J-20... The New Generation Fighter II

[tres]

I have to disagree with you on that. First of all, it's not hard to get an H1B. to this day, I have not heard anyone who applies for an H1B is denied.

oh yeah, H1b got denied all the time. People had to go back to India or China to wait for another round.

 

[SteelBird]

Not completely true. The book the man wrote was readily available for anyone to read. So nothing was stolen. The question is..why did not the Soviets/Russians develop a stealth aircraft?

Didn't they have the T-50?

 

[yfan]

Re: The Trefor Moss article, posted by Kyli

The Western media is quite annoying at times, and it is not simply a matter of China bashing and twisting facts, but mainly that they just get things wrong. They seem incapable of analyzing anything that is not American or European. Maybe the best thing would be to round up a large number of them and send them to "re-education camp". They would be forced to study The Art of War. For a few examples, I am putting some quotes below (from Sunzi, not Trefor Moss).


China is showing an aircraft that COULD be a reasonable f-22 hunter and a good f-35 hunter. Do we know this for a fact? Of course not, but NEITHER DOES THE PENTAGON. As has been pointed out by many on either side of the argument, there are too many unknowns: radar, RAM coating, data fusion, data links, etc.. Either way, the Pentagon, as well as the military establishments of all the countries in the region currently allied with the US, are now forced to devote some additional resources to counter 'a reasonable f-22 hunter and a good f-35 hunter'. It won't do to speculate that the new airplane is inferior.

This is relevant, because the f-35 program is somewhat of a sore point between the US and it's allies as it is. The presentation of the J-20, which MAY/COULD exceed its capabilities will simply add to this friction. Everytime a customer changes their mind about this plane, it adds to the costs for the rest, and especially the US. There was a short article in Aviation Week which speculated that the J-20 could help sales of the f-35. But I think all but one of the reader comments put down the f-35 as useless, ignoring the opinion of the author. There is also friction with some, apparently, over the decision not to sell the f-22.

A related point is that it reopens the debate over the f-22 in the US at a point where it could add to political difficulties in country, and especially for Gates. Remember, the general spoke about the progress of this project on TV last year not too long after the f-22 was cancelled. In my view, that was just a preview of the show we got in the last couple of weeks, and it was part of the same strategy. From that point of view, although I think he's wrong, Trefor Moss can be forgiven for thinking that the timing of was "carefully stage-managed". At least he gets the point that it creates special difficulties for Gates.

We all know that this project was given a certain priority, and if you want to ask about the significance of the "timing", the answer is obvious: the project was ready for testing! Still, the reason that this particular project was revealed in a way that created such a sensation does have something to do with "timing", at least, in the general sense. Here I'm not talking about the specific date, but about the economic crisis that hit the world, and primarily the US and its allies, in 2008 and which continues to this day. The revelation of this new plane is aimed at forcing the US to spend money it would not otherwise spend. China is "attacking" the US at its weakest point: the economy. It is "attack[ing] a position [the US] must relieve".

As a weapon of war, a shooting war, this airplane is not a reality yet. It'll take some years. But if war is seen in this broader sense, as seen by Sunzi, the J-20 is already playing a big role as a weapon, quite possibly as big a role as it will ever have. It is impacting it's adversary's economy at a time when it is weak, creating dissension in its ranks and attacking its alliances.

Trefor Moss (in the article posted by Kyli that everybody has been complaining about) manages to raise important questions but gives very silly answers. The focus of the article is the openness of the information, which he calls "bravura". We have all noticed that, quite gradually, we (the fans) have been allowed to see photos of new stuff just a bit sooner than a few years back. The fact of the matter is that China is a bit more confident now, and allowing more information to flow is much easier than trying to keep it secret. It is not only military projects that the world is allowed to see a bit more of, but also natural calamities, mine accidents, examples of injustice of officials, etc. The step-by-step "opening up", in the field of information, has been going on for a while, and it is not a matter of "bravura", but perhaps, simplifying the work of the state in this area.

The interesting thing is that THIS particular instance of "openess", the J-20 "strip tease" show, is that it was quite different from anything we've seen before. At the same time, it is quite different, in style, from from anything we are seeing NOW as well. What I am saying is that the "strip tease" was a unique event, and we should not expect to be tanatalized in this way every time something new comes out. For example, there has been a bit of a buzz lately about the ASBM, but it was generated by the American media, not by any special revelations we have seen. It is similar with other projects: there's nothing new.

By not seeing the uniqueness of this event, lumping everything together and even attributing this to a change in cultural attitude, the author misses the whole point, which is the strategic significance of this event. Sure enough, though, after dismissing the Chinese "mystique", he feels compelled to downplay the J-20 as old technology... but then he makes his point by bringing out similarities with f-22 and f-35! And sure enough, he has swallowed the bait: he ends the article by advocating the reopening of f-22 production as a hedge against problems with the f-35.

P.S. Sorry if this is yesterday's topic, but this thread moves too fast, and it took me a while to look up all the quotes.

