J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by Deino, Apr 17, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,698
    Likes Received:
    26,763
    If my memory serve me right, that is not unexpected way back in 2009 the then vice commander of PLAAF General He Weirong predict that they will induct the J 20 by 2017-2018 So it is right on the button .

    It is the western analyst/press with their penchant as always underestimate the Chinese capability that were way off their mark.
    I guess the link has since went dead But excerpt is still available from the net

    http://www.salem-news.com/articles/march012014/china-new-jet.php
    The Chengdu J-20 (Jian-20; simplified Chinese: 歼-二 十; traditional Chinese: 殲-二十; pinyin: Jiān èr shí) is a fifth-generation, stealth, twin-engine fighter aircraft prototype being developed by the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group for the Chinese People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF).[4] The J-20 made its first flight on 11 January 2011. General He Weirong, Deputy Commander of the People's Liberation Army Air Force said in November 2009 that he expected the J-20 to be operational in 2017--2019.
     
  2. b787
    Offline

    b787 Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,211
    Likes Received:
    2,770
    that will depend upon what engine they are using, if the engine does not allow to super cruise and thrust vector, then China took less risky path, i mean if it can super cruise, yes they eclipsed other stealth programs, but without it, it is an aircraft that still will eventually need to fix what others are still struggling to do now, and with the advances in radar and SAMs, then the aircraft will be at higher risk of being defeated in combat
     
  3. b787
    Offline

    b787 Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,211
    Likes Received:
    2,770
    is not underestimate, but they seem to have chosen to manufacture more prototypes without a proper engine, by building the first aircraft without a proper jet engine seems they chose two variants, the first series will be under powered, but still will test the main airframe and avionics, and the series II aircraft with the proper engine by 2020 or beyond.

    Perhaps they want the Su-35s engines for the initial series, which in my opinion is the most likely situation, but that will mean the program has chosen different engine solutions, in order to chose a quicker induction, but if the engine is in the class of 117 or F119 then my respects to the Chinese however i do not think that is the case.

    But anyway who knows perhaps they did it:)
     
    #1183 b787, Dec 26, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2015
  4. plawolf
    Offline

    plawolf Brigadier

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,127
    Likes Received:
    12,546
    Commeical Western military analysts and 'experts' are no better or worse than decent internet commentators when it comes to Chinese military developments because they have no real contacts with anyone from the Chinese military industrial complex.

    The reason a lot of these people have built up a solid reputation when reporting on western and even Russian military developments is because they have developed a good network of contacts within those military industrial complexes.

    They have friends and acquaintances who would drop them an exclusive for a bit of a quid pro quo on favourable coverage and commentary on the piece of hardware in question, which just so happens to be available on the export market. Everyone gets their backs scratched and everyone is happy.

    Problem is these writers have no such contacts with the Chinese. So they often turn to their normal contacts within the western and Russian military industrial complexes for comments about Chinese military hardware, which are often in direct competition with the stuff these people's companies are making. So is it any wonder Chinese gear and capabilities gets rubbished in the western press?

    Since selling arms isn't anywhere close to being as a big deal for the Chinese government as it is for western governments and even the Russians, I think the Chinese are secretly quite pleased with that status quo.

    The Chinese, after over a century of invasion and suffering, are not going to take national security lightly ever again. They would much rather not win any contracts but win on the battlefield themselves then win every lucrative arms contract and have their own armed forces defeated in war when the chips are really down.

    If the west is smart, they will start withholding more and more data about their own military capabilities and future direction as China closes the technological gap with the west.

    If they don't, more fool them.
     
    manqiangrexue, taxiya, delft and 5 others like this.
  5. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,543
    Likes Received:
    16,407
    J-20 may well enter initial service with only Al-31s as interim engines, but it will have WS-15s as its intended engines.

    However, even if J-20 "only" enters service with Al-31s, if they can use time not pushing the aircraft to its full performance envelope to further operationalize its avionics and weapons suite, that would still make it an immensely capable aircraft for the Air Force, even if it cannot conduct competitive air combat maneuvres or supercruise at intended speeds.
     
    delft, MastanKhan and b787 like this.
  6. b787
    Offline

    b787 Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,211
    Likes Received:
    2,770
    you give too much credit to your self, most of the internet commentators are plane spotters, many times like in my case fans like myself, (despite i am an engineer) and all pictures are carefully leaked, both by Russia and China.

    No aircraft can be judged without combat, the F-15 for example has being blooded, shot down more than 100 aircraft for probably less than 10 air to air losses and these loses are highly debatable even in Russia.

    The Russian hardware sadly has been utterly destroyed by F-16s and F-15s, so far China or Russia have not proven they have the stuff to challenge the american made aircraft, only the Russian SAMs have good reputation, so is not that western commentators underestimate the Chinese made weapons it is simply they have yet to prove in combat they have the stuff to be respected.

    And that include J-20, it does not mean they do not have it, it is simply the Chinese need to be tested like the Russian and American hardware has been tested.
     
  7. plawolf
    Offline

    plawolf Brigadier

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,127
    Likes Received:
    12,546
    That's just not true.

    It was the overall vastly different might of the countries in conflict, and the training and quality of the troops that decided the outcome of the battles, not the equipment.

    In every single combat example involving the F15 and F16, had those American jets been replaced with pretty much any comparable jet, the outcomes would have been exactly the same.

    When you are pretty much on your own, with only your wingman, no working radar, fighting against a sky full of hostiles, it doesn't matter if you were flying a Mig29 or F15, you are going to get splashed. Similarly, when facing such outmatched foes, it doesn't matter if it was a F15/16 or Mig or Suhoi that fired the missile that downed the target. So long as your kit isn't utterly worthless, you are going to win.

    It's only combat experience between peers or near peer powers that truly tests the calaber of your equipment. But examples of those kinds of wars are very few.

    Off the top of my head, only some of the earlier Arab-Israeli wars, the Iran-Iraq war, and maybe the Falklands war would qualify as even enough to give any meaningful insight into the performance and capabilities of weapons systems.

    In none of those wars do you get the kind of silly kill ratios arms manufactures loves to quote to flaunt their wears.

    Combat is only a true ultimate test of a weapons system if the combat is fair. Otherwise it's just a big guy beating on a little guy too outmatched to even be able to fight back. In which case what stick used to beat the little guy tells us nothing about how good the stick is. It could be any stick in the world, and it would do the same job so long as it's not defective.
     
    DigoSSA, taxiya, delft and 3 others like this.
  8. b787
    Offline

    b787 Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,211
    Likes Received:
    2,770
    war is not sport, it is not mean to be fair, it means war, to win the edge by unfair means, to be fair means to lose the war, wars are win by unfairness, by advantages. anyway let us get back on topic
     
  9. janjak desalin
    Offline

    janjak desalin Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    1,294
    Why argue with this guy? His bias is obvious and so are his insecurities.
     
  10. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,543
    Likes Received:
    16,407
    Guys, let's get back on topic.

    I think discussing how to assess a combat aircraft's capability is a topic of worthy discussion, and I myself also have some opinions about it, but it's worth creating another thread for it to discuss it amicably.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page