J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII

TK3600

TK3600

Captain
Registered Member
I have called 100 a while ago and I was right. I am calling for 150+ a year in the not so distant future when plant 3 is in full swing. I am not over optimistic, this is grounded in facts.

From the J-20 chief's talk, 5th gen stomps 4++ so hard in air superiority role that later has no meaning to exist. I extrapolate this means all J-10, J-11 series will be replaced by 5th gen. That should be well over 800, and high priority.
 
Wrought

Wrought

Junior Member
Registered Member
TK3600 said:
I have called 100 a while ago and I was right. I am calling for 150+ a year in the not so distant future when plant 3 is in full swing. I am not over optimistic, this is grounded in facts.

From the J-20 chief's talk, 5th gen stomps 4++ so hard in air superiority role that later has no meaning to exist. I extrapolate this means all J-10, J-11 series will be replaced by 5th gen. That should be well over 800, and high priority.
Click to expand...

Aircraft have more roles than just air superiority. It's both stupid and wasteful to use expensive platforms where cheaper ones will serve just as well. We already have a perfect example of this in the F-35, which
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as originally planned.

“You don’t drive your Ferrari to work every day, you only drive it on Sundays. This is our ‘high end’ fighter, we want to make sure we don’t use it all for the low-end fight,” he said in a press conference on February 17.
Click to expand...
 
TK3600

TK3600

Captain
Registered Member
Wrought said:
Aircraft have more roles than just air superiority. It's both stupid and wasteful to use expensive platforms where cheaper ones will serve just as well. We already have a perfect example of this in the F-35, which
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as originally planned.
Click to expand...
Yeah yeah, replacing all J-10 and J-11 alone will be enough. J-16 will replace all JH-7 series so it will come along.
 
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
Wrought said:
Aircraft have more roles than just air superiority. It's both stupid and wasteful to use expensive platforms where cheaper ones will serve just as well. We already have a perfect example of this in the F-35, which
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as originally planned.
Click to expand...
That depends on who you are expected to fight. Against the top airforce of the World and its allies equiped with F-35 and planned new LO fighter jets of 5th and 6th gen, J11B and J10C is not good enough.

And J11B and J10C don't have stealth to close into missile firing range to hit opponent's AWAC aircraft, refueling tankers and bombers without being targeted first by escorting F-22 or F-35.

Saving money is meaningless if it becomes a factor to why you lose the war. So if you have financial capability, spend more on the essentials that can help to win the war.

More important is that when you have the world's top level weapons, you can prevent a war. No one wants to fight against a strong opponent, not even the strongest military like USA if they don't have overwhelming fire power.
 
Last edited:
Wrought

Wrought

Junior Member
Registered Member
lcloo said:
That depends on who you are expected to fight. Against the top airforce of the World and its allies equiped with F-35 and planned new LO fighter jets of 5th and 6th gen, J11B and J10C is not good enough.

And J11B and J10C don't have stealth to close into missile firing range to hit opponent's AWAC aircraft, refueling tankers and bombers without being targeted first by escorting F-22 or F-35.

Saving money is meaningless if it becomes a factor to why you lose the war. So if you have financial capability, spend more on the essentials that can help to win the war.

More important is that when you have the world's top level weapons, you can prevent a war. No one wants to fight against a strong opponent, not even the strongest military like USA if they don't have overwhelming fire power.
Click to expand...

Your entire perspective is wrong. Air forces do not meet each other on a level playing field and pair off for dogfights. They operate as part of a larger interconnected system, both relying on and contributing to land and sea based assets. There is a very good reason the USAF is not entirely composed of F-35s. Say an incoming salvo of cruise missiles is detected, and you need to scramble fighters to intercept because GBAD is out of position. What value does a J-20 add to this situation over a J-10? Or perhaps ground forces need fire support in a battlespace with air superiority, but their organic artillery has been suppressed. Do you need latest-generation aircraft to drop bombs on bunkers? Even in a purely air-to-air scenario you don't need every single aircraft to be VLO. Some just need missiles and datalinks.

Wasting money on vanity projects like overengineered platforms instead of accepting good enough as good enough is exactly how you lose wars. Finite resources must be allocated to infinite wants as efficiently as possible. You don't always need the latest and greatest, you just need to get the job done.
 
Last edited:
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
TK3600 said:
I have called 100 a while ago and I was right. I am calling for 150+ a year in the not so distant future when plant 3 is in full swing. I am not over optimistic, this is grounded in facts.

From the J-20 chief's talk, 5th gen stomps 4++ so hard in air superiority role that later has no meaning to exist. I extrapolate this means all J-10, J-11 series will be replaced by 5th gen. That should be well over 800, and high priority.
Click to expand...


