J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

[Blitzo]

We can't be sure of anything on the J-20, but it's doubtful the plane's technology can match the F-35. Here's a short quote from USAF Chief of Staff, General Goldfein, and he isn't impressed with the J-20.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Let's be honest though, could he have said anything else of a much different tone?

It isn't like he could say "oh yes, the Chinese have produced a very competitive aircraft that will likely place pressure on our future air combat capabilities"...

It's not like any military would admit something like that whether it was true or not; hell they probably wouldn't admit it especially if it were true, and that goes for everyone, not just the US. So with all respect to the General, I consider his statement to be not only expected, but also dismissable.

 

[taxiya]

Let's be honest though, could he have said anything else of a much different tone?

It isn't like he could say "oh yes, the Chinese have produced a very competitive aircraft that will likely place pressure on our future air combat capabilities"...

It's not like any military would admit something like that whether it was true or not; hell they probably wouldn't admit it especially if it were true, and that goes for everyone, not just the US. So with all respect to the General, I consider his statement to be not only expected, but also dismissable.

Agreed to every bit.
But, Blackstone's Faith will prevent him to agree with us on the dismissal of a speech from an "open society". No way to mend that gap.

 

[cyan1320]

Let's be honest though, could he have said anything else of a much different tone?

Not to mention anyone bad mouthing the project will be killing any chance they have of being hired as a "adviser" to the big military contractors, when they retire from active service.

 

[Blitzo]

Agreed to every bit.
But, Blackstone's Faith will prevent him to agree with us on the dismissal of a speech from an "open society". No way to mend that gap.

Yeah; I mean this really has nothing to do with "open society" or even "credibility".

In fact, in these sort of situations where high ranking military officers are asked to comment on the capabilities of a potential adversarial nation, and especially a single type of weapon system that is so important and meant to compete with one's own big ticket system, their words are essentially worth nothing.... and like I said, this goes for virtually every nation's military as well.

Because no high ranking military officer would ever make a particularly respectable or well informed comment about an adversarial weapon system to the public, especially if it was meant to directly compete with one's own system, even if they had an accurate grasp on the adversary's weapon system capability to begin with.

 

[Blackstone]

I see the word "Faith". If wiki does not fail me, it says Faith is not based on proof, it is the foundation of religion, not science. P.S. "open" society or not (your faith of believing) has no material relationship with the capability of a jet fighter. So your opinion in this case (all things equal choice) is totally a faith which is almost religious or totally political.

Don't get me wrong, I do respect the personal choice of religious people, but I want to bring your awareness if you are not already aware of your difference with many members here.

In addition to religiously based usage, the word "faith" is also used in everyday speech to denote believe or trust in someone or something. Reasonable people would have no problems understanding I used that word in non-religious terms.

 

[taxiya]

Yeah; I mean this really has nothing to do with "open society" or even "credibility".

In fact, in these sort of situations where high ranking military officers are asked to comment on the capabilities of a potential adversarial nation, and especially a single type of weapon system that is so important and meant to compete with one's own big ticket system, their words are essentially worth nothing.... and like I said, this goes for virtually every nation's military as well.

Because no high ranking military officer would ever make a particularly respectable or well informed comment about an adversarial weapon system to the public, especially if it was meant to directly compete with one's own system, even if they had an accurate grasp on the adversary's weapon system capability to begin with.

Exactly, the general was just doing his job.

 

[taxiya]

In addition to religiously based usage, the word "faith" is also used in everyday speech to denote believe or trust in someone or something. Reasonable people would have no problems understanding I used that word in non-religious terms.

I am aware of the word being used in a broader sense. And I also know that although faith is the foundation of religion, it is not limited to religion. That is why I included this possibility in my post.

"open" society or not (your faith of believing) has no material relationship with the capability of a jet fighter.....
...or totally political.

So, yes I get your point that you may (by my understanding) not be religious at all, but it does not change my view of your position being not factually based.

 

[Equation]

He "broke off" and "bugged out", he was likely just out of airshow range, orbiting and waiting for lead to fly the show, then they flew back to where they came from together, and likely overflew that runway with an overhead break, one off, two holding heading for another 30 seconds or so, then break off and land behind lead!

Nah, that splinter color J-20 went off to buzz the tower.

 

[Blackstone]

Let's be honest though, could he have said anything else of a much different tone?

It isn't like he could say "oh yes, the Chinese have produced a very competitive aircraft that will likely place pressure on our future air combat capabilities"...

It's not like any military would admit something like that whether it was true or not; hell they probably wouldn't admit it especially if it were true, and that goes for everyone, not just the US. So with all respect to the General, I consider his statement to be not only expected, but also dismissable.

There is evidence US generals said differently. That was the case during the Soviet-era, as military officers had no problems saying the Soviets may have parity or even ahead in some areas. Bringing it to current events, a US Air Force general was recently quoted on Chinese missiles "out sticking" US missiles. There's also general agreement among US experts China is a near-peer in the space domain.

 

[Blackstone]

I am aware of the word being used in a broader sense. And I also know that although faith is the foundation of religion, it is not limited to religion. That is why I included this possibility in my post.


So, yes I get your point that you may (by my understanding) not be religious at all, but it does not change my view of your position being not factually based.

You're entitled to your opinions and I take them in the friendly spirit you gave.