J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter crobato
- Start date
- Status
Hordes of UCAV and super-long-range SAMs does seem to be the future trend, not everything is about current hardware and threats.
J10 is ok for now, but its design is not suitable for stealth, if faced with the F35/F22, its not going to cut it even with upgrades. It would require a new design. China could copy the high low combo of F22/F35 or it could do J20/UAV, with the limitation being cost and the maturation of UAV technology. I can understand the desire to skip the F35 equivalent and go directly to unmanned.
J10 is ok for now, but its design is not suitable for stealth, if faced with the F35/F22, its not going to cut it even with upgrades. It would require a new design. China could copy the high low combo of F22/F35 or it could do J20/UAV, with the limitation being cost and the maturation of UAV technology. I can understand the desire to skip the F35 equivalent and go directly to unmanned.
Last edited:
The current discussion is about the near term, if you bother reading.
And in the near term, the S-400 isn't even in service yet, and air superiority UCAV isn't even a gleam in anybody's eye.
F-22 production has ended. Lightning-II production is not slated to start for a while and suffering delays all the while. By the time the tier 3 partners are served, when do you think that would be?
And in the mean time, China actually still has to face air forces other than the USAF.
Anyway, the copy bit makes absolutely no sense. I hope you are aware that the F-35 came from the JSF programme, and what that acronym means... It is NOT a high low combo at all despite what you seem to be thinking. And let's just say I should be very surprised indeed if China somehow copies that model, as it does not seem to fit her operational requirement at all (hint again: Raptor/ Lightning-II was originally the ATF and JSF programmes... there is a reason for this).
And the day a UCAV can do a quarter of the job of the JSF ... is a very long way ahead yet. Think about it, China had only just finish testing a Predator equivalent, and a predator is a joke compared to a F-16, nevermind a Lightning-II.
S400 is already deployed in Russia and 300 J20 is not exactly a near term discussion. Air superiority UCAV is very challenging but getting more J20 can make up for that.
F22 is flying right now even if production has ended and F35 will probably enter services before J20.
So? I never said get rid of J10 right now.
In terms of A2A capability it is certainly a high/low combo. I dont see why you are so obsessed with program names.
There are UCAV programs going on not just in the US but also in Europe, and the Chinese have shown various designs. I dont know how far Chinese technology can go but it is certainly progressing well and in the right direction.
The S-400 is not in service. Parts of the radar, CIS system etc is, the missiles are not yet properly integrated and deployed. So far we have a 250km-ish capability based on the 9Ms, the 40N6 isn't ready yet.
... and you propose getting MORE than 300 J-20s? That's hardly likely.
As for 300 not being near term, here we are in agreement, but Roger seems to think otherwise, so there we are.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here. I point out that nobody apart from the US will have these planes any time soon... and... you agree with me. Okay. The point was that China is not going to face 5th generation jets of the American family from anybody other than the Americans, but there are still other nations around, and therefore the 4th generation fleet will remain relevant. This is in response to your point that J-10 will not be useful against Raptors, which is entirely correct.
Don't jump into a discussion and suddenly change the subject. We were/ are talking about the supposed role of the J-10. If you mean to talk about the future trend with no reference to near-term operational needs and the J-10, etc, you should do it in the next generation fighter thread.
To sum up: J-10s or for that matter any 4th gen jets are not up to dealing with 5th gen jets.
However, China will be facing lots of non-5th gen threats for at least two more decades. Ergo J-10 has a role. Is that a fair summary of proceedings?
Because the programme namees mean something. The JSF programme was to be a joint programme (the 'J' part) for the USAF, USN and USMC. It is also a strike fighter that has a much superior ground attack package. In no way is it a high-lo combo, which has specific meanings. It is a division of mission requirements (which may turn out to be horrendously wrong, by the way, but that's for another discussion). Therefore if China were to herself adopt a high-lo combo it won't be a copy and copying would be a pretty stupid idea as China won't have the resource or the operational requirement for a JSF, so your point about 'copy the US high-lo combo' is both factually incorrect (it is not a high-lo combo, you don't get to single out one aspect of two different programmes and look at it exclusively, it'd be like calling SPGs and MBTs high-lo combos... no, they are totally different beasts), and in any case an irrelevant analogy because that a F-22/F-35 style combo is not what China needs.
There are models and programmes which looks very pretty and stealthy and in ten years we may see them becoming fairly mature designs...
None of this mean they can do the job of a late-block F-16, with her 8 tonnes of bomb load, supersonic speed, large AESA radar and a man in the loop, and that if you recall was my point.
And for a UCAV to do the 'lo' combo of a high-lo combo, you kinda want it to be able to keep up with a fighter jet, don't you think?
Last edited:
J-10 With Taihang
Doesn't look like Taihang to me.
- Status