no such thing as “J-20 equipped with EOTS and IRST”, there is no essential difference between EOTS and IRST in infrared sensoring, and only one set of long-wave EOTS/IRST on the J-20.
Last edited:
Chengdu next gen combat aircraft (?J-36) thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Ah yes. Given the J-20 focus on air-to-air, it would be logical to avoid medium-wave and only go with long-wave infrared sensors
> I think it's actually the worst thing that could happen to it. Without J-36 they could redefine NGAD to be something more within America's limited capabilities
I think trying to dismiss the Air Force that defined Military aviation since the 1940s like that, through several major technological revolutions is fairly naive. Especially given the stupid amount of funding their MIC receives which basically equals a carte blanche in regards to funding. Not to mention that if we assume that China would be significantly ahead, you don't think large scale industrial espionage would take place? I haven't witnessed it first hand, but even I know that it was among the key defining aspects of the arms race of the First Cold War.
So while the J-36 is impressive and will fit right into Chinas vision of the next generation of combat aviation. I don't really see a reason why the US couldn't be able to come up with an equivalent that fits into their vision of the future of military aviation.
It's way too early to speculate on such matters, given that we know virtually nothing about the CAC next generation fighter and the NGAD program.
Orca says that military secrecy is working since the experts completely missed the core design philosophy behind CHAD.
Orca: Leaking secrets
Also Orca: Military secrecy works
"Authorized disclosure of classified info"
A bit surprised at how many "experts" think this is a JH for various reasons (though one reason is 'cause of CMPR)
Still waiting for TWZ's big article on J-36...
Still waiting for TWZ's big article on J-36...
What is the US vision?
It's Air Superiority anywhere.
But such a vision is likely not attainable, given the geography of Western Pacific and a significantly larger Chinese economy in terms of actual output of goods and services, as per the World Bank.
But if you can think of a coherent and realistic vision for the USAF, I'm all ears.
Thinking process and rationale outlined below.
-----------------
The US has a very limited number of possible bases it can use in the Western Pacific.
Within the First Island Chain:
1. Taiwan won't be available after Day 1
2. South Korea will be neutral
3. There might be 10 airbases in Japan
4. Some bases which could be built up in the Philippines
But in any case, all these landmasses within the First Island Chain are within 1300km of China. That is too close and vulnerable to Chinese numerical superiority in airbases, aircraft and missiles. By 2035, I expect it to be straightforward for China to achieve air superiority over the First Island Chain and also to enforce a blockade. Given the distances involved, the J-36 isn't really required.
There are 150+ airbases in mainland China and 2000 combat aircraft.
So the vision for the NGAD was to avoid the First Island Chain, and use the Second Island Chain (aka Guam) because it is too far for Chinese aircraft to establish air superiority.
---
In the Second Island Chain which stretches 3000km from China, there are only a handful of possible bases, and key to this is Guam.
But if the Chinese build enough J-36, they should be able to achieve air superiority over Guam and the rest of the Second Island Chain.
So again, the Second Island Chain is too vulnerable, especially to blockade because these islands are even smaller and more isolated than in the First Island Chain
---
So what does that leave?
If the US turns to the Third Island Chain and want to build a 6th gen air superiority aircraft to operate to the First Island Chain, it's likely larger than the J-36 and therefore require 4+ engines. This would likely be even more expensive than a B-21 and may not even be technologically feasible
Alternatively, the US could focus on aircraft carriers. But in general, carrier aircraft are more expensive and have less performance than a land based version. Plus there is the cost of the carrier group itself and how few of these floating airbases are available.
So I don't realistically see any future for US air superiority within the Second Island Chain.
---
Of course, China could mess up, but the Chinese can execute this strategy, there's nothing the US can realistically do.
This would mean the US vision simply becomes holding onto Guam.
Last edited:
American funding levels are not applicable for evaluating US R&D capabilities because the value of US dollar is grossly inflated by reserve currency's ability to import non-military goods and technology on printed debt, something they can't do with defence, and it's fully reflected in the gap between how much they spend and how much they receive.
Industrial espionage is a meme and American cope, it's not real, not to mention if US had the ability to penetrate Chinese security they wouldn't have been caught off guard and not be in their current position to begin with.
Given enough time even third world countries like Japan and Europe can come up with something close to J-36, the problem with military technology is it's value is extrinsically defined by the opponent and time passes for your opponent at the same rate as your own, that is, the reason US couldn't come up with NGAD is the D in NGAD is relative and it's a moving target, a target that can never be hit by someone slower than the target. This is why the real implication of J-36 and J-50 isn't as much in the aircraft iself as the R&D and industrial base behind it.
"We know nothing about CAC or NGAD" is a popular American cope but its meaningless, no country disclose classified technical specs for cutting edge systems and no country ever disclose strategy nor tactics, we know as much about both as we know how well J-8 will fare against F-22.