To be honest, I do not see the value of going hi/low with both stealth fighters. If Hi is good enough for air superiority and taking out radars, who cares your bomb trucks are stealthy or not. The cost incurred by stealth requirement on "low" is simply not justified. China will be well served with J-20/J-16 for offense and J-20, J-10, J11 for defense.
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
- Status
To be honest, I do not see the value of going hi/low with both stealth fighters. If Hi is good enough for air superiority and taking out radars, who cares your bomb trucks are stealthy or not. The cost incurred by stealth requirement on "low" is simply not justified. China will be well served with J-20/J-16 for offense and J-20, J-10, J11 for defense.
Not necessarily a clean slate, but I suspect a navalized j-20 may in fact share less than half of the major structural components with the land based J-20, and may not even look that much alike.
However, majority of the cost of the j-20 would not be in the physical structure of the aircraft, but in its sensors, weapon and flight avionics, and engines. So it would still be well worth developing a naval version as part of the j-20 project, even if the airframe is wholly new.
An aircraft is a mass of compromises. Tweaking them to change from land based to carrier based use might well be more complex than starting anew. Also a lot will have been learned developing J-20 that would be available to the design of such a new aircraft.
I believe that its not that simple my friend, air warfare its not like a football match with offense and defense "teams". It involves different missions (SEAD, CAS, CAP, Intercept, and so on)...
The HI/Low mix its a proven combination, because it works (F-15/F-16, SpecOps and Regular Grunts, Cruisers and Destroyers). Its a fair compromise between quality and quantity... Where you have have the necessary numbers without loosing your qualitative edge.
As to why the "low" part should be a 5th gen plane. My reasoning is as follows:
1. In a peer state conflict. you cant assume AIR CONTROL... I mean your Hi/"SuperLow" mix its based in the idea that you cant swap teams:
=Day 1.- J-20 team knocks air defenses and gains control of the skies
=Day 2 forward.- "Super Low" aircrafts team bomb the enemy to the stone age with impunity
Again its not that simple, the enemy could hide their mobile SAM for latter... Reinforcements aircrafts could arrive at day 6... or anything else
2. The "low" should be able to hold its own, or else you have to send a J-20 with it every time it has to go on a mission. For that you might as well buy only j20's
3. In the case you need to send a combined force ... the "super low" non stealthy aircraft would betray the stealth of the j-20. There you loose the element of surprise...
4. This planes would be flyng well into the next decades... maybe half a century. So 4th gen air-frames might not make it (also they would have obsolete avionics/engine by then)....
I don't want to digress in OT territory.. so i will leave it there
BR
plawolf
Lieutenant General
As you said, you don't send different types to do different jobs in sequence. Even after you had achieved air dominance, your strike packages will never be going in alone and unsupported. At all times, you will have the full spectrum of assets in deployment or on standby.
They enemy could hide his SAMs until day 60 or 600, it doesn't matter, there will always be SEAD and DEAD assets on station to take them out as and when they reveal themselves or are discovered.
Sure, you cannot plan ahead and mark on your calendar, but at some point, your assessment would be that they enemy's air force and air defences have been degraded so much that you no longer need first day of war level of stealth.
I would expect the JSF to spend the vast majority of its life hauling bombs on external pylons, and when they do that, they effectively give up pretty much all the stealth advantages their costly and limiting stealth design gives them.
You get all the costs but little of the benefit.
The argument against going full stealth is that it is better to just buy conventional fighters in greater numbers and/or at lower cost then getting stealths only to hand bombs on their wings.
The whole point is that if the "low" are conventional fighters, you save so much you can afford enough of your "hi" end asset you could not only overwhelm opfor's far smaller top end fighters, you could be able to use your top fighters against their "low" end fighters such that there is little chance any of their "low" end fighters would survive to even had a go at your own "low" end fighters.
We have to also remember that 5th gens only hold a distinct advantage in BVR against even 4th gen fighters. In a furball, the distinction between 4th and 5th gen pretty much melts away to near nothing, with the possible exception of the F35, who may really struggle against 4th or even 3rd gens in a dogfight because of the compromises needed for stealth and its 3 in 1 design.
If a mixed force of 10 J20s and 25 J10s came up against an opposing force of 5 F22s and 15 F35s, the J20s only need to keep the opfor occupied long enough for the J10s to get within WVR and the numbers alone would probably be enough overwhelm the opfor even if we are extremely generous and assume the F35s can hold their own in WVR against a J10.
Stealths operating with conventional assets doesn't mean they have to all fly formation.
Just because they are operating in the same airspace does not mean you can deduce the position of enemy stealths based on where their conventional assets are operating.
Moreover, operating with conventional fighters gives you options not available to an all stealth force.
I am going to assume J20s, F22s and PAK FAs will be able to quite effectively assassinate opfor AWACS or at least pose such a grave threat as to force them to withdraw so far back as to no longer be able to provide meaningful support until the enemy 5th gen threat could be neutralised.
Thus, if we rule out AWACS and ground based radar support, and have it purely as a fighter vs fighter game, the side with conventional fighters would actually hold the advantage.
You do not want your stealths to be using their radars actively scanning, even in LPI mod, as it would be far easier for opposing 5th gens to detect enemy active radar scanning and use that to get a locational reference for opposing 5th gens than it would be to pick up enemy 5th gens with your active scans.
Your conventional fighters wouldn't really care, since the enemy would likely be able to detect them even if they remained silent.
That actually frees up the conventional fighters to go and scan at full power and act like hounds to flush out the enemy 5th gens.
The enemy is left with the difficult choice of risking being detected by the enemy 4th gens' active scans as they continue to try and find the opfor 5th element, or engaging the enemy 4th gens and probably exposing themselves to attack from opfor 5th gens.
