China Flanker Thread III (land based, exclude J-15)

[siegecrossbow]

Sure, I guess, I mean that's the only conclusion we can draw from the available information right now, nothing in detail.

As per Yankee there could have been some limitations placed on the J-20, but he can't speculate. Either way having a non-stealth fighter beat a stealth fighter will keep the J-20 pilots on their toes and keep them from becoming complacent.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Stating the obvious, VLO isn't a dreadnought revolution. 40 years since F-117 to now was the time from HMS Warrior to Dreadnought.

J-16(or J-10c) was inducted at ~similar time to J-20, and probably costs comparable numbers to both procure and maintain.

 

[siegecrossbow]

View attachment 112607

There is some dispute regarding whether he is talking about J-20 vs J-16 or whether it is an earlier engagement between J-11A and J-11B since the aircraft type is not specified. That said, stealth aircraft are not invincible. Even though the J-20 dominated when it first entered service in the six or so years following induction PLAAF has had plenty of time to develop tactics for countering it.

Video.

 

[by78]

J-16s in night exercise.

 

[Strangelove]

 

[luosifen]

I thought PLAAF changed generation designations to match Western classification? Here they still refer to J-16 as 3.5 Gen.

 

[Blitzo]

I thought PLAAF changed generation designations to match Western classification? Here they still refer to J-16 as 3.5 Gen.

They haven't.

Various people from various organizations (PLA, state media, aerospace industry) continue to use both the Chinese generation designation system and the Western generation designation system. There's no particular rhyme or reason to it.

 

[BoraTas]

View attachment 112607

There is some dispute regarding whether he is talking about J-20 vs J-16 or whether it is an earlier engagement between J-11A and J-11B since the aircraft type is not specified. That said, stealth aircraft are not invincible. Even though the J-20 dominated when it first entered service in the six or so years following induction PLAAF has had plenty of time to develop tactics for countering it.

I read the same from many ex-USAF people on Twitter too. According to them stealth aircraft are killed much more commonly in exercises than published exercises would have you believe. My guess is L-Band radars on AWACSes or on ground actually achieve pretty good ranges against stealth aircraft. Maybe not hundreds of kilometers but still useful ranges. I also think aspect dependence of stealth is exploitable both by air defense and opposing fighters

 

[by78]

PLANAF J-11BG with the characteristic white radome.

 

[Hyper]

I read the same from many ex-USAF people on Twitter too. According to them stealth aircraft are killed much more commonly in exercises than published exercises would have you believe. My guess is L-Band radars on AWACSes or on ground actually achieve pretty good ranges against stealth aircraft. Maybe not hundreds of kilometers but still useful ranges. I also think aspect dependence of stealth is exploitable both by air defense and opposing fighters

The high kill ratio for stealth fighters are for unaided excercise probably.