J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[ougoah]

That was my point. Everybody is guessing.

Fair enough. Everyone here IS guessing. So why add to the guessing with a whole new level of poor guessing? It's easier accurately guessing about radar than it is about weight. In fact far easier if we get real about it. Is it not enough to avoid the weight question altogether by all agreeing to not stoop to such low levels of guessing? Maybe you're personally defending your post regarding weight by saying everyone is guessing. In that case, I agree but we should move on from such a fruitless topic.

 

[latenlazy]

That was my point. Everybody is guessing.

Not everything is a guess. The J-20’s physical dimensions, for example, isn’t a guess. The J-20’s distributed sensor arpetures (whatever may be in them) aren’t guesses. The J-20’s weapons bay size or weapons load aren’t guesses.

Insofar as we are guessing though not all guesses are equivalent in their validity. We can all get our own rough ballpark estimates of the J-20’s weight using some reasonable assumptions, but those reasonable assumptions aren’t foolproof. I’m simply saying that given how much tread we’ve had on debates about the J-20’s weight and where it’s taken us (at least in this forum) we should probably wait for official figures. Aviationweek isn’t liable to do any better or worse than what anyone else here has tried.

WRT to the J-20’s radar, we aren’t exactly guessing. Multiple statements have been made and articles written about it over the last decade both in formal channels and through the backdoor sources we normally get information from. There’s no such thing as definitive proof that you don’t see with your own eyes, but again, evidentiary standards. You could even call it guessing if we choose to believe an officially published spec at Zhuhai, but this is my point about evidentiary standards.

So... are there any links to videos where any pilots/officials mention the radar? Or any transcripts of such recordings? Are there any news (in video or written form) coming from state tv stating anything about radar? Are there any research papers that explicitly mention J-20 or J-16 and AESA research?

I know most people are going to interpret my questions as "Ah he's a non-believer". But that's not what all this is about. It's about trying to get THE best sources on a topic possible. If the best source is an indication based on the fact AESA was marketed for something as lowly as export JF-17, then so be it. But if there's any chance there's a better, more direct indication or a source, that'd really be great.

Tbh I’m a bit surprised you’re asking instead of digging for yourself, given that you’ve been with us at this stuff for a decade plus now (hope that didn’t come off as hostile, I’m more lightly amused and slightly bemused). If you’re interested in looking for more direct statements I think all the press, articles, and big shrimp statements going from the 2016 Zhuhai show through maybe Jan/Feb/March/April of 2017 is a good place to start. I recall one piece or source making direct mention of the J-20’s AESA talking about the J-20 using a tile arrangement for its T/R modules sometime back (it might have been from pb19980515). I’d dig for it myself but I’ve been pretty busy with real life (also my laptop getting stolen really doesn’t help, since trying to browse old archives on my phone or iPad is really inconvenient).

 

[Totoro]

Tbh I’m a bit surprised you’re asking instead of digging for yourself, given that you’ve been with us at this stuff for a decade plus now (hope that didn’t come off as hostile, I’m more lightly amused and slightly bemused). If you’re interested in looking for more direct statements I think all the press, articles, and big shrimp statements going from the 2016 Zhuhai show through maybe Jan/Feb/March/April of 2017 is a good place to start. I recall one piece or source making direct mention of the J-20’s AESA talking about the J-20 using a tile arrangement for its T/R modules sometime back (it might have been from pb19980515). I’d dig for it myself but I’ve been pretty busy with real life (also my laptop getting stolen really doesn’t help, since trying to browse old archives on my phone or iPad is really inconvenient).

For 14 years to be more exact. I am asking precisely because i did try to google myself and rummage through this forum myself but came shorthanded. So perhaps someone else is of better luck and could help me out with my quest. That's the only reason I am even asking.

So, the big shrimp statements are THE best source right now when it comes to a direct statement about J-20 radar?

 

[Brumby]

Aviationweek isn’t liable to do any better or worse than what anyone else here has tried.

I think that is a rather bloated confidence statement to be making about one's own knowledge on aviation matters. Aviationweek is a long established reputable journal on aviation technology. You and I have no reputation to stand by on our guesses.

WRT to the J-20’s radar, we aren’t exactly guessing. Multiple statements have been made and articles written about it over the last decade both in formal channels and through the backdoor sources we normally get information from. There’s no such thing as definitive proof that you don’t see with your own eyes, but again, evidentiary standards. You could even call it guessing if we choose to believe an officially published spec at Zhuhai, but this is my point about evidentiary standards.

Please refer to my point on the J-20 radar. I am asking whether there is a working AESA radar rather than whether it is working on an AESA radar. The February edition of Air International briefly touched on this point when it reported that "there is no series production AESA fighter radar available in China". This might mean that while China may be developing one, it does not have a final product that it is willing to go into series production. Btw published specs mean very little to whether there is a working one. Typically it takes 10-15 years to arrive at a product that you can go into production. You can even have pictures of all the unassembled parts but that doesn't mean you actually have a working radar.

 

[siegecrossbow]

For 14 years to be more exact. I am asking precisely because i did try to google myself and rummage through this forum myself but came shorthanded. So perhaps someone else is of better luck and could help me out with my quest. That's the only reason I am even asking.

So, the big shrimp statements are THE best source right now when it comes to a direct statement about J-20 radar?

It is the same with the J-16's radar. They never officially confirmed that the J-16 used an AESA radar. However, if you go through the bagu articles (closest things to official confirmation), you can find stuff like "AESA radars for heavy weight 4th generation fighter had difficulties picking up targets from ground clutter until so and so fixed the problem". That is as close as you can get to an official confirmation.

