J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
1) I have stated in my role as a moderator why we specifically do not want this topic to be brought up again, and indeed the very intent of letting new members be aware of the past discussion is actively not useful for this thread.
2) I have stated that we do not want any further discussion on this topic as it has already been done to death in the past and was distracting for the thread and will be distracting again, in context where none of us can speculate with anything resembling insider information. The fact that you posted that chart and tried to restart the discussion is not against the rules.
The fact that you have continued to challenge it when other members have patiently explained to you why your post is unhelpful, and when challenged it and quoted it when I in a moderator role with red text has explained the same to you, however is poor etiquette with the latter being against the rules. Yes, if a moderator says "stop" then it means one is expected to stop.
It is in the rules that users are expected to accept the instructions of moderators, and I've given you two opportunities now to back off and let it go.
Yes, it means that moderators by virtue of experience and by virtue of their common sense and good judgement, are expected to have a sense for when a discussion can sufficiently be derailed in a given thread to intervene and say "let's not talk about this" and to block off an avenue of discussion.
I've been here a while, I've seen enough threads get derailed to know what can result in a page or so of temporarily off topic discussion and what has the potential to lead to a multipage long emotive argument.
====
I've deleted posts above regarding the resurrection of that RCS study discussion.
To everyone, please exercise some common sense. If a member (and especially a moderator) gives a signal that perhaps a particular post or line of discussion is not worth re-pursuing, take a step back and maybe consider if they have a good reason for it instead of immediately becoming combative and oppositional.
Taiwan not including j-20 in daily monitoring does not necessarily indicate Taiwan did not observe j-20 to whatever degree they may or may not have.
I think the plaaf and CPC is too smart to believe and operate that way (how the GT article is implying) and even if they have certainty in the low observability of the j-20, it wouldn't be something the CPC and plaaf assumed without caution. Retractable luneberg lens have something to do with it all but if plaaf is secure enough to fly j-20 with LL retracted, it is hopefully doing so with a well known control and full knowledge of adversary intelligence on the matter.
I think the plaaf and CPC is too smart to believe and operate that way (how the GT article is implying) and even if they have certainty in the low observability of the j-20, it wouldn't be something the CPC and plaaf assumed without caution. Retractable luneberg lens have something to do with it all but if plaaf is secure enough to fly j-20 with LL retracted, it is hopefully doing so with a well known control and full knowledge of adversary intelligence on the matter.
Yes, that sort of inter unit support is very much sensible and appropriate.
Though what I was describing was something more like the USAF Weapons School -- an institutionalized way in which all units send their annual best pilots and crew for further subspeciality training and courses and to return to their home unit afterwards to teach and apply what they can learn, enabling better service wide dissemination of knowledge and competency.
Relax...it's just Taiwan..
plawolf
Brigadier
That might be beneficial when you are actually engaged in live combat against a peer or near-peer where combat attrition and replacements is a major factor, in the peacetime, there is a lot of value in getting your best and brightest together so they can challenge and inspire each other.
The purpose of these elite units is more to help write the playbook and develop new tactics and strategies rather than to just have one super elite unit of ‘aces’. These units are basically going to be the instructors of the Chinese Top Gun, where they will play opfor against regular PLAAF and PLANAF regiments to kick their butts and then show them how it was done.
Of course you can detect even stealth aircraft on radar. The question is how close and whether the signal is lost in the background noise. As per ShiLao’s podcast most of Taiwan’s groundbased radar (bar PAVE PAWS) are very old, some of which were purchased during the 1970s. For them to not have a clear picture of enemy assets is perfectly normal.