J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

[tidalwave]

stealth versus nonstealth is hard criteria and measurable.
network centric versus non network centric is soft criteria (iffs) especially both stealth fighers have aesa radar.
and if no awacs involved, how extra situation awareness comes about if number of stealth fighters from both sides are about the same? (That may be true if one side has overwhelming advantage in numbers)

 

[Blackstone]

The J-20 is a beautiful very original aircraft highly advanced, but as Master Brumby notes, some have assumed that means J-20 is at the head of the class, and that is a very dangerous assumption.

What head of the class warplanes relie on second-tier foreign engines?

 

[Blitzo]

The J-20 is a beautiful very original aircraft highly advanced, but as Master Brumby notes, some have assumed that means J-20 is at the head of the class, and that is a very dangerous assumption.

I think few have made that assumption here. Most members here I think are well aware of the lack of information we have in regards to J-20's capabilities especially in the domain of sensors and avionics.

 

[Blitzo]

stealth versus nonstealth is hard criteria and measurable.
network centric versus non network centric is soft criteria (iffs) especially both stealth fighers have aesa radar.
and if no awacs involved, how extra situation awareness comes about if number of stealth fighters from both sides are about the same? (That may be true if one side has overwhelming advantage in numbers)

If one side has superior sensors it may allow one side to detect the other side faster, whether it is passively or actively.
that is if both sides only have fighter aircraft, without support aircraft.

However, air wars won't be fought like that, and AEW&C, SIGINT/ELINT and ECM aircraft would all be in play as well, not to mention the integration of other 4+ generation fighter and strike aircraft, and that is why networking and sensors are important, because it allows you to increase the effectiveness of all your assets as a system.

 

[tidalwave]

However, air wars won't be fought like that, and AEW&C, SIGINT/ELINT and ECM aircraft would all be in play as well,.

Sine they are big target due to nonstealthiness. They all gonna killed by long range anti-radiation missiles.

 

[Blitzo]

Sine they are big target due to nonstealthiness. They all gonna killed by long range anti-radiation missiles.

No long range anti radiation missiles exist as of yet, and more importantly acquiring a target solution using only passive sensors is not yet feasible.

So no, AEW&C are far from "big lumbering targets". They will also be well defended by their own fighter screen.

 

[tidalwave]

No long range anti radiation missiles exist as of yet, and more importantly acquiring a target solution using only passive sensors is not yet feasible.

So no, AEW&C are far from "big lumbering targets". They will also be well defended by their own fighter screen.

Anti-radiation mssiles are guided by the AWAC's own emitting radar source.
Add more fuel then you have longer range.

AWAC's radar beacon will give it away outside of protective fighters range.

 

[Blitzo]

Anti-radiation mssiles are guided by the AWAC's own emitting radar source.
Add more fuel then you have longer range.

Yet no such missiles yet exist [in service], and there are still no passive ESM systems to my knowledge that can geolocate an active emitting source moving at real time to form a targeting solution, and certainly none as of yet for an air to air anti radiation missile.

 

[tidalwave]

Yet no such missiles yet exist, and there are still no passive ESM systems to my knowledge that can geolocate an active emitting source moving at real time to form a targeting solution, and certainly none as of yet for an air to air anti radiation missile.

why not? such missiles are said to be potentially against SAMs like the S300, S400 that's why PLA are deploying CIWS to guard those assets against incoming missiles.

I foresee AWACs need some CIWS and interceptors to protect themselves against such missiles.

Physics wise, its common sense,

 

[Blitzo]

why not? such missiles are said to be potentially against SAMs like the S300, S400 that's why PLA are deploying CIWS to guard those assets against incoming missiles.

Physics wise, its common sense,

A few reasons, with one reason being distance, and physics.

Anti radiation missiles against SAM ground radars do not have a range much greater than 100km. I'm not sure if simply putting a standard anti radiation missile passive seeker for anti AEW&C duties will allow a targeting solution greater than 100km.

Also, SAM radars are on the ground, and typically unmoving, which makes them far easier targets than AEW&C, which are not only moving, but also operate in the air and may be many hundreds of kms away from a launch platform.
No missile exists in service which has that sort of capability.