J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by siegecrossbow, Sep 4, 2017.

  1. Inst
    Offline

    Inst Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    639
    After Latenlazy got in the last word and was allowed to keep on derailing the thread? Okay, I'll drop it.
     
  2. Deino
    Offline

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,983
    Likes Received:
    26,017
    Even if I know that this wont settle this sheer endless discussion, it might at least help what the PLAAF and AVIC thinks.

    J-20A official role.jpg J-20A official role part.jpg
     
    AleDucat, by78, Yodello and 7 others like this.
  3. ougoah
    Offline

    ougoah Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,526
    Likes Received:
    1,790
    Like I said in the past, modern fighters often can combine many past roles into one platform. J-20 is a young bird and the frame's potential is nowhere being realised. Even the ideal engines are not onboard yet so there's more to squeeze out of it. Why is it not possible for it to be a decent enough striker, air-superiority, and interceptor, "omnirole" fighter.

    Our smartphones today replace a room full of devices from the 90s. Fighters can easily do the same. They're all up there flying in the air. The rest is just clever engineering. I'd expect J-20 to not only be capable of all those things, but excel in them. At least the plane itself. Ordinance is a whole different question.
     
  4. jobjed
    Offline

    jobjed Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    2,122
    Likes Received:
    5,693
    I'm also very interested in the J-10CE in the background. That confirms the latest iteration of the J-10 is cleared for export.
     
  5. Inst
    Offline

    Inst Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    639
    I don't think anyone here denies that the J-20 will fulfill an air superiority role. What people argue about is how the J-20 will fulfill the air superiority role. Some here think that classical dogfighting is always going to remain relevant, that short-range missiles can be spoofed out with flares or lasers. Others think that no one wants to dogfight anymore, and people want to wipe out their enemies at far WVR or BVR, and here the J-20's acceleration, speed, and supersonic agility become paramount.
     
    FishWings and Yodello like this.
  6. kurutoga
    Offline

    kurutoga Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    955
    PL10 in theory covers the 40km range, which would be at the edge of WVR
     
  7. Inst
    Offline

    Inst Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    639
    Also, please note the comment about "medium and long-range air combat"; i.e, it doesn't want to dogfight close-up.
     
  8. Hyperwarp
    Offline

    Hyperwarp Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,595
    Likes Received:
    4,741
    But it also says, "Seizing & Maintaining Air Superiority". Can you have air-superiority without both BVR and WVR dominance?
     
    N00813, taxiya and latenlazy like this.
  9. latenlazy
    Offline

    latenlazy Colonel

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,290
    Likes Received:
    3,487
    “Some” here think that bucket categories you keep referring back to are pretty arbitrary and in actuality fighters can fluidly move between those different domains within a single round of combat.
    It says dominant in medium and long range. It doesn’t say “bad” or “average” in short range.
     
    N00813, ZeEa5KPul, Yodello and 2 others like this.
  10. Inst
    Offline

    Inst Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    639
    Put another way, Chinese aircraft typically operate either over their own territory, or over the ocean. When F-4s were embarrassed by Vietnamese MiG-21s, that occurred when fighters were sortied from enemy territory while the aircraft were deep within enemy airspace.

    As to medium and long range, the omission is important; otherwise, the J-20 would have simply said air superiority or "at all ranges".

    I mean, if we can't stop this dumb conversation, here's a point about the F-16.

    https://theaviationist.com/2012/12/10/viper-dogfight/

    The F-16 is on par with most aircraft, but is clearly outmatched by the F-22 and is on par or loses to the Typhoon at certain flight regimes. If the J-20's STR is compared to the F-16, it implies that the J-20's STR is competitive with all 4th generation fighters, but probably only outmatches the F-35 in dogfights when it comes to 5th gens. Another look at F-16 EM diagrams show that at 5000 ft, its peak sustained turn rate is only 19 degrees per second, which is terrible when compared to the F-22's 28 degrees per second. Likewise, if you look at sea level graphs the F-16 only reaches 22.5 degrees at sea level.
     
Loading...

Share This Page