Re: New Generation Fighter
This is why I don't like a threads like this.
The problem is, it is not far cheaper than a J-20 with the same electrons/engines, for instance, the J-11's flyaway cost, is around 300 million yuan, whilst the J-20's cost, with full configuration should be around 600-700 million yuan, considering the likely exchange rate between the two fighters in a air-combat scenario, in terms of cost-efficiency, J-11 is far far worse than J-20, even with downgraded engines.
USN is going to produce F-35 and F-18E/F at the same time. Why do you think they do that? J-11 in 10 years will be produced in different configurations like naval fighter, fighter-bomber, long range attacker and possibly other variants like EW fighter and buddy-to buddy tanker. Aside from that, it is still more than enough to deal with most neighbouring air forces including the Russian air force.
Naval only need 30-50 Su-33/J-15s and the problem with SAC/601 is they cannot deliver anything new and all they can do is copying existing designs and make minor modifications.
China has a huge requirement for flanker variants still. Just think about how many existing PLAAF regiments use flankers and J-8s and will need to be replaced.
Think about the production rate and cost of 4th gen fighter in the beginning. Also think about the cost of maintaining these fighter jets. There is no way around it. PLAAF needs a hi-lo combination for the next generation. Whether it is J-20 (let's just call it that) and J-10B/C/D (whatever variant) or J-20 and another cheaper 4th gen option. There is a maximum number of J-20 they will produce and it is probably less than 300. PLAAF might disband some regiments and have less number of planes, but it will not be able to equip every regiment with J-20.
In a competitive market, the craps like SAC should have bankrupted a long time ago, they have lost every single open fighter research deal to other air industry groups in China since 1980s, the only reason that they can still get orders is because the high-ups in Chinese NASA has lots SAC's fans and ex-employee considering this company's long history.
how old are you really? Yes, SAC has not been as successful in military projects as CAC, but it has a lot of things to offer in terms of heavy fighter design and production that CAC does not have experience with. When you have multiple design bureaus and plants that could end up with contracts, it promotes competition and better products and better pricing for PLA. It is never good for a country like China to place all its eggs in one basket. On top of that, its civilian division has been extremely successful recently in becoming supplier for Cessna skycatcher, Bombardier Q-400/C-Series, Boeing 787 and Airbus 320.
Again, J-10 isnt cheap, but yes, it is good for the purpose of maintaining the size of airforce, which itself is an improtant aspect of strength.
J-8 is a crap fighter, and the latest model of J-8 get beaten in air-combat even by fighter-bomber FBC-1, thats why nowadays Navy use FBC-1, a fighter-bomber, for their intercept missions, instead of the use the supposed interceptor called J-8.
And J-8 is highly overpriced piece of crap, the fighter itself cost ~2/3 of a brand new J-10, and J-10 can eat it for lunch considering even Su-27/J-11 can beat the crap out of it easily.
The only reason the PLAAF still order this piece of overpriced crap is to keep SAC alife.
Every fighter jet can be useful if applied in a correct scenario. J-10 is a tremendous success, but J-11 is still needed along with J-10 for different missions. In terms of J-8, I would love to see it retire from PLAAF other than the special recon versions, but PLAAF will take a long time to replace all of the 2nd generation regiments it has. And J-8II will still be effective against the air forces of most a good number of regional air forces.
This is why I still think PLAAF really needs to reorient its forces from "defensive" to "power projection."
J-10 is great for air defense, even against stealth targets, but it does not have the range of the J-11B. The most important missions for the PLAAF will be maintaining air superiority out beyond the first island chain. The J-10 is a little too short legged for that.
So I think PLAAF should hold off on J-10B if J-20 is going to be in service in three years or so. The flankers can still continue to be produced until a heavy stealth fighter with flanker's range is ready.
By the way, what happened to the stealth bomber? When is it going to fly? When are we going to have photos?
If J-20 is going to be ready in 2013, then the naval version should be ready by 2020 at the latest. That means China should not waste time and money on a first generation aircraft carrier with flankers. Instead, Varyag or another test / training vessel can be built for the next 10 years. The first mass produced carrier should only be launched in 2020, when the stealth naval fighter is ready. Besides, PLAN can spend the next 10 years practicing with helicopter carriers and amphibious warfare ships. It doesn't have a really pressing need for a carrier. If China can make a tilt-rotor aircraft, then it can really use a helicopter carrier to good effect.
Let's squash all these fantasies. J-20 is not going to be ready in 2013. Naval version will not be ready by 2010 at the latest. Let's not even get into stealth bomber, they are still inducting H-6K!
