J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)

[Troika]

With a combat radius of 1000 to 1500km, 300 J-20 would be enough to defend China. You don't need to constantly patrol every single inch of territory, and most critical points are covered by 300+ km range SAM anyway.

1. 300 is a wildly optimistic figure
2. ... you actually propose to use IADS to replace fighters? Are you serious?
3. It takes time to get from place to place, even with supercruise. In any case operational requirements can't be waved away just by drawing big circles on a map. You need to consider org structure logistics sortie rate of airport, traffic rate sensor coverage etc. It certainly isn't good enough to say 'I think so 300 should be enough'.
4. I am not sure where you get the 1000-1500 km combat radius from. Sheer optimism? That's higher than the Raptor's.
5. Eagle in interceptor role can have up to 2000 km combat radius. The USAF certainly doesn't seem to think that's entirely adequate and stop at 300 Eagles. I suggest you look into the reasons of this.

With 300+ J-20, I really question whether China will need any other fighter. Instead, it should shift its focus toward a heavy stealth fighter-bomber, like T-50.

T-50 is a heavy stealth fighter-bomber? Since when? Just because it is postulated (not even remotely realised I may add) to be able to carry ground-attack munitions does not a fighter-bomber make.

J-20 is already in flight testing. I'm sure we will see it enter service in 3 to 5 years. During those 3 to 5 years, PLAAF can keep making J-11B and J-10A with domestic engines.

... three to five years? :roll: I don't think you have a clear idea of how long it takes to develop and test a fifth generation aircraft... or any other advanced aircraft, for that matter. I'll eat my hat if the J-20 enter service in 2015. With any condiment of your choice.

The only indication it'll be about is in the 2017-2019 timeframe, and then it'll be IOC, with very limited numbers - 1 squadron if that. At 1 squadron a year it'll take another 12 years to have a full 300. Even assuming everything in your wildly optimistic scenario (2013 IOC, immediate production, 300 J-20 is all the PLAAF ever needs for fighters) is correct, that's 2025.

So we are back to producing J-10s in the mean time. Are you still seriously telling us that the bog-standard J-10 is good enough in 2018? 2020? 2025? What do you do with the ones built in 2020 or 2023 come the 300 J-20 air force? Immediately scrap them all?

Past patterns in the PLAAF suggests they won't do anything of the sort, so no, we'll be seeing J-10B yet, and if we don't it'll not be because there was no need to upgrade the J-10, but because the J-10B upgrades are not economical or feasible for one reason or another.

 

[Centrist]

With a combat radius of 1000 to 1500km, 300 J-20 would be enough to defend China. You don't need to constantly patrol every single inch of territory, and most critical points are covered by 300+ km range SAM anyway.

With 300+ J-20, I really question whether China will need any other fighter. Instead, it should shift its focus toward a heavy stealth fighter-bomber, like T-50.


J-20 is already in flight testing. I'm sure we will see it enter service in 3 to 5 years. During those 3 to 5 years, PLAAF can keep making J-11B and J-10A with domestic engines.

First of all, we need to stop comparing the J-20 with the J-10. The J-20 is supposed to be an AIR SUPERIORITY fighter, not a dog fighter. It is more comparable with the J-11B in its mission.

Second, the J-20 hasn't flown yet. Even if it flied next year, it has 5 years of flight testing ahead of it. At the earliest it will begin production in 2016. Let us remember also that the engines are far from ready. So the fully capable J-20 wont begin production until later.

Third, China cannot afford 300+ J-20s, that is a fantasy. If the J-20 is going to compete with the F-22, it is going to cost nearly as much. China has a military budget that is a fraction as large as the US. You tell me how they are supposed to buy twice as many?

 

[Blitzo]

First of all, we need to stop comparing the J-20 with the J-10. The J-20 is supposed to be an AIR SUPERIORITY fighter, not a dog fighter. It is more comparable with the J-11B in its mission.

Second, the J-20 hasn't flown yet. Even if it flied next year, it has 5 years of flight testing ahead of it. At the earliest it will begin production in 2016. Let us remember also that the engines are far from ready. So the fully capable J-20 wont begin production until later.

Third, China cannot afford 300+ J-20s, that is a fantasy. If the J-20 is going to compete with the F-22, it is going to cost nearly as much. China has a military budget that is a fraction as large as the US. You tell me how they are supposed to buy twice as many?

Not wanting to speculate too much on an aircraft which hasn't flown yet... But the T-50 is significantly cheaper than the F-22 and I'd imagine the J-20 will be even cheaper than that as well (not sure about maintenance, but that's thinkign a bit too far ahead). 300 as an eventual number isn't ridiculous, seeing as the RuAF and IAF are both going to buy 250 of their respective PAK FA and FGFA each. It'll probably take until the late 2020's for 300 J-20's to be built though...

 

[Roger604]

Even if 4th generation fighters are still needed past 2013-2015 when China starts making J-20, the best solution would be J-11B and J-11BS, not J-10B. China nowadays needs fighters that are leggy. This is the chief shortcoming of J-10. China should step beyond the era of short range point defense fighters.

Heavy, long range, strategic, multirole and stealthy should be where PLAAF focuses on once J-20 enters service.