The only - and at least for me still huge - problem is: Where are all these additional J-20s?
 
G

GiantPanda

Junior Member
Registered Member
Wrought said:
Your entire perspective is wrong. Air forces do not meet each other on a level playing field and pair off for dogfights. They operate as part of a larger interconnected system, both relying on and contributing to land and sea based assets. There is a very good reason the USAF is not entirely composed of F-35s. Say an incoming salvo of cruise missiles is detected, and you need to scramble fighters to intercept because GBAD is out of position. What value does a J-20 add to this situation over a J-10? Or perhaps ground forces need fire support in a battlespace with air superiority, but their organic artillery has been suppressed. Do you need latest-generation aircraft to drop bombs on bunkers? Even in a purely air-to-air scenario you don't need every single aircraft to be VLO. Some just need missiles and datalinks.

Wasting money on vanity projects like overengineered platforms instead of accepting good enough as good enough is exactly how you lose wars. Finite resources must be allocated to infinite wants as efficiently as possible. You don't always need the latest and greatest, you just need to get the job done.
Click to expand...

J-20 is not overengineered for China's requirement -- advanced opponents and very long distances.

Also economy of scale makes J-20 cheaper over time, probably much cheaper than an equivalent anywhere else. China's industrial complex had done this for ships, heavy infrastructure equipment, cellphones, computers and EVs. It will do this for aircraft.
 
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
Wrought said:
Your entire perspective is wrong. Air forces do not meet each other on a level playing field and pair off for dogfights. They operate as part of a larger interconnected system, both relying on and contributing to land and sea based assets. There is a very good reason the USAF is not entirely composed of F-35s
Click to expand...
Where in my post have i ever mentioned dog fight???

Wrought said:
They operate as part of a larger interconnected system, both relying on and contributing to land and sea based assets
Click to expand...
I have never dispute this, in fact in many of my previous posts over the years, I always insist China will fight a multi-dimensional warfare.

Wrought said:
Say an incoming salvo of cruise missiles is detected, and you need to scramble fighters to intercept because GBAD is out of position. What value does a J-20 add to this situation over a J-10?
Click to expand...
In a multi-dimensional warfare, J20 is to be guided by space based sensors, sea based sensors etc so that it will be at least 1,000km from Chinese coasts before the incoming enemy aircraft can reach their missile releasing position, refueling positions etc. And you can be sure these non-combat aircraft would be escorted by F-22 or F-35. That is where J20 will have a big advantage over J10 and J11B because J20 are unlikely to be detected by F-22 or F-23 from far away. By the time J20 is detected, those AWAC, aerial tanker or bombers are already in killing zone of J20's missiles. J20 don't even have to engage F-22 or F-23 head on.
 
obj 705A

obj 705A

Junior Member
Registered Member
Wrought said:
Wasting money on vanity projects like overengineered platforms instead of accepting good enough as good enough is exactly how you lose wars. Finite resources must be allocated to infinite wants as efficiently as possible. You don't always need the latest and greatest, you just need to get the job done.
Click to expand...
The J-20 is not an "overengineered" "vanity project". The J-20 is an absolute necessity for the defence of China. Chinese military sources have said time & time again that the gap between 4th/4.5th gen & 5th gen is far too big. All 4th gen fighters except the J-16 will have to be replaced with 5th gen fighters. The J-16 will remain as a missile truck, as for the J-10 on the other hand there will be no need for it to remain in service & will be replaced with 5th gen fighters.
Even in the example you gave about using aircrafts to intercept cruise missiles, a long range missile truck like the J-16 would probably fair better than the J-10.
 
G

GiantPanda

Junior Member
Registered Member
obj 705A said:
The J-20 is not an "overengineered" "vanity project". The J-20 is an absolute necessity for the defence of China. Chinese military sources have said time & time again that the gap between 4th/4.5th gen & 5th gen is far too big. All 4th gen fighters except the J-16 will have to be replaced with 5th gen fighters. The J-16 will remain as a missile truck, as for the J-10 on the other hand there will be no need for it to remain in service & will be replaced with 5th gen fighters.
Even in the example you gave about using aircrafts to intercept cruise missiles, a long range missile truck like the J-16 would probably fair better than the J-10.
Click to expand...

Correct. The trend is pretty clear that China with a continental landmass AND a vast sea area where its main threats emanate from will concentrate on manufacturing the J-20 and J-16 and soon the J-35 in large numbers. The J-10C will be relegated to secondary effort in manufacturing probably mainly for exports in the near future. We are already hearing rumors of the J-10 lines being transferred to Guizhou to make more room for J-20s at Chengdu.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top