J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

Status
Not open for further replies.

latenlazy

Brigadier
So it is kind of like the Sukhoi family in Russia where they just keep upgrading it? That does sound workable, but wouldn't it result in quite a bit of capability differences and constitute a headache for sustainment with all the different iterations?
Again, depends on the several factors I’ve listed above, but it’s not like this isn’t a normal practice across the world’s air forces. For example, to my knowledge the F-15 A and B variants never received midlife upgrades.
 

ansy1968

Brigadier
Registered Member
Extremely doubtful. Small aerodynamic refinements are pretty normal for iterations of a fighter design but total deletion of essential aerodynamic features constitutes an entirely new aerodynamic configuration. The amount of development work that would require, given the potential benefits, would be better spent on a clean sheet design, especially since a clean sheet design wouldn’t have to deal with complications of altering downstream design dependencies that would be endemic to such drastic modification of a mature design. Aerodynamic configurations are highly integrated dependent systems, not highly modularized systems.
Hi latenlazy

thanks, learn a lot form you, its better to start for a clean design regarding on 6G, from my perspective (a little bias), J20 itself looks futuristic compare to its contemporaries, the design itself hold enough space for future upgrade. I remember long ago from old SDF CHINA 5G STEALTH FIGHTER THREAD a CGI picture of what if J20 looks like, especially its lambda wings, it really looks like a bird of prey. I really wish to see that in the future iteration of J20.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
So the current J-20s cannot be retrofitted with a gun? That sounds surprising given that even relatively underpowered J-20s are still designed to compete in WVR engagements.

Not sure if it can or cannot be retrofitted with a gun or not, but on balance given the general priorities of the aircraft I can see why not having a gun on the J-20As powered by interim engines could be a fair decision.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
This video makes an interesting argument that guns aren't necessary in air-to-air fighters, and specifically mentions the F-22 as an example of a mistaken decision to install a gun on an air superiority fighter. Since the F-22 is the closest analogue to the J-20, I think it's worth posting here
TL;DW: Guns should be installed on multi-role aircraft for ground attack, not air superiority fighters. The overwhelming majority of kills in aerial engagements have been with missiles.
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
This video makes an interesting argument that guns aren't necessary in air-to-air fighters, and specifically mentions the F-22 as an example of a mistaken decision to install a gun on an air superiority fighter. Since the F-22 is the closest analogue to the J-20, I think it's worth posting here
TL;DW: Guns should be installed on multi-role aircraft for ground attack, not air superiority fighters. The overwhelming majority of kills in aerial engagements have been with missiles.

Well since the turn of the century yes but this is certainly not true. But a gun on the J-20 would be nice if it weren't a space and weight cost for more useful equipment. I agree with the idea that 5th gens should not be used as dogfighters when the PLAAF has got over a thousand cheaper candidates to do that with.
 

defenceman

Junior Member
Registered Member
Hi what russians have in their factory for j20 suppose WS/15 is not coming up to the expectations ( in the current) scenario and WS engines the desired one for j20 is giving any problems for the production line
if any member with knowledge about if possible to answer
thank you
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
Would j20 be used at china -india border?

It's not at the moment because the Indians have totally backed off and surrendered parts of two disputed regions. If however the Indians come back for a fight, then it's uncertain. IAF doesn't have Rafales ready for fighting. It takes many years for pilots and ground crew and the commanding structure to get trained on new fighter and then develop tactics after all this. Plus they've only got 2 or 3 delivered into IAF so far I think.

The most capable fighters in IAF are the Su-30MKI and Mirage-2000. The Mig-29s are very old and the French fighters carry better weapons than even the MKI. Most of the western and newer Indian missiles are not yet integrated onto the MKI and even then the Astra has pretty poor range, no dual stage motor/s, no dual seekers, and India doesn't have much experience at all developing high end missile software and hardware components. Astra being their first attempt. Meanwhile Chinese ones have been learning from western missile tech and leading ones too since the Sino-Soviet split and built upon those lessons many generations already. PL-12s will suffice, no need for even PL-15s and PL-21, PL-xx unless they just want to fire some for live testing.

J-20 should be used in case of IAF vs PLAAF. It'll be a once in a lifetime opportunity to verify training, tactics, and lessons learned can be applied to modify them and implement in further training with PAF in future. If JF-17 and F-16 could absolutely devastate IAF, Indian air defences, blind and subdue communications and radars, then what would J-10C + J-16 + J-20 + hundreds of UAVs + dedicated early warning, AWACS, tankers, dedicated electronic warfare, and superior air defence achieve? Even if PLARF spares Indian airfields from ballistic missile attacks and PLA spares them from receiving hundreds of CJ-10. Could explain why the Indians totally gave up on their claims in Galwan and Pangong Tso in the span of a few weeks and officially announced it lol all without firing even a bullet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top