 

[siegecrossbow]

First of all, we need to stop comparing the J-20 with the J-10. The J-20 is supposed to be an AIR SUPERIORITY fighter, not a dog fighter. It is more comparable with the J-11B in its mission.

Second, the J-20 hasn't flown yet. Even if it flied next year, it has 5 years of flight testing ahead of it. At the earliest it will begin production in 2016. Let us remember also that the engines are far from ready. So the fully capable J-20 wont begin production until later.

Third, China cannot afford 300+ J-20s, that is a fantasy. If the J-20 is going to compete with the F-22, it is going to cost nearly as much. China has a military budget that is a fraction as large as the US. You tell me how they are supposed to buy twice as many?

What is the difference between an air superiority fighter and a dog-fighter?

 

[Centrist]

What is the difference between an air superiority fighter and a dog-fighter?

Sorry, I was not clear. Modern air combat follows the "High-Low" fighter doctrine. In the case of the US, the F-16 is the "low" fighter; less expensive, single-engined, and built in large numbers. The F-15 is the "high" fighter; more technically advanced, more expensive, and built in smaller numbers.

The J-10 is to China what the F-16 is to the US. The J-11B is their equivalent to the F-15. The J-20 would be a "high" fighter, to supplement or replace the J-11B series...it is not intended to replace the J-10 per say.

 

[latenlazy]

That's what you think. With only 187 of them around, allow me to express skepticism. Consider the operational requirement of the Raptor. In any case what you think does not constitute evidence.

Regardless, however, he's already more or less proven his point. The F-22 has been around for over a decade now and achieved IoC with squadron strength half a decade after. Projecting this to the J-20 it puts us at the mid 2020s at the most optimistic estimation... and in the 15 years in between, it'll be J-10s and J-11s.

Except for whether or not the F22 would have been deployed in Iraq/Afghanistan I don't think we're in disagreement. Last point I'll make on this. We didn't have that many more F117s and those were deployed for Iraq.

 

[Troika]

Except for whether or not the F22 would have been deployed in Iraq/Afghanistan I don't think we're in disagreement. Last point I'll make on this. We didn't have that many more F117s and those were deployed for Iraq.

You need to look at the context of the discussion, which is the apparent obsolescence of every fighter as soon as the J-20 comes out. The air war over I-A wasn't fought with F-117s alone, the heavy lifting was done by bomb trucks, and the same apply here. They MIGHT have deployed some raptors if they had been ready and around for a while if only to test it out a bit, but they certainly won't have been anywhere close to the main fighter in theatre.

Anyway, you really should take my advise and look at the operational requirements for the Raptor, mission requirements, role, the raptor commands the air but the nighthawk has a significant attack component in specs. With only 187 around they really aren't going to go anywhere when a Falcon can do the job just as well.

EDIT: We are not in disagreement as such, but I must stress that we need to look at operational requirement and a piece of kit's place in the prevailing doctrine, what it was designed to do, etc. And in the context, I should have been much surprised if they were ever deployed to fight brushfire wars. Now, if the USAF had the 384 they calculated to need... that might have been different.

 

[Troika]

Even if 4th generation fighters are still needed past 2013-2015 when China starts making J-20, the best solution would be J-11B and J-11BS, not J-10B. China nowadays needs fighters that are leggy. This is the chief shortcoming of J-10. China should step beyond the era of short range point defense fighters.

Heavy, long range, strategic, multirole and stealthy should be where PLAAF focuses on once J-20 enters service.

Stop stating 2013-2015 as if it was a fact and announced on the PLA Daily.

And there is no qusetion of 'even if' 4th generation fighers are still needed. We have already given you solid reasons why they would be, based on YOUR wildly optimistic model. I'll say it again, 2013, 10 years to make 300 planes. There's still 13 years and 13 years is 13 regiments each of J-10s and J-11s.

And you should justify your claim that the J-10 is a point defence fighter, not simply by repeatedly chanting it like you do the 2013-2015 J-20 service date. Do you even know what a point defence fighter means?

 

[latenlazy]

EDIT: We are not in disagreement as such, but I must stress that we need to look at operational requirement and a piece of kit's place in the prevailing doctrine, what it was designed to do, etc. And in the context, I should have been much surprised if they were ever deployed to fight brushfire wars. Now, if the USAF had the 384 they calculated to need... that might have been different.

I think in context of Iraq I was operating under those assumptions, because at the time projected number of F-22s was 384, so had the US Airforce had those 384 at the time they would have used them. Anyways, all that is non sequitur.

Even if 4th generation fighters are still needed past 2013-2015 when China starts making J-20, the best solution would be J-11B and J-11BS, not J-10B. China nowadays needs fighters that are leggy. This is the chief shortcoming of J-10. China should step beyond the era of short range point defense fighters.

Heavy, long range, strategic, multirole and stealthy should be where PLAAF focuses on once J-20 enters service.

Correction, China needs to keep procuring both. Furthermore, there's a case to be made that China needs the J-10 more than it needs the J-11. While the J-11 would be important for power projection capabilities, keep in mind that China's air force is still primarily defence oriented, where long range capabilities aren't as important as point defence. In other words China will need the J-10 as its mainstay defence fighter.