J-20... The New Generation Fighter

Subedei said:

I agree that the seemingly accelerated introduction of the J-20 will evoke a defensive response/reaction from the United States defense establishment, with one likely response a consideration of re-starting F-22 production.

So, now, please explain to those of us that don't practice "voodoo economics" precisely how spending more federal funds on an incredibly expensive product in what will surely be an inflationary financial environment qualifies as "conservatism".

From your assessment, I can only logically interpret your use of the adjective "conservative" as being referent to cultural ideologies and certainly not fiscal policies or practices.

Hell, maybe the United States can borrow the money to finance the F-22 from China! Selling the PBC another trillion dollars in US Treasuries would -most certainly- put the United States in a dominant geoplitical position going forth.

Click to expand...

When the cost of not having a stopgap fighter and the cost of producing an entirely new fighter to fill in for air force requirements is greater than restarting production. It's not like the US can just afford to not have a modern air force after all.

You're also overstating the cost burden the F-22 program alone would have on the US, and looking at the issue from too short a timespan. The US debt issue is compounded by military spending, but if the deficit would stay stable the US wouldn't be in as much trouble. The reason why people see this debt issue exploding 10 to 20 years from now and not next year is because the debt grows annually due to projected welfare obligations. In other words, so long as the US cuts overall military spending (which includes the Iraq and Afghanistan wars) and gets its welfare system in order there's no reason why 5-10 years from now the US can't restart production of the F-22 (as long as that's cheaper than starting an entirely new program and the F-35 can't fill in the requirements). Think about it, that time span isn't that long to keep the USAF competitive, since it won't be for at least another 10-15 years before either China or Russia could procure their own 5th generation fighters in the same numbers.

why do chengdu engineer opt for canard,when it was consider "un-stealthness".or it is possible that the final production model will include horizontal tail fin.

Jeff Head said:

Sorry, massive or significant rebuild of those fighters will not occur. All it takes is a different outlook in congress and the votes to sustain it...and that is what is coming in in 2010...and will have to do even more in 2012 which I believe it will.

The F-22 can then be funded to the tune I have suggested, and I hope it will. With the J-20 being prominantly displayed do not be surprised to see it proposed...and then depending on the votes...

It may even move to some export of the F-22, particularly to Japan...but that would be later.

Click to expand...

Is that why China shows J-20 so early? By investing in even more weaponry, while already responsible for half the military spend in the world, the US would sabotage its economy and future without further help from China

Roger604 said:

I disagree. J-20 is a VLO design with true 4S capability. But it's definitely designed with multirole in mind. This is by no means a bad thing. CMC needs something that can project power deep into South China Sea and even Malacca Straits. In particular, the wings are high-mounted to give maximum space for an anti-ship missile.

A J-20 has a better chance at evading SPY-1 on the Arleigh Burke compared to a cruise missile. It has a better chance to avoid being tracked by SPG-62. It can get close to a Hawkeye before getting detected. To a CVBG, a regiment of incoming J-20 carrying short-range, high-speed ASM is more dangerous than facing the same number of long-range ASM fired at stand-off distances by H-6.

I can also see J-20 loitering over a battlefield in a Taiwan scenario hitting mobile targets like Patriot batteries and radars with PGM. And if an F-22 arrives from Guam, well, it can hold its own too!

I think something more blended wing with smaller vertical stabilizer would be even better at air superiority than J-20 but then it wouldn't be multirole, so for China's purposes J-20 is more pressing.

Click to expand...

There is no indication for this design to be a multi-role platform at the moment, not even bigger in size comparing to F-22 or T-50. On the contrary, features such as canards or movable tail fins contribute to post-stall maneuverability, and the single-seat cockpit suggests the emphasis on AA combat instead of Anti-ship etc. Due to its striking resemblance to F-22 (the front section), it's a safe bet the two of them were designed to do the same job, which put them under a different category from the likes of T-50 or F-35.

Also there is absolutely no need to modify the JXX into a strike-fighter, since the large fleet of flankers, JH7A & H6 in PLAAF can do the job perfectly well. The hi-lo combo we have been speculating is very likely to be that of JXX and J10B (or any other single-seaters).

challenge said:

why do chengdu engineer opt for canard,when it was consider "un-stealthness".or it is possible that the final production model will include horizontal tail fin.

Click to expand...

Probably canard will give it great agility/turn rate. Consider this is a massive plane. By just having powerful thrust is not enough.

The Chinese engineer did mention by using RAM. RCS of canard was significantly reduce. They must have weight all the pros and cons to come to the final design of J-20.

Jeff Head said:

One of the unintended consequences of the PLAAF showing off this taxi test (which is still years in advance of actual full production of the aircraft) of the J-20 is that the incoming congress in the US, which is much more conservative, and will probably even get more so in 2012, may be moved to restore funding for more F-22s. Which I believe, for the US is a very good thing. Instead of 125 of them (or whatever the current number is), we may end up with a good number, like 400.

Click to expand...

If that happens, then it will only show that PLA cant have any kind of transparency. PLA loses if its transparent, loses if its not. Better to be more opaque in the future, to the detriment of information.

70092 said:

New high speed taxi pics, seems the first flight is near:

Click to expand...

I wonder if the pilot intended to fly the plane but found out that the engine didnt have enough power.

Seriously, the question of the engine is crucial. This plane seems bigger than su-27/j-11b/T-50/F-22, and it needs a high power engine, and china has problems on this area. I dont tire of stressing this.

challenge said:

why do chengdu engineer opt for canard,when it was consider "un-stealthness".or it is possible that the final production model will include horizontal tail fin.

Click to expand...

On account of the weight distribution of the airplane additional impetus is required

Seems real to me.

Why is so difficult to get a video!?

^^ I think videos got censored or something. People definitely took videos but no one dared to put them up yet.