J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread IV (Closed to posting)

[escobar]

old pics?

 

[FirstImpulse]

First, on the use of 4th generation (F-15J, J-16/15/11) non-stealth aircraft with 5th generation (F-22, J-20) stealth planes:
There is no stealth/non-stealth hi-lo mix. Anywhere, except for Russia- and that's because they don't have the money to develop a lighter-weight 5th generation fighter at the moment. The Hi of the Chinese and American perspective air forces are the J-20 and F-22 respectively. The low are the F-35 and its apparent clone, the J-31.

Second, the thought that 4th and 5th gen platforms can't or don't work well together in air combat is completely untrue. The United States has been practicing with F-15s and F-22s to perfect this type of arrangement, mostly from the test units stationed at Nellis. The F-22s go in deep and kill as many enemy aircraft as possible from BVR while remaining invisible, and then direct the shots from the F-15s, using the Raptor's LPI radar to target many more aircraft from just barely inside the range of the AMRAAM missiles fired at supersonic speed. This method has been used in Red Flag to completely decimate several squadrons' worth of opposing aircraft, while the good guys suffer no losses. 4th and 5th generation fighters work VERY well together, you just have to adjust tactics.

Third, 5th generation aircraft tend to be larger than their 4th generation counterparts (consider the difference between the F-16 and F-35, for example), because everything that was once hung from the wings or fuselage is now stuffed inside the craft for stealth/aerodynamic purposes. Sensors, fuel, weapons, etc takes up alot of space. So the smallest effective 5th gen you're likely to see is the F-35. The J-20 is as massive as it is because of all the fuel it carries.

 

[jobjed]

First, on the use of 4th generation (F-15J, J-16/15/11) non-stealth aircraft with 5th generation (F-22, J-20) stealth planes:
There is no stealth/non-stealth hi-lo mix. Anywhere, except for Russia- and that's because they don't have the money to develop a lighter-weight 5th generation fighter at the moment. The Hi of the Chinese and American perspective air forces are the J-20 and F-22 respectively. The low are the F-35 and its apparent clone, the J-31.

Third, 5th generation aircraft tend to be larger than their 4th generation counterparts (consider the difference between the F-16 and F-35, for example), because everything that was once hung from the wings or fuselage is now stuffed inside the craft for stealth/aerodynamic purposes. Sensors, fuel, weapons, etc takes up alot of space. So the smallest effective 5th gen you're likely to see is the F-35. The J-20 is as massive as it is because of all the fuel it carries.

J-31 is NOT a clone of the F-35, I think anyone should be able to tell that just by looking at how many engines they have.

Your third point is disputable. The Flanker series of aircraft greatly exceed the F-22 in size and based on satellite images, is likely slightly larger than the J-20; which brings me onto my next point. The J-20 is not massive in any respect. It looks massive because its fuselage is long and narrow and its tail is disproportionally small due to its all-moving capability.

Many nay-sayers have long been hilariously claiming the J-20 is collosal and massive in order to convince their narrow minds that the J-20 is a non-manoeuvrable interceptor/strike aircraft. Who in their right minds would design an interceptor with a delta-canard layout which is INHERENTLY agile and obviously for dog-fighting; same logic applies to strike aircraft.

Also, how would you know what purpose the size of the J-20 serves? Which source claims that the J-20's size is due to its fuel load? It could just be as likely that the designers of the J-20 wanted that particular size due to aerodynamics or it was necessary in order to house the WS-15, who knows? Definitely not us though.

 

[FirstImpulse]

J-31 is NOT a clone of the F-35, I think anyone should be able to tell that just by looking at how many engines they have.

Your third point is disputable. The Flanker series of aircraft greatly exceed the F-22 in size and based on satellite images, is likely slightly larger than the J-20; which brings me onto my next point. The J-20 is not massive in any respect. It looks massive because its fuselage is long and narrow and its tail is disproportionally small due to its all-moving capability.

Many nay-sayers have long been hilariously claiming the J-20 is collosal and massive in order to convince their narrow minds that the J-20 is a non-manoeuvrable interceptor/strike aircraft. Who in their right minds would design an interceptor with a delta-canard layout which is INHERENTLY agile and obviously for dog-fighting; same logic applies to strike aircraft.

