I agree that they’re not everywhere now. My estimates basically assumes a rate of 16-24 aircraft per year, but far more likely at 16. Any slowdown from that could also be attributed to the engine transition.
J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Wonder if they’re using second or third generation single crystal blades and getting some lifetime use data out of these enhanced engine variants.
16 to 24 manufactured per year is not 12 per year. This is LRIP and the rate should only increase from this. Definition of being everywhere varies and to me, PLAAF already possessing closer to 50 J-20s now rather than 20 frames counts as being everywhere. Certainly far more prevalent than Rafales in IAF. 50 J-20s is a lot considering the US didn't even buy 200 F-22s before stopping the production. That's a lot by any measure. Maybe your definition of everywhere isn't the same as mine but sure isn't what was said about 4 factories building 1 per month unless he means 4 per month in total. That's probably closer to the real rate.
It might just be 12 per year. My 16-24 is only an estimate. Even if it were 50 planes flying that rate of production is really nothing to write home about.
50 J-20s in about 2-3 years of LRIP isn't impressive and this rate isn't either but 50 fighters is more than most airforces have. It's semantics but 50 is a lot of J-20s to me. People have been lamenting how few there are around for the last two years like J-20s are unicorns. I called them "all over the place" because there are way more J-20s than Su-35s in PLAAF already. Probably around twice as many. How much is a lot then? I admit I was quick to treat the production rate post as another one of those complain posts because I unfairly associated it with the total numbers. It's a new fighter and probably demands a lot more to build. 12 per year isn't anything to write home about but it's also not something to be whinging about. 50 units in service is about 1/5th of the entire J-11 fleet nearly.
If China wants to have a sustainable force balance in active conflict comparable to the net sum of its potential adversaries it’s going to need a whole lot more production capacity. If 50 units of the J-20 is 1/5th of the entire J-11 fleet that says a lot more about the size of the J-11 fleet than it does about the commendability of J-20 production rates (I lost track years ago but I’m pretty sure the J-11 fleet is probably closer to 400 than 250 at this point though? Someone check me on this).
It doesn't say much about the size of the J-11 fleet. It says more about people's expectations. PLAAF's 4th gen fighter fleet is enormous unless you compare it to the USAF one. There's a reason why the US military spends so much, about as much as the next 10 combined or something of that nature. 250 J-11 fighters is an impressive size. How many nations have airforces with even 250 fighters let alone 4th gen fighters of just one type? 50 J-20s in 2-3 years of LRIP is already 20% the entire J-11 fleet which has taken decades to build up to. I don't know what people expect from CAC and PLAAF but it really sounds like they're expecting a little too much.
The size of expectations should probably fit the scale of needs no?
I'm sure they at least aim for it. Maufacturing J-20s isn't making happy meal toys if you can excuse my previous analogy. It's not even comparable to building J-10s, clearly. Something about the "lower" production rate is actually reassuring to me.
- Status