J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

[taxiya]

Thank you sir, and you have framed the issue very well, but the very word "interceptor" is almost like a "racial slur", and you know as well as I do that in the world of "air combat" the "merge" is becoming something we intend to avoid at all costs?

There is no such negative thinking here about the interceptor, in fact what these Western observers are doing it "warning" the the J-20 has long legs, and will be equipped with long legged stand-off weapons, and that our strategic "eyes and fuelers" will be at great risk???

I apologize if it seemed my post was aimed at you, it was not, I was just commenting that being an interceptor, striker, are excellent capabilities for your 1st string A2A bird, and open up its utility, making them more necessary than many realize.

I guess that one and maybe the primary reason that many people in this forum have a problem with the "interceptor" notion is about who is saying, rather than "interceptor" role itself. It is the kind of "nay sayers" and "China bashers" that people get annoyed by.

No, "interceptor" is not "offensive" at all, it is the type of people in that video and who posted it here being "offensive" (more of annoyance).

If the repeating of such post does not stop, the counter posts will not stop. If the obsession of posting such "expert" view is not stopped, the "obsession" of countering it will continue. Act always lead to React, just physics.

 

[lllchairmanlll]

For those of you who dont understand Chinese (I am a japanese but I can read Chinese), it is obviously you guys might miss some useful first hand information with regards to not only J20, but many other Chinese military technology development. In many cases, a lot of "leaked" or deliberately "leaked" information had already been on the Chinese internet years before outside observers or analysts realized their existence and report them as news.

For an example, this picture was on Chinese forum in early 2009. Almost 2 years before the maiden flight of J20. It was after the reveal of J20, when people looked back at the picture, they realized that the aircraft symbology in this cockpit looked familiar.

Xu Yong Ling (retired), was the chief test pilot of J10. Xu instructed He Bin Bin, who was a rookie test pilot a decade ago. Now, He Bin Bin is one of the test pilots of J20, who also flew one of the J20s during 2016 China Airshow.
Xu Yong Ling:

He Bin Bin:



Recent pictures of Xu and He after the 2016 China Airshow (I have no idea who is that guy in the middle):



In one recent interview on ifeng.com, Xu talked about his thoughts on J20 and how PLAAF will use this platform for both defensive and offensive operations. If anyone is interested, I can spend sometime translating it into English. It was more like a 30 mins long talkshow than interview.

 

[lllchairmanlll]

remember this guy? Yep, he crashed a J10B during test fly in 2014.

He might be one of the J20 early test pilots. Couple weeks earlier some pictures showed that he could be the other pilot who flew J20 during the airshow.


Found him in one picture before airshow.

 

[Air Force Brat]

I guess that one and maybe the primary reason that many people in this forum have a problem with the "interceptor" notion is about who is saying, rather than "interceptor" role itself. It is the kind of "nay sayers" and "China bashers" that people get annoyed by.

No, "interceptor" is not "offensive" at all, it is the type of people in that video and who posted it here being "offensive" (more of annoyance).

If the repeating of such post does not stop, the counter posts will not stop. If the obsession of posting such "expert" view is not stopped, the "obsession" of countering it will continue. Act always lead to React, just physics.

I'm with you here, but try to see our friends perspective, he's wrong on a lot of his aerodynamic observations and suppositions, but he is a brother in the Lord to me! I do my very best to be an encourager to our friends here who don't have their minds wrapped around what a novel and very fine aircraft the J-20 is?? for what its worth the same gent on the tape also criticized the F-35, (but he did point out our old Hi/Lo structure).

I was in the same boat he is now, until our own "Engineer" very kindly and patiently "schooled me" on the J-20, ( I just love that guy!). I was once young and "knew it all", as I have put a few years behind me, I find I really want to understand??? on the other hand, I don't have a lot of patience for those whom I have tried to "bring up to speed".

One thing that continues to help me here on SDF are my many fine friends and brothers, and the two tapes are indeed better than many, giving the J-20 a little slack for being in early LRIP, and looking to the future when the WS-15 shall debut.