Also, how would you know what purpose the size of the J-20 serves? Which source claims that the J-20's size is due to its fuel load? It could just be as likely that the designers of the J-20 wanted that particular size due to aerodynamics or it was necessary in order to house the WS-15, who knows? Definitely not us though.

Ok, the J-31 certainly is a different airplane. But it's pretty obivious that the nose of it is practically a bolt-for-bolt copy of the JSF. Yes, the Flankers are larger than the F-22, but also have longer range without refueling.
The edcated guess that the J-20 carries alot of fuel is based on simple logic. The biggest things fighters normally carry in their fuselages are fuel and weapons. The J-20's three weapons bays seem to have identical capacities to the Raptor's, so there is only one other easy explanation. And the fuel explanation makes sense, because the J-20 is intended to operate in the Pacific area with minimal tanker support- the Raptor was designed to operate over Europe with a large amount of tanker support. If the J-20 didn't carry as much fuel as it does, it wouldn't make much sense for China to operate it.
Um... when did I mention maneuverability? Never even spoke the word, lol.

 

[kyanges]

Ok, the J-31 certainly is a different airplane. But it's pretty obivious that the nose of it is practically a bolt-for-bolt copy of the JSF. Yes, the Flankers are larger than the F-22, but also have longer range without refueling.
The edcated guess that the J-20 carries alot of fuel is based on simple logic. The biggest things fighters normally carry in their fuselages are fuel and weapons. The J-20's three weapons bays seem to have identical capacities to the Raptor's, so there is only one other easy explanation. And the fuel explanation makes sense, because the J-20 is intended to operate in the Pacific area with minimal tanker support- the Raptor was designed to operate over Europe with a large amount of tanker support. If the J-20 didn't carry as much fuel as it does, it wouldn't make much sense for China to operate it.
Um... when did I mention maneuverability? Never even spoke the word, lol.

Here's what it looks like to me. You think it's supposed to operate over the Pacific, and obviously that means it has lots of fuel, and it has lots of fuel because it's big, and it's big because it needs lots of fuel, and it needs lots of fuel because it's supposed to operate over the Pacific.

None of that is known to be true though. To start off, the J-20 isn't particularly large, and even allowing for lots of fuel, we don't know if that will enable it to operate well over the Pacific because we know next to nothing else about its engines or any other systems, or if that's really even the intended mission the Chinese have in mind. Would the claimed extra fuel of the J-20 even really allow it to fulfill the mission of loitering/cruising around the Pacific?

I understand why it would make sense that the J-20 is supposed to operate over the Pacific, since that's the direction from where likely most of its most advanced adversaries will be coming from, say F-22s out of Japan. But that carries some unsubstantiated assumptions too. As stated above, is the Chinese plan for defense/offense really to reach out over the Pacific with land based stealth fighters, to meet the enemy? Who but the Chinese really knows?

Regarding the J-31 / F-35 nose, I would reconsider.

(I put this together for comparison.)

Though similar in many ways, it's hardly a "bolt for bolt copy".

 

[jobjed]

Ok, the J-31 certainly is a different airplane. But it's pretty obivious that the nose of it is practically a bolt-for-bolt copy of the JSF. Yes, the Flankers are larger than the F-22, but also have longer range without refueling.
The edcated guess that the J-20 carries alot of fuel is based on simple logic. The biggest things fighters normally carry in their fuselages are fuel and weapons. The J-20's three weapons bays seem to have identical capacities to the Raptor's, so there is only one other easy explanation. And the fuel explanation makes sense, because the J-20 is intended to operate in the Pacific area with minimal tanker support- the Raptor was designed to operate over Europe with a large amount of tanker support. If the J-20 didn't carry as much fuel as it does, it wouldn't make much sense for China to operate it.
Um... when did I mention maneuverability? Never even spoke the word, lol.

Would you care to provide an alternative style of nose for stealthy fighters? PAKFA, ATD-X, J-20, F-22 and J-31 all have the same style of nose; a faceted cone split into a top and bottom section with an obvious line intersecting them. By the way, the J-31 probably adopts the same logic behind the F-35 in regards to stealth, but definitely has different avionics, engines and a variety of other sub-systems; so no, it can NOT be practically a bolt-for-bolt "copy" of the F-35.

Fuel and weapons yes, but you also forgot the engine, wires, cockpit, radar, hydraulics and a million other things that occupy the fuselage. Like I said, we do not know why the J-20 is this size; likewise, I'm not denying the fact that fuel load is a possibility. But I'm adamant that we can't be certain it is.

