J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII


banjex

Junior Member
Registered Member
^that's because of the Soviet threat. You can't directly project American force planning against the USSR onto contemporary China.
 

banjex

Junior Member
Registered Member
Because the current number of F-22s is relevant to China's contemporary force planning (no matter how the current number was arrived at historically). It's relevant because the US is unlikely to restart Raptor production. So it's a good benchmark for China to aim at.
 

The Great Game

Banned Idiot
Registered Member
The benchmark China needs to check against is F-35 force deployment in the Asia Pacific.
I agree with this perspective.

Chinese military decision-makers must evaluate CHINESE geo-strategic adversaries’ military actualities and potentialities comprehensively in determining its forces weapons systems procurement and structures. Simple comparisons to this adversary’s or that adversary’s weapons systems, either functionally, numerically, or how these are organized, do not contribute to the formation of comprehensive procurement strategy.

Additionally, taking these geo-strategic adversaries’ military actualities and potentialities into consideration, Chinese military decision-makers must, I think, eventually, consider seeking to achieve both numerical and technological primacy (in their 3rd and 4th generation fighters) in the “Indo-Pacific” air domain, as opposed to near-parity. It won’t be cheap, but it will be necessary. The campaign to surround China with adversarial forces is only JUST beginning to take shape.
 

latenlazy

Colonel
I agree with this perspective.

Chinese military decision-makers must evaluate CHINESE geo-strategic adversaries’ military actualities and potentialities comprehensively in determining its forces weapons systems procurement and structures. Simple comparisons to this adversary’s or that adversary’s weapons systems, either functionally, numerically, or how these are organized, do not contribute to the formation of comprehensive procurement strategy.

Additionally, taking these geo-strategic adversaries’ military actualities and potentialities into consideration, Chinese military decision-makers must, I think, eventually, consider seeking to achieve both numerical and technological primacy (in their 3rd and 4th generation fighters) in the “Indo-Pacific” air domain, as opposed to near-parity. It won’t be cheap, but it will be necessary. The campaign to surround China with adversarial forces is only JUST beginning to take shape.
I think that given geography plays against the US in the Asia Pacific theater, especially closer to China’s periphery, near parity is basically enough to deter war. Parity and supremacy are what would be necessary to totally push out the US from the region entirely. If China can take war off the table for the US, depending on how the US reacts to those conditions, supremacy may not be a necessary objective, though China might arrive at that by sheer inertia of its growing economic capacity alone...
 

The Great Game

Banned Idiot
Registered Member
I think that given geography plays against the US in the Asia Pacific theater, especially closer to China’s periphery, near parity is basically enough to deter war. Parity and supremacy are what would be necessary to totally push out the US from the region entirely. If China can take war off the table for the US, depending on how the US reacts to those conditions, supremacy may not be a necessary objective, though China might arrive at that by sheer inertia of its growing economic capacity alone...
Well, as I stated, my analysis isn’t based upon any single-adversary evaluation, but on a more comprehensive evaluation of adversarial actualities and potentialities. I’m fairly certain that the Chinese leadership is historically well aware of the degree to which “other” powers are willing to combine their forces in order to impose “unfair treaties” upon the Chinese nation. As such, CCP would be remiss to NOT consider that one, or more, regional adversaries (and, one in particular, but several in concert) might be willing to commit their 4th gen air resources as 2nd wave air-superiority and bomb-truck elements to US 5th gen vanguard forces.

Ultimately, we are talking about the future of the world’s economy and, just as was done in the past, there may be MANY takers looking to carve out a share of that share which can be expropriated from the Chinese sphere of influence.

As an example, consider that IAF (yeah, I know) MKI fleet working in concert with USAF F-22s and F-35s. This would probably require numerical superiority, at least, to neutralize, I think.

Oh, and don’t forget those Rafales! LOL!
 

Top