I think the strongest evidence is circumstantial. If China is at the point where it can confidently export AESA radars for a light fighter like JF17, don't you think that it has the capacity to do so for its top of the line fighters? Until they export the J-20 I think PLAAF will just keep people guessing.

 

[latenlazy]

I think that is a rather bloated confidence statement to be making about one's own knowledge on aviation matters. Aviationweek is a long established reputable journal on aviation technology. You and I have no reputation to stand by on our guesses.

1) You don't need to be a decades long reporter or publication to do decent volumetric estimates, and being a decades long reporter or publication doesn't make any volumetric estimates you might have done inherently more credible than any others. That credibility lays in the methods and its assumptions, not in the cloak of status or authority.
2) I do not think Aviationweek's reputation on Chinese aerospace matters is really that impressive. Places like this forum have beaten or superseded publications like Aviationweek on most matters of Chinese aerospace for at least the last two decades.

The February edition of Air International briefly touched on this point when it reported that "there is no series production AESA fighter radar available in China". This might mean that while China may be developing one, it does not have a final product that it is willing to go into series production.

The credibility of that report was debated pretty extensively on this forum already. I don't really see a point re-litigating it. Either you believe all the sources we have on hand from Chinese media, leaks, and big shrimps that China has AESAs in their fighters, or you don't.

Btw published specs mean very little to whether there is a working one. Typically it takes 10-15 years to arrive at a product that you can go into production. You can even have pictures of all the unassembled parts but that doesn't mean you actually have a working radar.

By this standard of evidence we don't really know if the F-22 or F-35 have AESAs.

 

[ougoah]

It is the same with the J-16's radar. They never officially confirmed that the J-16 used an AESA radar. However, if you go through the bagu articles (closest things to official confirmation), you can find stuff like "AESA radars for heavy weight 4th generation fighter had difficulties picking up targets from ground clutter until so and so fixed the problem". That is as close as you can get to an official confirmation.

I think the strongest evidence is circumstantial. If China is at the point where it can confidently export AESA radars for a light fighter like JF17, don't you think that it has the capacity to do so for its top of the line fighters? Until they export the J-20 I think PLAAF will just keep people guessing.

I've rarely found western military journalism on China to be without some political and nationalistic/racial motivations. While some publications may have otherwise good reputation for accuracy and fairness, when it comes to China... and some others, their reliability goes way down. There's been too many examples of western military journalism getting it so very wrong... read a "Chinese J-11 using Russian RD-33 engine" once. Dozens of examples at that level of failure.

The example brought up about China not having series production AESA was brought up a few weeks ago but honestly how on Earth does this reporter know? Anonymous sources I guess. What's that person's reputation on breaking accurate news/information on new Chinese military hardware? Certainly couldn't have been as accurate as the usual Chinese forum posts. Those articles are far more likely written to serve another purpose. Also depends on series production definition. I mean if they've equipped all those J-16s and J-10Cs with AESA, that sounds about as close to effective series production as possible... I would have defined it as batch level production. But who knows how finnicky making those modules are. Oh wait... I've got it! Those J-10Cs and J-16s have empty radomes and older radar units installed! Only a few fighters have actually received AESA. There you go. Answered everyone.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Actually I remembered a semi confirmation from Zhuhai 2018. When advertising the triple array AESA for JF-17, the spokesperson claimed that a similar product was used on J-20 and J-16. This was misquoted by Jane's defense as the J-20 using KLJ-7A radar or will consider KLJ-7A or something like that.

I just find it difficult to believe if they let the J-20 enter service and perform combat patrol on the Eastern Seaboard without a working AESA radar.

 

[ougoah]

Actually I remembered a semi confirmation from Zhuhai 2018. When advertising the triple array AESA for JF-17, the spokesperson claimed that a similar product was used on J-20 and J-16. This was misquoted by Jane's defense as the J-×0 using KLJ-7A radar.

I just find it difficult to believe if they let the J-20 enter service and perform combat patrol on the Eastern Seaboard without a working AESA radar.

Yes I remember that one. Another epic failure from an unexpected source this time. Janes is by far the exception and has delivered some of the highest quality military journalism. It's actually understandable that military journalism is so fraught with errors and intentional ones too. Considering how sensitive and nationalistic their audiences are, then add the political skew. That mistake by Janes reached pretty far and even led many Pakistani forum members at PDF to believe the JF-17 is set to receive an AESA that is used on J-20 or heavily based off the one that is. Truly propaganda and fake news is the scariest weapon of all. Fingers pointed in every direction though.

We've all seen bad "reporting" from Chinese sources too and know what BS is like. In fact there are some members here who like making big silly claims and drawing incredible conclusions too. Even those Chinese forums are filled with such. Thanks to decent moderating, SDF is a place of relative sanity.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Yes I remember that one. Another epic failure from an unexpected source this time. Janes is by far the exception and has delivered some of the highest quality military journalism. It's actually understandable that military journalism is so fraught with errors and intentional ones too. Considering how sensitive and nationalistic their audiences are, then add the political skew. That mistake by Janes reached pretty far and even led many Pakistani forum members at PDF to believe the JF-17 is set to receive an AESA that is used on J-20 or heavily based off the one that is. Truly propaganda and fake news is the scariest weapon of all. Fingers pointed in every direction though.

We've all seen bad "reporting" from Chinese sources too and know what BS is like. In fact there are some members here who like making big silly claims and drawing incredible conclusions too. Even those Chinese forums are filled with such. Thanks to decent moderating, SDF is a place of relative sanity.

Maybe they didn't pass it by the editor? Any way the whole idea that the J-20 will use the same radar as a light fighter is preposterous.