Edifying analysis. But I think you over-rated Chinese. Sometime there is simply lucky factor in it.

 

[maozedong]

Re: The Trefor Moss article, posted by Kyli

Edifying analysis. But I think you over-rated Chinese. Sometime there is simply lucky factor in it.

I think that's very good analysis,nothing over-rated Chinese, nothing lucky factor, can you post long article to support your comment? not only say so little word?

 

[Asymptote]

Not completely true. The book the man wrote was readily available for anyone to read. So nothing was stolen. The question is..why did not the Soviets/Russians develop a stealth aircraft?

So, I guessed it right. You locked this thread 2 hours ago because I said something anti-american??
Isn't that kinda pathetic when you were espousing how forum posters should get off their high horses when all the post and media bashing Chinese but when something even remotely anti-american (american stole the russian tech) and you would immediately give out warning and lock the thread??

Anyway, back to the thread, I read it somewhere that the AESA radar for J-20 has over 2000 T&R modules. That's 500 T&R modules more than the F-22's AN/APG-77. So the question is, is it better to have more T&R modules in an AESA radar?

I bring up this question because I am thinking of the power requirement, and distribution of power to each modules. Having more modules could mean the power is spread too thin, thus you get a weaker radar with shorter range. Would that be the case?

 

[challenge]

that will depend on the power output per module. consider APG-77 has max. range of 420~400km range, and a 200km plus detection range against 1 meter target,that's quite impressive. (against same range APG-71 is getting 70km. range)
european CEASAR AESA program like APG-77 contain 1,500 T/R and has same range .
but the introduction of gen.-3 IR FPA and AESA could in fact means the end of stealth aircraft.

 

[Lezt]

that will depend on the power output per module. consider APG-77 has max. range of 420~400km range, and a 200km plus detection range against 1 meter target,that's quite impressive. (against same range APG-71 is getting 70km. range)
european CEASAR AESA program like APG-77 contain 1,500 T/R and has same range .
but the introduction of gen.-3 IR FPA and AESA could in fact means the end of stealth aircraft.

I think it is like a weapon vs armor thing, like how radar rendered camo paint kinda obsolete as a stealth measure. the definition of stealth will change accordingly

 

[Blitzo]

So, I guessed it right. You locked this thread 2 hours ago because I said something anti-american??
Isn't that kinda pathetic when you were espousing how forum posters should get off their high horses when all the post and media bashing Chinese but when something even remotely anti-american (american stole the russian tech) and you would immediately give out warning and lock the thread??

Anyway, back to the thread, I read it somewhere that the AESA radar for J-20 has over 2000 T&R modules. That's 500 T&R modules more than the F-22's AN/APG-77. So the question is, is it better to have more T&R modules in an AESA radar?

I bring up this question because I am thinking of the power requirement, and distribution of power to each modules. Having more modules could mean the power is spread too thin, thus you get a weaker radar with shorter range. Would that be the case?

That's assuming they don't have more power to begin with. If they didn't have enough power to support the supposed 2000 T/R modules then they would obviously wind it down, or at least choose the optimal compromise number.

 

[maozedong]

The indian guy's name is Noshir Gowadia. He joined Northrop in November 1968, and continued to work there until April 1986. As a design engineer, Gowadia was reportedly one of the principal designers of the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, who conceived and conceptually designed the B-2 Bomber's entire propulsion system and billed himself as the "father of the technology that protects the B-2 stealth bomber from heat-seeking missiles." He apparently gave a lot of "lectures" in China, and he was sent to jail for that.


Another interesting bit about this is as some posters have talk about who can work in the US defence industry,
Noshir Gowadia was born Bombay (Mumbai), Most likely to have been educated in India and didn't immigrate to US until well after college. So this is very interesting, as it shows you CAN work in US defense industry even if you are not born in US. It is possible after Gowadia's case that they tighten up that rule and now only allow 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants to work in defense industry.

I knew this indian story, but so many doubt for this case.
there are many international espionage organization, the operation of their own to collect idle reported the sale of information to foreign buyers, these spies are not part of a government organization.
Noshir Gowadia just sold some technology information to these espionage organization, but the US had not full evidence any relation between Noshir Gowadia and chinese government, otherwise Sino-US diplomatic crisis caused by huge, but the U.S. did not protest to China,only the media reported very hot.
Noshir Gowadia is indian, he should loves his country, he won't love China. what he did is sold technology information to espionage organization.
in China, there are also so many international espionage organization activate, they sell Information to foreigner,

 

[Blitzo]

Looks like the USAF is starting to react to the J-20:

It’s been just three weeks since China unveiled its new J-20 stealth fighter, and already the U.S. Air Force has plans well underway to defeat the mysterious plane from Chengdu.

No, the Pentagon won’t be buying more F-22 Raptors from Lockheed Martin. Instead, the U.S. military’s main flying branch has turned to an older jet that, with upgrades, could prove to be an even better J-20-killer than the newer, more expensive F-22. That’s right: the Boeing F-15 Eagle, one of the stars of the 1991 Gulf War, is quickly shaping up as America’s main countermeasure to China’s new fighter for the next 20 years.

To be fair, the F-15 and F-22 (and, later, the F-35) will probably usually work in teams. But the F-15, with its better sensors, could prove to be the backbone for U.S. and allied forces in any Pacific dogfight.

The magic is all in the Eagle’s nose. Compared to the angular, stealthy F-22, the totally non-stealth F-15 has a more capacious nosecone that can carry a larger radar. The larger the radar, the more likely it is to detect the J-20, despite that plane’s potentially very small frontal radar cross-section. The F-15 also routinely carries more fuel and missiles than the F-22.


The Pentagon has begun fitting new, electronically scanned Raytheon APG-63(V)3 radars to around 175 F-15Cs dating from the 1980s. In a few years, the 220 ’90s-vintage F-15Es — normally optimized for ground attack, but also capable of air combat — will get new APG-82(V)4 radars, also from Raytheon.

To pay for this electronic transformation, the Pentagon has set aside some of the roughly $34 billion it will save by shutting down several redundant Air Force headquarters and command centers and delaying production of the troubled F-35 stealth fighter-bomber.

The F-15 initiative was important enough to warrant mention in Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ announcement of Pentagon cost-cutting measures last week. Gates said the modernized F-15s would be “viable well into the future.” That might come as a surprise to some observers, considering that just three years ago, an F-15C disintegrated in mid-air, nearly killing the pilot. After that accident, some observers declared the F-15 unfit for duty, for reasons of age.

But the Air Force determined that a poorly made part, rather than age, caused the F-15 disintegration — and that with repairs and good maintenance, F-15Cs could keep flying until at least 2025, and E-models until 2035. “But those are just planning factors,” said Col. Gerald Swift, the Air Force’s top F-15 maintainer. “Right now, there is nothing life-limiting on the F-15. It is a very well-designed platform.”

The sprawling U.S. Air Force base in Okinawa, Japan, will be the main home of the modernized F-15s. The first batch of F-15Cs with the new (V)3 radars arrived in December. By 2013, there will be 54 improved F-15Cs at the Pacific outpost, flying alongside a rotating force of 12-18 F-22s.

The Air Force is working on new tactics to blend the F-15s and F-22s into a single team. As currently envisioned, the F-15s would fly with extra fuel tanks and AMRAAM missiles and with radars blaring, while the F-22s, carrying less gas and fewer missiles, would turn off their radar and sneak up on the enemy for ninja-style jabs. “Our objective is to fly in front with the F-22s, and have the persistence to stay there while the [F-22s] are conducting their [low-observable] attack,” Maj. Todd Giggy, an F-15 pilot, told Aviation Week.

This teaming will get a big boost starting in 2014, when the Air Force finally installs secure data links on the F-22, allowing it to covertly swap targeting info with other planes. Even then, the F-15 will have a better radar and more weapons and endurance, making it the Pentagon’s preferred J-20-killer — and the biggest reason why the United States hasn’t yet lost control of the airspace over the Pacific.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Basically the whole idea revolves around AESA equipped F-15s being non stealthy bomb trucks (or rather, AMRAAM trucks) our of the firing zone, and they will fire AMRAAMs at opposing J-20s when F-22s get the viable targeting info -- sounds like CEC.

Of course it's too early to judge how well this tactic will work when the J-20's only made it's first flight and this F-15/F-22 (and maybe F-35) combo seems only a proposal at this stage -- but if the PLAAF have AWACS like KJ-2000 and KJ-200 in the field they should be able to detect F-15s at a long range and F-22s at a closer range and move to direct fighters to engage them or avoid the F-15s kill zone altogether.
And J-20s (with supercruise and supermanouverability) should be quite able to outmanouever the AMRAAMs, which sound like they will be fired at near maximum range anyway. And there's also the large flanker force which could very well undergo similar AESA upgrades in the near future -- and the J-20 will supposedly have a larger AESA than the F-22 so there are lots of variables at play.

All the while J-20s would be making similar "ninja jabs" to enemy aerial assets like AWACS and tankers as the F-22s do the same; but PLAAF assets could very well stay in SAM coverage to give some level of protection while being able to perform their duties to an extent.

I'm kinda just rambling here, but it's interesting to see what the USAF will actually do. We're at a point where later in this decade, PLAAF will hopefully start to upgrade all J-10s and Flankers in the inventory with AESAs (the nose domes of the latter are huge, and should be able to hold a larger one than F-15s?), while integrating newer missiles like the PL-10, PL-12C/D, and PL-21.
I believe they have the technology --I think it's a matter of being able to get them all certified and then just churning them out i due speed. We won't be able to see significant numbers of J-20s until ~2018, but by that time they should match the number of F-22s deployed in the pacific at the current time.

We're in for an interesting decade.