Here it is:
To admit I’m disappointed with that report since it draws a few – IMO misleading or even wrong - conclusions based on quotes that were put into the wrong context:
First of all concluding the “J-20’s missions appears to be maritime reconnaissance and targeting for antiship ballistic missiles and in support of ship-launched cruise missiles” is most of all wrong. From all we know including the Chief designer’s official papers to official PLAAF statements, the J-20 is a pure-fighter. I remember old reports hinted that role, but IMO this is no longer valid. The J-20 might have a secondary attack role, but surely not as its primary intention. Also these reports about “a precision air-to-surface missile with a 600-mile range” are all wrong; in fact they are even ludicrous. There have indeed been reports concerning the latest PL-XX, a giant ultra-long-range AAM to counter tankers, AEW and other primary assets from long distance (maximum 300+km), but that weapon is far too large to fit the weapons bays, which can only hold two PL-15 each, complemented by two PL-10 short-range AAMs in the side bays.
The second issue is related to three quotes of my report (thank You by the way), but I meant them in a very different way:
1. My original report said nothing to maneuverability but I said "Currently the fighter is underpowered ... at least until the planned WS-15 engine is available. In the meantime, the J-20's engines are probably adequate and will provide flight performance at least comparable to the latest J-11B fighter." (in quote 3)
2. Also (in quote 5) You imply another conclusion: “As for the development of a genuine 5th generation combat aircraft, China obviously has a long way to go.” This is an apparent reference to China’s problems developing advanced engines and avionics.
Again, this was also meant regarding the still not available WS-15 and in no way related to any issues concerning its avionics
3. And finally ... (in quote 8): Andreas Rupprecht writes “The J-20 is most likely no match for the F-22 and the F-35…” again a misquote: My original sentence was ... "As regards to stealth the J-20 is most likely no match for the F-22 and the F-35 (see the non-stealthy engine exhaust, the uncovered countermeasures launchers and other details)." That does not imply the J-20 is no match for the F-22 or F-35; only it has still some shortcomings concerning stealth.
Don’t get me wrong and I surely do not want to either hype the J-20 not to diminish the F-22 and F-35 but sometimes I have the feeling that reports like this come to over-simplistic conclusions … and it’s never good to underestimate any opponent.
By the way in the next Combat Aircraft Issue, an updated report for the J-20 will be published.
Andreas Rupprecht
. A lot of the so-called censorship are also done by the website's own volition to either preserve the company image or protect the company's affiliates. 
