for a possible upgrade allowing the Q-5 to use the C-801 anti-ship missile or something? Q-5B maybe?
    It may have actually been operational for a while. although defunct by now, letting the JH-7s do the task instead.

    By the way crob can I ask a favor? Assuming the Q-5D is the most numerous of the newer production models in service, could you provide a list of the weapon types that they are capable of carrying and what stations they carry them on? I know it's a lot, but good information on the Q-5 is hard for me to come by and you're one of the better sources on Chinese stuff there is.
    The plane has six points in the wings and four in the fuselage.

    Wings:

    Outer point : Usually an AAM for self defense. The PL-5 is the one seen for this.

    Middle Point: Almost always taken up by a tank.

    Inner Point: Stressed for 500kg. Either a 500kg bomb, or two 250kg bombs in a rack. The most common installation has been rocket pods though.

    Fuselage points:
    Four 250kg bombs.

    These pics of the pod and LS500 bomb is actually on a Q-5.

    http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/...attack/q54.asp

    I am not sure why they gave a new designation for the Q-5 just for carrying the pod and LGB as there is no precedent for that. Also the pics above shows the background plane to be dark green, indicating an operational Q-5D, rather than prototype Q-5Es or Q-5Fs in yellow.
    pb::

  28. #58
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,464
    wasn't the coolest thing about the Q-5 its internal bomb bay?

  29. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,026
    I wonder if the features of the Q-5E/F will simply be incorporated onto the D fleet, therefore meaning that seeing a green Q-5 with LGB's or a targeting pod wouldn't be a weird thing....

    Does the E/F have any other improvements that the D doesn't have?

    Does any Q-5 model aside from the now defunct K and M have a truly functional modern-day HUD?
    Fox-4!

  30. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    pi::
    Posts
    7,172
    There is also the F. There are probably 200 or less of these late models with the majority of them being the D variant. Series production has supposedly ended for all Q-5s.
    I have to disagree on this one. The fact you have Q-5E/F/J prototypes indicate that new aircraft are still being built, even at reduced levels. Once you have dissolved a production line, it's like Humpty Dumpy---it is very hard to get everything back, with all the skilled labor and management gone.

    Like the J-7 and J-8II lines, there has to be some low rate of production in order to keep the production line, then ramp up the production if needed.

    There is still quite a number of Q-5 regiments out there; 250 operational planes is not a bad number. There may be more in reserve. Although these regiments may be inevitably targeted for JH-7A upgrades.

    Personally there is something about the way plane looks that I look, quite raw, spunky and retro looking. Would hate to see it go. I don't know what the opinions of the pilots are, but I guess they would probably hate to lose their steeds to something, although much more modern, is also a lot bigger and less nimble. By the way, since that F-100 vs J-6 thread last year, no one ever mentioned that the J-6 is a difficult plane to fly (by admission among PLAAF pilots including Han Decai). One can expect the Q-5 to be just as worst. But once it is mastered they reward the pilot well for the effort with a fairly good thrust to weight ratio to boot.

    I wonder if the features of the Q-5E/F will simply be incorporated onto the D fleet, therefore meaning that seeing a green Q-5 with LGB's or a targeting pod wouldn't be a weird thing....

    Does the E/F have any other improvements that the D doesn't have?
    That the details we don't know.

    Does any Q-5 model aside from the now defunct K and M have a truly functional modern-day HUD?
    We have never seen a cockpit inside a late Q-5 model but all the new models should have them.
    pb::

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES