J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII

[Andy1974]

There are different tiers to training — you have stages where you gain basic competency flying aircraft, stages where you practice basic maneuvers and strategies, and stages where you tie everything together and simulate “the real thing”. It is wasteful dedicating J-20A to anything less than highest fidelity training.

Agreed, which is why you can probably get away with just 10 J-20A.

It is also important that the trainers you use before the J-20A are as similar as possible to the J-20A, such as the JL-XX with its twin canted tails and ventral stabilizers.

I’d also say that the J-20S is also great for training once new cadets join their brigades, they can combine regular operations with training in one sortie.

All in all, I’d say this can produce a lot of trained pilots quite efficiently.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Agreed, which is why you can probably get away with just 10 J-20A.

It is also important that the trainers you use before the J-20A are as similar as possible to the J-20A, such as the JL-XX with its twin canted tails and ventral stabilizers.

I’d also say that the J-20S is also great for training once new cadets join their brigades, they can combine regular operations with training in one sortie.

All in all, I’d say this can produce a lot of trained pilots quite efficiently.

J-20S like you said is probably better for the role.

 

[tphuang]

The gap between J-20 AL-31 and WS-10C is qualitative but not of a generation leaping variety. It is more of a case of I have AESA, but you have better one and I have stealth, but your RCS is even lower and over wider radar band. It is much easier to teach a Toyota driver to drive a BYD than it is to teach a cyclist to do the same.

I think it’s important to think about the difference in combat not just in the power it gives to the aircraft but also the likely greater electrical power they were ably to put in j20 when WS10C came along.

I already posted news of new j20 radar with SiC substrate that significantly increased its detection range. As such, it’s important to think about the jump from J20 to J20A as the improved electronic platform + material used rather than the engine.

I am not sure the difference between WS10C2 & initial WS15 will be that large. Since it would think 10C2 also can provide the power needed for all the electronics on board.

 

[siegecrossbow]

I think it’s important to think about the difference in combat not just in the power it gives to the aircraft but also the likely greater electrical power they were ably to put in j20 when WS10C came along.

I already posted news of new j20 radar with SiC substrate that significantly increased its detection range. As such, it’s important to think about the jump from J20 to J20A as the improved electronic platform + material used rather than the engine.

I am not sure the difference between WS10C2 & initial WS15 will be that large. Since it would think 10C2 also can provide the power needed for all the electronics on board.

Increase in power generation for WS-15 is significant. The raw increase in thrust on the other hand is not as crazy as many people here assumed. But increase in power generation is only part of the equation. The enhancement to power management, digital signal processing and back end algorithm contribute as much, if not more to the efficacy of the radar.

 

[tphuang]

Increase in power generation for WS-15 is significant. The raw increase in thrust on the other hand is not as crazy as many people here assumed. But increase in power generation is only part of the equation. The enhancement to power management, digital signal processing and back end algorithm contribute as much, if not more to the efficacy of the radar.

What I am saying is that WS10C2 likely provides enough power generation for the system inside. Limitation is like the aircraft’s electrical generator and rest of plumbing.

 

[Blitzo]

Increase in power generation for WS-15 is significant. The raw increase in thrust on the other hand is not as crazy as many people here assumed. But increase in power generation is only part of the equation. The enhancement to power management, digital signal processing and back end algorithm contribute as much, if not more to the efficacy of the radar.

To add onto what tphuang wrote, I think the best way of seeing it is that power generation is mostly bottlenecked by the genset your aircraft has rather than the engine thrust it has available.

An aircraft can keep the same engine but improve its genset (or indeed, additional thermal management improvements), and still yield significant improvements in power generation.


For J-20A, its gensets and thermal management properties/cooling system of the aircraft would have been expected to have significant improvements from vanilla J-20, but there may be no change in those systems between WS-10 equipped J-20A and WS-15 equipped J-20A, therefore it's entirely possible there is little to no actual net improvement in power generation in that regard... which is actually appropriate and entirely expected.

 

[antiterror13]

Is it fair to say that roughly about 30 to 50 J-20s with AL-31F?

I think even with AL-31F, J-20 still solid against any fighters in the region even against F-22 or F-35

Not sure whether China would consider to upgrade AL-31F to WS-10C2 or just leave it as it is, I tend to believe that China would leave it until mid-life upgrade, probably in early 2030s

 

[sunnymaxi]

Is it fair to say that roughly about 30 to 50 J-20s with AL-31F?

I think even with AL-31F, J-20 still solid against any fighters in the region even against F-22 or F-35

Not sure whether China would consider to upgrade AL-31F to WS-10C2 or just leave it as it is, I tend to believe that China would leave it until mid-life upgrade, probably in early 2030s

it depend on the Engine life. AL-31F/FM2 has generally 3000 hours service life. once it expire they will change it with domestic Engine. no other option.