Case for revival of point defense interceptors

[CV12Hornet]

Can GCI controlled Soviet fighter achieve similar results ? Esp since they have very few AWACS of limited capability

No. GCI is inherently less flexible, especially in the case of chaotic battlefields. And in any case VVS fighters were not equipped for GCI.

As far as the Tu-126, yes, it has limitations and is only available in small numbers. But it's better than nothing and for clearing the skies of Chinese fighters should suffice. The higher the altitude, the more effect the Tu-126 becomes as an AWACS. Pity the Beriev A-50 only entered service in 1984...

But I should point out the Israelis pulled off Bekaa Valley with only four E-2 Hawkeyes in their fleet and two aloft at any one time. And that the MiG-23 is so hilariously superior to the J-6 that they'll be swatting down Chinese fighters even without AWACS help, the Soviets can reserve AWACS help for their MiG-21s.

 

[CV12Hornet]

Is there a way Soviet strike planes like mig27 and su17 can deal with J6 themselves ? Like
By flares
Accompanying chaff bombers
Self defense missiles
Not sure if flying too high or too low will help against J6
This way they are not limited by range of escort fighters and can strike deeper into PRC?

MiG-27s and Su-17s aren't going to be striking deep into the PRC anyway, that's a job for Su-24s and whatever heavy and medium bombers the Strategic forces deign to allocate. But generally, flying low and fast is the best option. Evade the radars and the J-6 is relying on the Mark 1 Eyeball, which is no bueno when trying to catch supersonic strike aircraft that are faster than you.

With guns.

 

[Blue cat]

This is pretty much a peacetime requirement and I'm not sure it really calls for a point defence interceptor, most of the time you'd want to intercept when (or preferably before) they approach your airspace and then shadow them as they wander around the perimeter. The SR53 or equivalent would not be able to do this as it just wouldn't have the range to shadow.

There generally isn't the need to visually ID a plane coming in at Mach 2+, while a plane coming in more slowly (which might be a civil plane and so need visual ID) doesn't need a specialized interceptor to be intercepted,

Basically, if you had an unlimited budget then yes, you might want an unlimited number of high speed short range interceptors for peacetime interceptions because IFF is not perfect. In the real world there are better uses for limited resources, and a better air defence system is a mixture of CAP fighters and SAMs. On second thoughts, given unlimited resources it would be better to have lots more planes on CAP than lots of planes on the ground. I find it hard to think of a situation where it is better to have planes on the ground than planes already in the air, but that could just be a lack of imagination.

The ultimate target that might need a point defence fighter is the aircraft carrier as it is a single critical target that is hard to repair in situ. The USN chose the F14 over a point defence interceptor for a reason despite the smaller number of large F14s that could be carried. The RN only thought about the point defence interceptor because it couldn't afford sufficient/big enough carriers to operate a sufficiently effective CAP, As soon as technology enabled an effective CAP with fewer planes it abandoned the idea of a point defence interceptor.

Yep... As I mentioned in a prior post, while some nations might have conceivably wanted uber performance (ie. mostly high speed with reasonable range and endurance) manned interceptors had the cold war for example un folded a bit differently I suspect very few nations would have wanted point defense interceptors once there were other viable alternatives to them.

 

[AdA]

One major power which used these aircraft was PRC well into the 80s they had hundreds of J6 which are pretty close to point defense interceptors
Did they just keep them in service as they did not have anything better or was there a method to their madness ?

The J-6 (MiG-19) is a tactical fighter.
The contemporary Soviet interceptor was the Su-9.
The primary chinese interceptor was the J-8, but this was more a "patrol fighter" with long range and AAM rather than a point defence interceptor.

 

[Monk78]

The J-6 (MiG-19) is a tactical fighter.
The contemporary Soviet interceptor was the Su-9.
The primary chinese interceptor was the J-8, but this was more a "patrol fighter" with long range and AAM rather than a point defence interceptor.

But given the huge numbers of J6 and some J7 they would most likely be tasked for interception duties as well

 

[CV12Hornet]

J-6 production was broadly split between the J-6A interceptor and J-6/J-6C day fighters, based on the MiG-19P and MiG-19S, respectively.