By your logic it would be even more effective to pair a handfull of J-20's with a crapload of supertucano-type aircrafts...and call it a day.
I disagree, because i believe you are thinking at short term...while your HI/Low mix must be planned to be operational for DECADES into the future.
As i see it any HI/Low mix should be of the same generation, in this case 5th gen...that means not only Stealth, but Supercruise, Superagility and Sensors/Avionics. As i understand 4th gen figther cant even talk to 5th gen directly (because the latter use a new, more discrete, directional COM-Link)
In 30 years time one would hope that a mayor part of the PLAAF its of 5th gen (western).... including their HI/low mix
If you want to further discus this topic i suggest you create a new tread
Back OT:
About a naval J-20 variant.... i believe this would be different enough of the land based version as to warrant a new designation....
As you said, you don't send different types to do different jobs in sequence. Even after you had achieved air dominance, your strike packages will never be going in alone and unsupported. At all times, you will have the full spectrum of assets in deployment or on standby.
They enemy could hide his SAMs until day 60 or 600, it doesn't matter, there will always be SEAD and DEAD assets on station to take them out as and when they reveal themselves or are discovered.
Sure, you cannot plan ahead and mark on your calendar, but at some point, your assessment would be that they enemy's air force and air defences have been degraded so much that you no longer need first day of war level of stealth.
I would expect the JSF to spend the vast majority of its life hauling bombs on external pylons, and when they do that, they effectively give up pretty much all the stealth advantages their costly and limiting stealth design gives them.
You get all the costs but little of the benefit.
The argument against going full stealth is that it is better to just buy conventional fighters in greater numbers and/or at lower cost then getting stealths only to hand bombs on their wings.
The whole point is that if the "low" are conventional fighters, you save so much you can afford enough of your "hi" end asset you could not only overwhelm opfor's far smaller top end fighters, you could be able to use your top fighters against their "low" end fighters such that there is little chance any of their "low" end fighters would survive to even had a go at your own "low" end fighters.
We have to also remember that 5th gens only hold a distinct advantage in BVR against even 4th gen fighters. In a furball, the distinction between 4th and 5th gen pretty much melts away to near nothing, with the possible exception of the F35, who may really struggle against 4th or even 3rd gens in a dogfight because of the compromises needed for stealth and its 3 in 1 design.
If a mixed force of 10 J20s and 25 J10s came up against an opposing force of 5 F22s and 15 F35s, the J20s only need to keep the opfor occupied long enough for the J10s to get within WVR and the numbers alone would probably be enough overwhelm the opfor even if we are extremely generous and assume the F35s can hold their own in WVR against a J10.
Stealths operating with conventional assets doesn't mean they have to all fly formation.
Just because they are operating in the same airspace does not mean you can deduce the position of enemy stealths based on where their conventional assets are operating.
Moreover, operating with conventional fighters gives you options not available to an all stealth force.
I am going to assume J20s, F22s and PAK FAs will be able to quite effectively assassinate opfor AWACS or at least pose such a grave threat as to force them to withdraw so far back as to no longer be able to provide meaningful support until the enemy 5th gen threat could be neutralised.
Thus, if we rule out AWACS and ground based radar support, and have it purely as a fighter vs fighter game, the side with conventional fighters would actually hold the advantage.
You do not want your stealths to be using their radars actively scanning, even in LPI mod, as it would be far easier for opposing 5th gens to detect enemy active radar scanning and use that to get a locational reference for opposing 5th gens than it would be to pick up enemy 5th gens with your active scans.
Your conventional fighters wouldn't really care, since the enemy would likely be able to detect them even if they remained silent.
That actually frees up the conventional fighters to go and scan at full power and act like hounds to flush out the enemy 5th gens.
The enemy is left with the difficult choice of risking being detected by the enemy 4th gens' active scans as they continue to try and find the opfor 5th element, or engaging the enemy 4th gens and probably exposing themselves to attack from opfor 5th gens.
Wolfie, Wolfie, man, Brewer and Shipley described this in their little ditty??? "One Toke Over the Line"?? The F-35 and F-22 are both 5 gens?? as is the J-20?? so lets remember that to start with??? You seem to be painting a picture with the wrong shade of gray??
You are assessing the worlds newest, most capable Fighter aircraft??? through the internets "drunk googles"? In a one on one, the F-35 will hold its own against J-20 and PAK-FA, and while its primary mission is still JSF, it will be more than competent in the A2A mission as well. In case you haven't smelled the coffee, the "new brew" is all BVR, all the time!
Nobody on this side of the pond sings Hi/Lo any-mo, its more "Higher and Higher!", and yes I have to catch myself as well??? but we've got to move into the new century here Bub?? we do. You really need to pay a little more attention to Jeff Head? The J-20 is coming along nicely, and promises to be both stealthy, as well as outstanding, if in fact it does get drawn in to a WVR. That's why the Chinese have invested so much in this particular aircraft, while those four gens and four pluses are great airplanes, they are going to be "out in the open" when the real deal comes down? Only a true fifth gen will be able to "go about its bidness"?
don't we have any "scuttlebutt" about 2017, 2018??? somebody's got to know something??? and I know they wanna tell us here on the SDF???
Now that's what I'm talking about, plug it in and watch for smoke??? that's where the short is??? so I'm thinking that we need to be looking for 2017 here in the next couple of weeks??? and 2018 shortly after that, "I KNOW" these chicks are in "batch production"???
I should add the phrase LRIP to batch production.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Henri K.:
- J-20 2017 will fly before the year is out
- #2017 will be the last pre-production prototype
- J-20 2017 will fly before the year is out
- #2017 will be the last pre-production prototype
- Status