J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

[b787]

Yes, indeed. Send your few highest value assets to do battle where their distinguishing capabilities are at the greatest discount, and the chances of their loss are at a maximum. Particularly if you actually have a large number of older, cheaper assets, still fully capable of matching enemy knife fighters, sitting around doing nothing.

You should really take over the role of the chief of staff of your country's Air Force. It would be so very good for everyone else.

your answers is not impressive, in gulf war I, Stealth fighters were used to attack key targets, Iraq inflicted 40 aircraft losses just by SAMs (admited by the USA but Iraq claimed more), they never got advanced SAMs, any F-15 or F-16 trying to cross a barrier of S-400s and S-500s will be downed in larger numbers, the F-35 was born from that experience, an aircraft with stealth and very advanced jammers and data links.

The aircraft is supposedly being able of being manufactured in the thousands, so the F-35 is supposed to replace F-16 almost on a 1:1 basis.
The idea is give 360 degree offbored sight to the AIM-9X, HMS and other related sensors, so when they throw 4.5Gs fighters you have parity in numbers.

There is where J-31 is going to be needed, J-20 is going to be expensive, and more if it wants to be a F-22 equivalent, as it stands without supercruise and TVC nozzles, is no more than a large F-35 but is unlikely it can be manufactured in larger numbers or even equal numbers, PAKFA has the problem of producibility too, it is not going to be built in large numbers, so Russia is trying to build a smaller 5G fighter.


Syria has shown the F-16s and F-15s can not violate the no fly zone protected by S-400s, but if F-35 is available the west think S-400 will have more troubles, but Russia is developing A-100 AWACs, MiG-35s with AESA radar and S-500, so regardless what you say, 4G fighters are now obsolete against new SAM systems

 

[lllchairmanlll]

I thought Wired only did iphone review, they start doing Stealth Fighter review? That's great! Bad news for Aviation Week!

 

[lllchairmanlll]

"so Russia is trying to build a smaller 5G fighter."

@Deino
Hate to say this, but this is exactly why military forum should purely focus on pictures and solid news report. Because you got to see this kind of "expert" lecturing people over and over again, with repetitive false information and solid imagination.

 

[Blackstone]

Another write up on the J-20.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China’s fifth-generation J-20 stealth fighter made a cameo appearance during the 11th Zhuhai Air Show in China, this being its first public foray anywhere in China.

However, the brief apparition of two J-20s was limited to a disappointing couple of overhead passes lasting about 30 seconds during the opening ceremony, before they subsequently disappeared into the haze.

All in all, the J-20 indeed proved very stealthy. However, this was not due to any secret technological factors, but rather the enigmatic way that China customarily treats its latest military equipment.

Based on Shephard’s abbreviated observation of China’s new fighter, the J-20 appears large and ungainly, although half a minute certainly was not nearly long enough to analyse its aerial performance.

The Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) J-20s were cloaked in a dark grey splinter paint scheme and People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) livery, indicating the type has begun to enter service.

The J-20 has commenced low-rate initial production (LRIP), although it is unclear how many aircraft have been produced to date. One Chinese source speculated that the figure could be up to eleven, based on the evidence of a small construction number ‘XX0011’ recently witnessed on one LRIP J-20.

Revised estimations say the J-20 could achieve an initial operational capability in 2017-18. If so, that represents a short development period for a fighter, since its maiden flight in January 2011, especially compared with the long and troubled gestation of the American-led F-35 Lightning II, the world’s most expensive weapon ever.

This relatively short period between first flight and fielding by the PLAAF could mean that Chinese industry either has reached such an advanced state that it has managed to avoid the type of pitfalls Lockheed Martin experienced with the F-35, or alternatively it implies that the Chinese plane does not incorporate nearly as much sophisticated technology as the F-35. The latter is obviously a more realistic assessment.

Andrew Erickson, professor of strategy at the China Maritime Studies Institute at the US Naval War College, told Shephard, ‘The J-20 for a long time was a type of aircraft to get out over the water with long-range weapons to pick off an AWACS or slow-moving target. When you combine range, low detectability and the large payload of air-to-air missiles it can carry, China would hope to pick off high-value targets. That’s long been the motivation for it.’

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Gee I read hundred(exag) of amateur articles like the above. I just chuckle and go on . Don't bother to post it here because I value this forum as a bit better than run of the mill forum

 

[dingyibvs]

Yea I got tires of pointing out all the hilarities in his post. I think he even said something like supercruise gice

you have no idea what is post stall, fighters like F-22 are made in low numbers, F-35 lacks the performance of F-22, the jet is fat slow, has a tiny wing and is acknowledged to be at the most a peer of F-16 and in that even struggles, .


First a Fighter has volume limitation, it can not carry lots of weapons internally, the few AAMs it carries plus missiles fail too, there are also electronic ways of jamming your missiles. so once your jet has down 2-3 enemy fighters has lost all its missiles, but since the F-22 is built in small numbers with a real huge budget, the F-22 will need to go WVR combat, add SAM like S-400 and the legacy 4g fighters are going to be downed leaving only 5G to fight,

Since you know perfectly F-22 is heavy, has a fatter cross section than a trimmer Eurofighter, it will need to face close combat at WVR, that type of combat, means you will lose speed, then poststall comes in to play, once S-400 were deployed no F-15 or F-16 will enter Syrian airspace dominated by Russia.

