For reference, the T/W of F119 is ~9.00, and F135 is ~11.47.
Did they mentioned anything about the maximum (afterburning) thrust of WS-15?
J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Did they mentioned anything about the maximum (afterburning) thrust of WS-15?
No real spec details on the WS-15.
Old rumor from maybe the late 2000s early 2010s.
not talking about technical details.
but WS-15 stands in between F-119 and F-135 if we talk about general specifications. like T/W and total thrust
huge accomplishment for China.
Still trying to square how 110 kN military thrust at a bypass ratio of 0.25 translates to a wet thrust of 180 kN.
we should wait for official details.
Some EW can be done by plugging in the cord.
Some still requires whole rows of operators, every single of which has maybe dozen or two of comparable colleagues around the world.
Dedicated operator needs and will continue to need operator(s), fully dedicated to it and not busy with flight-related tasks.
It is so - precisely that second dedicated person for specific demands.
Though i am not especially optimistic for EW J-20 in any case. J-16D seems to have an outright better platform.
As I said, it depends on what you are comparing it to, how you are operating the aircraft and the environment you’re operating at. If your single seater is operating in a less intense environment or if it is not expected to get closer than stand-off range, then absolutely you can probably run it with a single pilot.
Note the post I was replying to and the reply that I wrote.
“EW certainly needs more than one crew per aircraft” — I am saying no, it can be done with one person.
Now, I’m not saying that one person is superior to a two man crew, nor am I saying that all EW missions can or should be done with a one person.
But it is categorically incorrect to say that EW needs more than one crew per aircraft, and your reply has not disproven my point on that.
Heck, the nature of technology means that contemporary aircraft with a single pilot can do EW in a more capable manner than dedicated multi crew EW aircraft from years past. (Think F-35 compared to EF-111 or EA-6)
What this means for J-20 in the EW role, is that I expect a single seat J-20 to be absolutely highly capable as a EW platform and able to effectively operate in that role. However I expect a twin seat J-20 to be more capable as a EW platform and operate more effectively in that role.
Erm, this is a very bad example, because the lack of EF-111 replacement (now rushed in EW form of F-15EX) is currently seen as a core deficit of USAF structure, and EA-6 was directly replaced by F-18G(also with complaints that it isn't enough for deck use, since there is no guarantee larger USAF EW assets will be there to back it up).
And that's USAF with its large existing F-35 fleet, and USN with both. They still complain that chosen solution was at least a partial downgrade(navy) or a complete capability gap(USAF).
F-35 is an unlucky comparison here - as it is capable of only more or less automatic electronic attacks attacking ahead, in one band.
In this case, it isn't even a straightforward improvement over discrete systems of the previous generation - yes, the jammer itself is more capable and advanced, but again - only ahead, only one band, and pilot(who's effectively attacking) won't have much attention - or, likely, skill and education - to spare.
Frankly speaking, the fact that 2010s(oh that dangerous topic) fighters can do electronic attacks with their main array should be more viewed in the general picture(vastly improved EW order of battle, and expectation to significantly suppress all fire control systems under our attack...assuming they won't reply in kind), rather than replacement or even substitution to 360 deg systems with dedicated operators with special education and skills.
I personally think that the current J-20, as it is, is absolutely disastrous as a dedicated EW platform. It won't escort anything, it won't be able to degrade opponents' SA picture, comms, anything.
Its twin development can be made to carry pods from the J-16(their more independent and automated evolution) - but it still will be bad, simply because there are just 4 parallel(mutually interfering) underwing suspension points to play...which are also needed for oversized munitions and fuel tanks. Yes, flanker platform is bright as F on a radar screen, but for a plane that is supposed to be a blinding-bright sun on as many screens as possible, it just works.
However, J-20 (as, again, expected of the plane of its generation) is probably an absolute troll at mixing kinetic and centimeter- electronic attacks when it turns hot to engage. And in this form, it's a very brutal development for A2A(expected), but also SEAD/DEAD.
p.s. but the main point for me personally is still the professional operator(1) with time(2) and dedicated hardware(3). In this order.
I.e. among current fighter planes, there is one sorta- EW battlestar - that's Su-57 again. But because of (1) and (2) it's still ultimately a fighter, regardless of hardware - and the commander using it instead of a proper EW will suffer.
Much like eurocanards with their fancy suites - survivable, but even escort jamming is realistically beyond them.
Last edited:
The side weaponsbays can be repurposed to carry EW arrays for flanking jamming/ELINT.
- Status