J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII

[by78]

Another image of J-20 pilot's HMD.

 

[by78]

View attachment 164324

A bigger version.

 

[by78]

A missile launch from the ventral weapons bay.

 

[siegecrossbow]

A missile launch from the ventral weapons bay.

Seems a lot less smoky than PL-12. Fo we know if it is PL-15 or the mysterious PL-16?

 

[by78]

Seems a lot less smoky than PL-12. Fo we know if it is PL-15 or the mysterious PL-16?

Not known, but probably more likely a PL-15 than a PL-16.

 

[Blitzo]

This is possible for the filming of the video, but I’m pretty sure that the intent of the maker is to showcase ability of advanced drones to coordinate/cooperate with manned combat aircraft. In tactically useful situations a second passenger is the still preferred controller option over pilot or ground based control, the latter by the virtue of proximity to combat zone so reduced delay in communications/greater resistance to interference.

I don't think you've read what I've written at all.
The point of what I've written is that a single seat aircraft can still be highly capable of commands in complex tactical environments. Just because a twin seater is even more capable of it doesn't detract from single seater capability, and whether it makes sense for a single or twin seater to be operating, depends on the complexity of the environment, the importance of the mission, extent of supporting assets.



A single seat J-20A might be able to control 8 drones in a tactically complex scenario, while a J-20S might be able to control 20, for example.

In such a scenario, is it even worth talking about a single seat vanilla J-20 doing a simple formation flight with a GJ-11 under its command?

 

[Aval]

The video indicated that it was actually the J-20 (and a single-seater, non-A/S variant at that!) which was collaborating with the GJ-11.

Ground/AEW&C Controller:



J-20 Pilot:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1988098718932099570

View attachment 164360

玄龙/Xuanlong? A dragon as a name?

I thought only fighters (and PLAAF specifically) got dragon names.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch, but maybe giving a draconic name to the GJ-21 suggests it is more important than we think. Or more specifically that it can do A2A missions?

I'm weary of reading too much into what's basically fluff, but convention is typically rooted in logic. The PLA gives us little to work on, so we often have to extrapolate.

 

[Tomboy]

玄龙/Xuanlong? A dragon as a name?

I thought only fighters (and PLAAF specifically) got dragon names.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch, but maybe giving a draconic name to the GJ-21 suggests it is more important than we think. Or more specifically that it can do A2A missions?

I'm weary of reading too much into what's basically fluff, but convention is typically rooted in logic. The PLA gives us little to work on, so we often have to extrapolate.

GJ-2 has a dragon name as well

 

[Aval]

GJ-2 has a dragon name as well

I see. So dragon names are for PLAAF aircraft and more than just fighters. The more you know.

I suppose that means we could one day see the UADFs with dragon names as well.

 

[siegecrossbow]

玄龙/Xuanlong? A dragon as a name?

I thought only fighters (and PLAAF specifically) got dragon names.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch, but maybe giving a draconic name to the GJ-21 suggests it is more important than we think. Or more specifically that it can do A2A missions?

I'm weary of reading too much into what's basically fluff, but convention is typically rooted in logic. The PLA gives us little to work on, so we often have to extrapolate.

Not that much of a stretch to assume that it can perform AA role as well albeit to a limited extent.