But you are a bit confused, Russia knows the most important aspect is not stealth, since stealth is just radar signature reduction and is not 100% invisibility, for that you need supercruise.

The MiG-25 in 1991 in the gulf war was the best Iraqi fighter, why? speed, was the clue, the F-15 fired their AIM-120s and many times missed. AAMs do not fly for hours, they fly very few minutes at best, BVR missiles can be dodged, PAKFA has Variable geometry intake, which means besides supercruise can go beyond Mach 2 if needed this means your legacy F-15 or F-16 are at total disadvantage, even Su-35 supercruises.So do not try to lecture me, the best fighters will have TVC nozzles and supercruise, post stall has shown on a 1:1 fight to give an edge but supercruise means forcing the enemy fighter to deplete its load of crappy AAMs

Supercruise gives you 100% invisibility

 

[Blitzo]

Another write up on the J-20.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Repeating Hendrik's statement and my previous posts, can you please not post so many similar articles about J-20 that offer nothing new, just because it's related to J-20?

Please read the article, use some common sense and judge whether it is worthwhile or not and whether its logic and content offers anything new that we didn't know. Remember, you are dealing with people who have closely followed the J-20 before it was even the J-20, back when it was the J-XX, back in the mid 2000s. Most of us have been tracking the development of this aircraft for about a decade now back when it was still a rumour that was decried by skeptics as fanboy wetdreams, and the knowledge that has been accrued simply exceeds that of most of these so called defence journalists and occasional military analyst whose area of expertise is not even dedicated full time to Chinese military matters.


Otherwise you're just insulting our intelligence and essentially asking us to push back at you every time you do so, because virtually every article you are posting are repeating either old stereotypes and mantras, or repeating facts and information that we came to the conclusion of years ago.

 

[Blackstone]

@Bltizo- the article quoted Andrew Erickson, a respected professor at the US Naval War College, so it's a good reference on Chinese military, including the J-20. Also, SDF isn't a mutual admiration society for PRC fanbois, so articles from mainstream sources that don't cheerlead the J-20 are quite acceptable.

 

[Blitzo]

@Bltizo- the article quoted Andrew Erickson, a respected professor at the US Naval War College, so it's a good reference on Chinese military, including the J-20.

He is one of the better military analysts out there that follows the Chinese military.

I do not fully disagree with his statement but if you are using that either as a surrogate for your own position or if you are presenting that as if it is some kind of take on the J-20 that has not been repeated ad infinitum and viewed with wide skepticism among those of us who are better informed on this topic than indeed he seems to be.

Also, SDF isn't a mutual admiration society for PRC fanbois, so articles from mainstream sources that don't cheerlead the J-20 are quite acceptable.

No, of course this forum isn't a mutual admiration society.

This is a forum to discuss credible information, rumours, leaks, pictures for respective weapons systems and other topics, and in this case it is about J-20. This is a forum to use critical thinking and logic to make sense of the information and pictures we have, to increase the quality of our knowledge about those topics and to hopefully disseminate that knowledge.

Most of us have been following the Chinese military for quite a long time, and the J-20 in particular.
So I hope you realize why I and others do not take poor quality, repetitive and stale contributions with much respect, because we are not the uninformed mainstream, and we have higher standards than the quality of content and commentary that they put out.
That is not to say such commentary and content cannot or should not be posted, but it depends upon how that context is framed. If poor quality and stale content is posted and provided with the OP's own commentary (OP being you in these last few cases) to directly acknowledge that their content is poor quality and not up to par, then that is one thing.
But if no commentary is provided, or if there are even a few words that are posted potentially in support of articles that are poor quality and of poor logic and generally lacking in competency, then that raises questions about what you the OP thinks and why you the OP are posting it in that way.


If you continue to post these poor quality articles without any of your own commentary to either express support or skepticism towards their content, then at best the conclusion I think we can come to is that you are willing to continue being unfriendly and quite frankly arrogant in the way you are conducting yourself in this thread despite the repeated posts by many members including myself criticizing the quality of the articles you have been posting.

OTOH, at worst, by not offering any meaningful commentary on these articles that you post, then the conclusion I and others will come to is that you are using these write ups as a means of indirectly stating your own opinion about this topic without directly saying it, and given the quality of those articles then it means that your own opinion and position would be quite controversial and criticized.
In other words, by posting these articles without commentary, the perception you are also creating is that you are trying to convey your own position without putting yourself at risk or putting yourself in the firing line of everyone here directly refuting you.


Merely saying "they're media and they deserve a place here" does not convince anyone here, not when so many of the articles are consistently of poor quality and not when you are so obviously insistent on posting articles despite everyone else's negative response.

 

[foxmulder_ms]

@Bltizo- the article quoted Andrew Erickson, a respected professor at the US Naval War College, so it's a good reference on Chinese military, including the J-20. Also, SDF isn't a mutual admiration society for PRC fanbois, so articles from mainstream sources that don't cheerlead the J-20 are quite acceptable.

I wouldn't go to many "mainstream sources" for information.

Also, aren't you bored to read how J-20 is very big.