 

[Inst]

The problem with the interceptor label is that it implies that the aircraft is not agile enough to perform air superiority roles, and that in a contest with an air superiority aircraft it's inherently toast. The same with deep strike / strike aircraft; the implication is that in a contest with a PAK-FA or F-22 the J-20 is done for.

The J-20, however, will likely be assigned interception as its initial roles, due to the low-risk profile of the mission as well as the engine problems with the Al-41s / WS-10s. That is not to say, however, that the airframe, with proper engines, is not capable of functioning as an air superiority aircraft.

 

[lllchairmanlll]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The original video is above, unfortunately, it is in Chinese and with no subtitle. I will simply translate some bullet points here.

1.J-20's production number will be at least over 100+, it is an aircraft for combat, the air force really wants it, they want it as soon as possible. It will likely enter service sometime in 2017.

2. J-20 program featured unprecedented level of competition involved through biding and overall development, something you never see before in Chinese military development. Its development started more than a decade ago.

3. It is designed for Asia-pacific combat environment, it is specific for China's geopolitical circumstance from now on to foreseeable future.

4. It will be expensive, so air force will unlikely use it only for air superiority. Air to ground and air to sea capabilities are also on the list, but it may take more than one step to achieve. (PS: perhaps first A2A, then later upgrade with better A2G capability?)

5. Original objective for its avionics system is to match that on F-22, but later changed to match F-35 level. Application of early development (similar to F-22's avionics architecture) has been applied to some improved Gen 3 aircraft.

6. J-20's development has not been facing "major problem" so far. But it has some issues, mainly data fusion and how to better transfer it into real combat capability. It is not an engineering issues, youngs kids now know how to write code and make the functionalities happen. Rather, it is a problem from the user end. The air force needs plenty of time and exercises to figure out how to use the platform to its max potential, both in current and future environment. The evaluation process is time consuming, it could take even longer than the actual development of the aircraft itself. The American took more than a decade to figure out how to "use" the Gen 4 fighter in every circumstance, and I doubt they figure it out by now. So we will take at least same amount of time. (PS: hmm, interesting)

7. The chief J20 test pilot who made the maiden flight in 2011 is also one of my "apprentice". After the maiden flight, on the same day, he called me on telephone that flying J20 was such a pleasant experience and that he simply did not want to land the aircraft. 15 mins was simply not enough. I had the chance to get in the cockpit of one early prototype, though I could not fly it, I feel what he said.

Keep in mind that Xu's perspective is unlikely to be 100% accurate and reliable (it is in fact very hard for us to judge whether he is telling the truth or not), but when compared to any other outside observer, Xu simply has much more reliable source.

 

[Deino]

Amazing ... simply amazing !

 

[Inst]

Come to think of it, I just rechecked and the JASDF will be receiving F-35s by the end of the year. With J-20s IOC-ing next year, and the F-35s entering Japanese service, what are the chances they'll be engaged in paper dogfights by the end of next year?

 

[Blitzo]

Come to think of it, I just rechecked and the JASDF will be receiving F-35s by the end of the year. With J-20s IOC-ing next year, and the F-35s entering Japanese service, what are the chances they'll be engaged in paper dogfights by the end of next year?

Very low to zero.

Both air forces will be too busy assessing and integrating these fighters, not to mention develop training methods, maintenance, doctrine, tactics etc... and even once that is all done, these aircraft are too new and too valuable to be used in patrols in international airspace outside of borders in such a short amount of time.

 

[latenlazy]

6. J-20's development has not been facing "major problem" so far. But it has some issues, mainly data fusion and how to better transfer it into real combat capability. It is not an engineering issues, youngs kids now know how to write code and make the functionalities happen. Rather, it is a problem from the user end. The air force needs plenty of time and exercises to figure out how to use the platform to its max potential, both in current and future environment. The evaluation process is time consuming, it could take even longer than the actual development of the aircraft itself. The American took more than a decade to figure out how to "use" the Gen 4 fighter in every circumstance, and I doubt they figure it out by now. So we will take at least same amount of time. (PS: hmm, interesting)

At least they're being honest about the interface and functional design challenges for sensor fusion. Wonder if some kid of AI assist will eventually be part of the solution...