J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Bltizo said:
If you are interested in reconciling Butowski's claim, it is fairly simple.

As Deino explained a month or so back when the article was released, Butowski is an aerospace journalist whose focus is on Russian aviation, with many sources in the Russian industry, and his claim that China having no production fighter AESA was from Russian sources.

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/j-20-5th-gen-fighter-thread-vi.t8169/page-472#post-542092


PLA watching is indeed about guesses, but it's also about making educated guesses, with "educated" being the operative word. Specifically, it means evaluating sources and journalists and commentators and trying to judge how accurate they are likely to be. This can be done by considering where they likely get their information from, as well as the kind of track record they have in predicting past relevant events.



There is a rather simple two step smell test when considering a new claim:
1: how credible does the claim sound in respect to the known body of knowledge.
2: how credible is the source (i.e.: how likely is it for the source to be able to be able to accurately make the claim they are making based on where they get their information from, and/or what kind of relevant track record they have).
Click to expand...
So to recap, Butowski's sources say there is no series production and your community is saying what exactly - in development; in testing or fielded? Based on what Totoro has gathered, they are all circumstantial and can be interpreted in multiple ways.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Brumby said:
So to recap, Butowski's sources say there is no series production and your community is saying what exactly - in development; in testing or fielded? Based on what Totoro has gathered, they are all circumstantial and can be interpreted in multiple ways.
Click to expand...

Fielded, obviously.

Please let me be clear here -- I am saying that I believe Butowski's sources for this particular domain is inferior to the cumulative information that the public open source PLA watching community has been able to obtain over the years.

I consider the burden of proof to be on the side claiming that J-20 is not using an AESA (let alone that there is no production AESA fighter in service).
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Bltizo said:
Fielded, obviously.

Please let me be clear here -- I am saying that I believe Butowski's sources for this particular domain is inferior to the cumulative information that the public open source PLA watching community has been able to obtain over the years.

I consider the burden of proof to be on the side claiming that J-20 is not using an AESA (let alone that there is no production AESA fighter in service).
Click to expand...

Do you appreciate the logic that you cannot prove a negative? If your community says it is fielded, what evidence do you have? So far all I am hearing are claims based on "trust me" we know better. The burden of prove is always on the party claiming they have something unless you wish to suspend all logic and reasoning.
 
ZeEa5KPul

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
Brumby said:
Do you appreciate the logic that you cannot prove a negative? If your community says it is fielded, what evidence do you have? So far all I am hearing are claims based on "trust me" we know better. The burden of prove is always on the party claiming they have something unless you wish to suspend all logic and reasoning.
Click to expand...
I hope you understand that what you wrote entails that the burden of proof is on you and Butowski. That's not all - I'm skeptical that not only does the F-22 have an AESA, but that it has any radar at all. I haven't taken one apart to see if it has a radar, and I haven't spoken to anyone I consider trustworthy who's confirmed it. How should I know it even has a radar? Prove it.
 
I

Inst

Captain
Brumby said:
Do you appreciate the logic that you cannot prove a negative? If your community says it is fielded, what evidence do you have? So far all I am hearing are claims based on "trust me" we know better. The burden of prove is always on the party claiming they have something unless you wish to suspend all logic and reasoning.
Click to expand...

America does not not exist is a negative. Therefore, you cannot prove that America exists.

Our indications from the Chinese grapevine is that the J-20 has likely entered series production. This is a topic in dispute, but you can't prove it hasn't entered series production either, which is a negative.
 
B

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
It is not worth it to waste breath on debating such a “claim” from a nobody! Is he the Chengdu spokesman? The defense minister?

China offers wide range of AESA aircraft for export, it is completely outlandish to suggest cutting edge designs would not have one.

Taken into context, his lunatic claims can be understood or at least explained. For a long time, Russia has been pushing to sell aircraft with modernized PESA, such as Irbis and Bars.

Not only does it look bad marketing wise when put side by side with expensive Chinese/Western export fighters like J-10CE and Rafale, but China is also planning on integrating the KLJ-7 radar into JF-17 block III, which will be a low cost plane and intrude directly into Russia’s niche.

It is therefore very important for them from a marketing perspective to downplay the effectiveness of AESA and their ignore their advancement level while glorifying modernized PESA variants.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Brumby said:
Do you appreciate the logic that you cannot prove a negative? If your community says it is fielded, what evidence do you have? So far all I am hearing are claims based on "trust me" we know better. The burden of prove is always on the party claiming they have something unless you wish to suspend all logic and reasoning.
Click to expand...
Why should we believe Butowski’s word over the word of someone from the 14th institute or sources who’ve telegraphed new developments time and again that were then confirmed by visual proof? How many times has Butowski provided information about Chinese military technology and proven to be right, confirmed by other sources? I find the reasoning behind whose words you choose to privilege and whose you choose to be skeptical of curious given where the evidentiary substance lay.
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Ultra said:
But why are they wearing those ugly-ass leather jackets.... and those bulky 1960s Mig-pilot helmets...
Click to expand...

Because Chicks dig pilots, and nothing says "Fighter Pilot" like an old leather jacket and a kool white helmet, (we're the good guys, remember!)......
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Brumby said:
Do you appreciate the logic that you cannot prove a negative? If your community says it is fielded, what evidence do you have? So far all I am hearing are claims based on "trust me" we know better.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what I am saying.

PLA watching is very much about knowing who knows better and who does not. And then there are also people that are not able to identify who does know better and people that aren't able to identify who knows better and who doesn't know better.


The burden of prove is always on the party claiming they have something unless you wish to suspend all logic and reasoning.
Click to expand...

The burden of proof depends on the preceding understanding of assumptions and existing consensus base of knowledge.

The suggestion that J-20 does not have an AESA at this stage or that there is no in service production fighter AESA in the PLA is like suggesting 055 or 052D doesn't have AESAs or that they don't use gas turbines. In these situations the claim being put forward is the one that challenges the known and accepted body of understanding, and suitably credible sources would be needed to back up such major claims.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Bltizo said:
The suggestion that J-20 does not have an AESA at this stage or that there is no in service production fighter AESA in the PLA is like suggesting 055 or 052D doesn't have AESAs or that they don't use gas turbines. In these situations the claim being put forward is the one that challenges the known and accepted body of understanding, and suitably credible sources would be needed to back up such major claims.
Click to expand...
At this point it’s basically Butowski’s word against the body of evidence listed by totoro earlier.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top