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

[Air Force Brat]

F-22 and B-2 are more over estimated than really are practical, first because they are ultra expensive, as Eurofighter proved, i still have my doubts stealth is what is claimed specially since F-117 was decomissioned so fast.

PING! Mig, the above statement is NONSENSE! The F-22 is the best in class, there are no competitors flying as of today, to suggest the Eurofighter will ever beat the Raptor in a one to one is more NONSENSE! PONG! The B-2 does what its supposed to do, it has delivered payload on target, it too stands as the Gold Standard of Stealth! to compare it to the F-117 only displays your lack of understanding! End OFF TOPIC

The J-20 has been built to be a competitor to the F-22 or even T-50 if they ever get it going? so yes everyone in the real world acknowledges that low-observable technology does give you an "unfair advantage", the J-20 is obviously the Chinese ideal of the fifth generation ideaology. It does incorporate stealth technology throughout, to dismiss stealth out of hand is to play in a fantasy world. In the real world it does allow one to operate up close and personal without being observed, allowing you to plan and execute your attack without a lot of fanfare, can it be defeated or reverse engineered? of course, but it is worth employing and don't think for a minute the J-20 isn't costing an arm and a leg, it is very sophisticated and very expensive. How it will ultimately measure up in the real world remains yet to be seen, so lets stick to reality on this J-20 thread, please and don't pander, its intellectually dishonest, and robs one of his integrity? Brat

 

[kwaigonegin]

F-22 and B-2 are more over estimated than really are practical, first because they are ultra expensive, as Eurofighter proved, i still have my doubts stealth is what is claimed specially since F-117 was decomissioned so fast.

Perhaps China, Europe and Russia are wiser to make their jets less stealthy just for the sake of effectiviness.
at a price tag of 180 million of course lockheed will claim stealth works, even when their pilots can not use oxygen masks, an irony do not you think, how simple flaws are seen in ultra expensive jets while most americans can not even afford a decent health plan

Over estimate or not, the F-22 and B-2 remain the preeminent fighter and bomber of the world today and tomorrow. There is no question about it. One can argue the justification or even the 'practically' of such fighters BUT that is what the US taxpayers (some), military and government wanted and so that is what we have now.

Can a lowly A-10, 1/5 the cost of the F-22 be more effective against a group of terrorist hiding in a mudhut? One can argue yes. You can also buy 25 M1A1 Abram tanks for the cost of 1 F-22. But an Abram is not effective against a bunch of hostile MiGs. One can also argue Al Queda do not have an AF. The fact is when it comes to military acquisition practicality means 100 different things to 100 different people.

When it comes to fighters there is also a point of diminishing return with ROI and capability. After a certain price point very little is gain afterward BUT those small things can and do make a difference when everything else is equal.

Like you said you can probably make an F-22 type equivalent with 95% of it's capability for half the cost but the additional 5% will cost the other half. To others that is a waste but to some that extra 5% in capability is worth paying an arm and leg for.


hope my little rambling that makes sense.

 

[Munir]

Over estimate or not, the F-22 and B-2 remain the preeminent fighter and bomber of the world today and tomorrow. There is no question about it. One can argue the justification or even the 'practically' of such fighters BUT that is what the US taxpayers (some), military and government wanted and so that is what we have now.

Can a lowly A-10, 1/5 the cost of the F-22 be more effective against a group of terrorist hiding in a mudhut? One can argue yes. You can also buy 25 M1A1 Abram tanks for the cost of 1 F-22. But an Abram is not effective against a bunch of hostile MiGs. One can also argue Al Queda do not have an AF. The fact is when it comes to military acquisition practicality means 100 different things to 100 different people.

When it comes to fighters there is also a point of diminishing return with ROI and capability. After a certain price point very little is gain afterward BUT those small things can and do make a difference when everything else is equal.

Like you said you can probably make an F-22 type equivalent with 95% of it's capability for half the cost but the additional 5% will cost the other half. To others that is a waste but to some that extra 5% in capability is worth paying an arm and leg for.


hope my little rambling that makes sense.

I remember the Germans produced the Tiger and King Tiger... Better then the best... Yet the Americans produced huge numbers of the most simple tank at the moment. So? It is not only quality but also numbers. And in that what would say 10 F22 do against 50 J31?

 

[AssassinsMace]

I don't know if this pic of the J-20 with different engine nozzles has to do with this but Huitong's latest is one WS-15 is about to be fitted onto the 2001.

 

[kwaigonegin]

I remember the Germans produced the Tiger and King Tiger... Better then the best... Yet the Americans produced huge numbers of the most simple tank at the moment. So? It is not only quality but also numbers. And in that what would say 10 F22 do against 50 J31?

Of course quantity is a quality it itself. I never said that to be untrue. All I'm saying is in regards to the earlier postings, the USAF is willing to pay pay more and justify the additional cost and that to each person practically means many different things. There is a pint of diminishing return to EVERYTHING and I am sure if someone want to built a $10 billion dollar fighter made of gold and silver and make it fly it is probably possible with enough R + D as well but as with most things everything is measure against cost and capability factors. In the case of the USAF/USA theirs is just a tad higher than other country's views on 'practicality' and cost vs capability factor.. Of course having a defense budget that is more than the entire world combined makes such decision making a lil bit easier too..

 

[MiG-29]

Thanks a lot ! By the way is there a so called AL-31M1 (Stage III) or similar ???

Deino

To be honest i do not know, the only think i read once is they might get more powerful Al-31s, so very likely these are Al-31M1s.

Besides that i do not know
see

It is expected that China will order more AL-31F engines in future (this refers to the high-powered modifications). At that the 140 ordered engines will have the increased thrust

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[leibowitz]

Picture request:

I'm trying to get a decent, free to use picture of the J-20 for the J-20 wikipedia article. Currently, all the pics we've found there have had unclear copyright issues. Anyone here know how I should go about this, or who I should contact?

Thanks so much!

 

[Air Force Brat]

Picture request:

I'm trying to get a decent, free to use picture of the J-20 for the J-20 wikipedia article. Currently, all the pics we've found there have had unclear copyright issues. Anyone here know how I should go about this, or who I should contact?

Thanks so much!

Chengdu or AVIC, maybe even PLAAF, they might like a little press right now? BRAT

 

[Hyperwarp]

Picture request:

I'm trying to get a decent, free to use picture of the J-20 for the J-20 wikipedia article. Currently, all the pics we've found there have had unclear copyright issues. Anyone here know how I should go about this, or who I should contact?

Thanks so much!

Looking at the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

pages, none of the image have watermarks in them. So that maybe the problem. I've attached some non-watermarked J-20 images I found at CDF. There should be allot more.

 

[Engineer]

Looking at the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

pages, none of the image have watermarks in them. So that maybe the problem. I've attached some non-watermarked J-20 images I found at CDF. There should be allot more.

It has nothing to do with watermarks. Wikipedia needs the photographer to waive his copyright of an image before accepting that image into the article.