J-20... The New Generation Fighter

Re: New Generation Fighter

Bltizo said:

Ah right -- err I posted a response just now to your response to my first question (lol)

Let's hypothesize China does make a small AShM able to fit into the J-20's weapon bays (let's give a range of 150 km). Would it be worth it to fly four J-20s into the massive picket line of Aegis, E-2D, Growlers, F-35s and Superhornets while acting in conjunction with ASBM, land based AShM, sub based AShM ... ...

Click to expand...

The biggest bottleneck in destroying a Carrier is spotting its exact location.
Just my 3 cents, J-20 will be used as a patrol aircraft to spot the Carriers.

Once the Carrier is spotted, J-20 will automatically upload the Carrier location to Central Command and let the fireworks party begin by attacking the Carrier and its buddies, using the simultaneous combo of land based AShBM, Diesel submarines lurking on the sea floor, and of course advanced UAV Drones, and all other saturation methods.

There is no need to attack the Carrier directly with J-20.

Re: New Generation Fighter

bladerunner said:

Why would they want to, they havent even got the F-35JSF yet. On the other hand theoretically Germany has the money to develop another plane

Click to expand...

Thinking in the long-term -as the Chinese have been known to do- I was suggesting that, IN THE FUTURE, Europe will NOT be able to compete against China in the development and production of advanced military technology.

When was the last time that Germany developed, and produced, a combat aircraft independently, WWII?

Re: Comparing overhead views of China's J-20 and U.S. F-22

siegecrossbow said:

I thought we already determined that the wingshape was fllat delta???

Click to expand...

Err no, see my post #1641. The angle of the photo makes it look like it's just a simple delta, but I think there's actually a sweep in the trailing edge which gives it a slight diamond shape.

GreenestGDP said:

The biggest bottleneck in destroying a Carrier is spotting its exact location.
Just my 3 cents, J-20 will be used as a patrol aircraft to spot the Carriers.

Once the Carrier is spotted, J-20 will automatically upload the Carrier location to Central Command and let the fireworks party begin by attacking the Carrier and its buddies, using the simultaneous combo of land based AShBM, Diesel submarines lurking on the sea floor, and of course advanced UAV Drones, and all other saturation methods.

There is no need to attack the Carrier directly with J-20.

Click to expand...

UAVs, satellites and over the horizon radar could be used to spot carriers, though the high speed and altitude of the J-20 coupled with its (eventual) powerful radar and stealth could make it a "mini awacs" like the F-22.

Re: Comparing overhead views of China's J-20 and U.S. F-22

Bltizo said:

Err no, see my post #1641. The angle of the photo makes it look like it's just a simple delta, but I think there's actually a sweep in the trailing edge which gives it a slight diamond shape.

Click to expand...

Thnx that is definitely a possibility. Making the wings straight delta definitely didn't make too much sense because it compromises stealth from the rear. I'm hoping that Mr. Sweetman was wrong this time.

Here is a thread in Chinese from Feiyang that talks about how the 2002 prototype was spotted. The picture is extremely blurry so I won't bother posting it here.

Re: New Generation Fighter

i think one of those tech guys on the tarmac got the pic.

Re: New Generation Fighter

I think we all understand that attacking a USN CBG will require a multi-phase, multi-layered, multi-level, multi-dimensional operation. Consequently, that would require a mix of numerous weapons of complementary -and even overlapping- functions.

I think that to reduce a suggestion to a neither stated nor implied simplicity, in order to counter an argument not made, doesn't add much to the discussion. I'm not here to idealize either Chinese or Western weapon systems. I certainly don't consider USN CBGs to be impervious to attack. I have no need to assent to ideologies of Western supremacy, of any kind.

I do think that, if there is consensus that PLA/PLAAF/PLAN consider USN CBGs to be THE fundamental threat to their regional power projection, it could be reasonably anticipated that countering that threat would be a fundamental consideration in their weapon design.

In fact, the SU-27 was rejected because it lacked AShM capacity. The J-11 was developd to compensate for this deficiency, and the SU-30 was purchased primarily becuse it has this capacity. Additionally, the JH-7 and the H-6 have been consistently upgraded to increase AShM capacities. Therefore, my reasoning is based on what I preceive to be PLA considerations as demonstrated through previous and current practice.

Of course, I could be incorrect. I know that even before I type. But, can anyone here prove that through argument? I try to avoid making definitve statements about what can, or cannot happen. As far as the suggested "brute force" overwhelming assault that has been suggested as the only way to to sink a carrier, maybe we should inform the commander of that PLAN sub that surfaced -undetected- within easy striking distance of a USN aircraft carrier. He seemed not to have known that.

My first post regarding the potential of the J-20 as a carrier killer, in fact, stated that:

"I think we might be seeing another addition to China's carrier killing abilities."

I still think that we might be seeing another addition to China's carrier killing abilities.

We may actually never know. What we will learn is how the USN assesses the threat from this platform. Any takers to a bet that the USN will -most certainly- take the capabilities of this platform into consideration as a potential threat to carrier security?

Time to grade J-20 Firefang against F-22 benchmarks


China's J-20 Firefang stealth fighter

Full glass cockpit? Check.

High-tech glass digital display? Check.

Diamond-shaped nose to deflect radar away from transmitter? Check.

Diamond-shaped wings to ameliorate radar detection? Check.

Angled fuselage to deflect radar away from transmitter? Check.

Internal weapons bay? Check (almost indubitably; otherwise just stay with J-10).

RAM (i.e. radar absorption material/coating)? Check (looks like it's coated already).

J-20 prototype manufactured ahead of schedule? Check. Most of us thought it was at least a few years away.

Flat nozzles for engines? Not yet. Chinese engine technology needs a few more years to catch up.

Saw-toothed edges? Can't tell. Forthcoming high-resolution pictures will answer this question.

Sleek and beautiful? Check.

Final assessment: A+++ (F-22 technology at a China price!)

Re: New Generation Fighter

^ Martian, I wouldn't give it an A+++ yet, lol... We don't how what kind of datalinks, aesa, pasive sensors and fbw it has yet. A bit early to give it a final ranking but I think from what we can see it doesn't fare too badly.

Re: New Generation Fighter

cloyce said:

by flying high you will increase your theoretical detection range against surface targets, and your missile max range will also increase a little bit due to higher potential energy. But it won't save you from most AA missiles out there. I mean, the Blackbird flied in the stratosphere, but was shot down anyway.
Unless you achive Mesosphere flight capability, modern missiles will kill you anyway.

Click to expand...

I think you mean the U-2 spy plane, I don't think SR-71 were ever lost to enemy fire.

Re: New Generation Fighter

Bltizo said:

That's why all current 5th gen fighters place so much emphasis on manouverability, so when fighting opposing 5th gens the BVRAAMs will be ineffective and they will return to good old dogfighting and more effective IR homing missiles).

Click to expand...

Oh goody as last seen in the Korean war. I believe that only some F35's will have a cannon, the T50's have, so do you think the J-20 will have any?