Furthermore, how do you know the J-20's weapons bays are similar in capability to the F-22's? As far as I know, no pictures have been released of the internals of the J-20's weapons bays, we can only speculate as to its depth, arrangement, capacity and other details.

 

[FirstImpulse]

Fuel and weapons yes, but you also forgot the engine, wires, cockpit, radar, hydraulics and a million other things that occupy the fuselage. Like I said, we do not know why the J-20 is this size; likewise, I'm not denying the fact that fuel load is a possibility. But I'm adamant that we can't be certain it is.

Furthermore, how do you know the J-20's weapons bays are similar in capability to the F-22's? As far as I know, no pictures have been released of the internals of the J-20's weapons bays, we can only speculate as to its depth, arrangement, capacity and other details.

Twenty bucks says a large part of the code from the F-35 (that was confirmed to have been hacked and stolen by the Chinese) winds up in it's Chinese twin-engined cousin.

Unfortunately my sinodefense account is too new to post pics or urls, although you could google image search "j-20 weapons bay revealed" and the third image will be a model of the J-20's bays at a Chinese airshow. But just going by the locations and sizes of the bay doors, in addition to where the intakes have to snake through, it is apparent that the weapons bays are very Raptor-esque.

 

[FirstImpulse]

Here's what it looks like to me. You think it's supposed to operate over the Pacific, and obviously that means it has lots of fuel, and it has lots of fuel because it's big, and it's big because it needs lots of fuel, and it needs lots of fuel because it's supposed to operate over the Pacific.

I understand why it would make sense that the J-20 is supposed to operate over the Pacific, since that's the direction from where likely most of its most advanced adversaries will be coming from, say F-22s out of Japan. But that carries some unsubstantiated assumptions too. As stated above, is the Chinese plan for defense/offense really to reach out over the Pacific with land based stealth fighters, to meet the enemy? Who but the Chinese really knows?

Regarding the J-31 / F-35 nose, I would reconsider.

Though similar in many ways, it's hardly a "bolt for bolt copy".

That illustration has opened my eyes a bit, although it has a few errors.
And in regards to strategy, you just have to do some homework as to what rhetoric "The Party" is going on about. When it comes to military strategy and what their military is gearing up for, from the research that I have done, they are attempting to disuade US influence in the Pacific, so they can replace it with their own. That's been their modus operandi for the past few decades, IIRC. Certainly they have other things to worry about (India, most prominently), but their focus for developing weapons is on the Pacific.

 

[kyanges]

That illustration has opened my eyes a bit, although it has a few errors.
And in regards to strategy, you just have to do some homework as to what rhetoric "The Party" is going on about. When it comes to military strategy and what their military is gearing up for, from the research that I have done, they are attempting to disuade US influence in the Pacific, so they can replace it with their own. That's been their modus operandi for the past few decades, IIRC. Certainly they have other things to worry about (India, most prominently), but their focus for developing weapons is on the Pacific.

Tying that back into the J-20, regardless of whatever the Chinese plans are for the pacific, it's just loose speculation that the J-20 serves that particular role in that larger plan, namely, that of long range interceptor designed for unsupported flights over the Pacific.

It's just too narrow an analysis, considering in the time frame that the J-20 is supposed to be in service, China would have other means of engaging in that theater, such as their carrier to name one.

Or how about examining one of the pillars of the "Big plane for big fuel" assumption. Around the late 201X's, when the J-20 is supposed to start buzzing around, wouldn't China have better air refueling assets to rely on anyway?

Again on the J-31, it's doubtful, since one can't simply copy and paste code from system to system between two very different planes. We haven't even been told precisely what code was stolen, beyond "avionics source code" or some such.

 

[AssassinsMace]

The irony, First Impulse, is you're new and you seem to think you're giving us here new information. Maybe you should read these threads from the beginning first because you'll find all your "new" information is old. I'll go into other forums and I'll estimate the people that don't usual bother with keeping up to date with Chinese military news are at least three years behind. You don't think what you've said has been said since the J-20 first appeared? I especially love a newbie that came in here a while ago declaring China had no AWACS whatsoever. Then all these pics of Chinese AEWs quickly followed. Never saw the newbie again who thought he was schooling us in here.