J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
SU-30MKI of course Brother! its basically just a "hypothetical" scenario, and everyone uses hypothetical scenario's to attempt to anticipate the "Hostiles" actions and tactics and how to defeat and prepare to meet "hostiles" and win..
clicking on your link, it seems like the author is attempting to show the J-20 as an "overwhelming" defender, easily defeating the Flanker?? not necessarily the case in an "actual merge" with a J-20 meeting an OVT equipped Flanker....particularly the SU-35 or the like???
so unless they have some specific Flanker named, its just generic
But I have to wonder are they actually gonna allow those Russian SU-35 drivers to go head to head with the J-20? many have suggested the SU-35s were for an "adversary" element,,, but what if the SU-35 comes out on top???
Last edited:
vesicles
Colonel
I would imagine what’s exactly why the Chinese bought the Su-35. Under the assumption that they bought the Su-35 as an adversary element, the possibility of the Su-35 coming out on top would be big. You would want a capable opponent to be your adversary element. Otherwise, it is meaningless.
If I were a PLAAF official, I would let both the Su-35 and the J-20 pilots loose and tell them to go at it.
maybe not if you have aspirations to "move up the ladder"? You are a research scientist, its in your very being to "get to the truth", however, you also need funding,,, so a few times you likely found testing to disprove your hypothesis??
I know you understand exactly what I'm talking about, it would be a "catch 22" if your funding were dependant on proving your hypothesis being accurate,,,
back to the J-20, what if the SU-35 were to prove vastly superior in the merge??? ( not at all out of the realm of possibility),, I'm rather certain the F-35 or even the F-22 would have "fur-ball" on his hands if meeting an SU-35 at 450 knts, 900knts closure Mav?
what if testing indicated that your J-20 needed OVT to "stay with him", major problem, re-write tactics,,, or just "keep to the code" and only engage BVR,,, I'm rather certain the J-20 is far stealthier than the SU-35, but you do get my point, don't you??
Still, we would ALL like to know how the J-20 stacks up in the Merge against the F-35, wouldn't we, I know I would... heck, I'd really love to know how the F-35 or even the F-22 fair??
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Then they try to integrate OVT on J-20 or try to rewrite tactics, gain experience, develop strategies etc... all these what-ifs are the whole point of the exercise.
I'll be honest, I'm not particularly worried or concerned if the F-35 (using that as a surrogate for the J-20) doesn't just Kick the SU-35s butt? and I'll be honest, it really is beginning to look like a helmet mounted sight, and high off bore-sight capable AAM, will honestly TRUMP! (sorry, I couldn't resist), overall super maneuverability, this is a perfect illustration of exactly why Low Observability is so important for present and future fighter aircraft.
So I rather doubt that they try to buy a bunch of Russian F-117s to gain OVT capability,, but you're right, they will no doubt rewrite tactics and update their strategy to defeat the SU-35.
but you are both right, the only really important thing is that PLAAF is able to meet and defeat those Flanker variants that are in the hands of China's Op FOR, and to do that, they need to know if the J-20 does indeed have ANY specific vulnerabilities??
I'm just enquiring about the "political consequences" if somebody has proven to be consistently wrong about the J-20s true capability??
If the Su-35 comes out on top, they'll make changes so that J-20 eventually comes out on top ALL the time. That's partly (if not entirely) why they bought it in the first place. It's only likely su-35 comes out on top in WVR. So if J-20 can't beat formulate winning strategies against something like su-35, they will advise all J-20 pilots to refrain from WVR engagement against su-35, su-30mki, and su-57.
vesicles
Colonel
The beauty of basic research is that we don’t need to prove our initial hypothesis to be accurate. In fact, most of the times, our initial hypotheses are way off. And I personally love it when we are proven wrong because it would be boring if everything is expected. And also, unexpected findings are exciting findings and get us into high impact publications.
We can actually get dinged on our funding applications if we are too sure about our hypotheses. Most funding agencies actually hate it when applicants are too confident. That generally means lack of experience on the part of the primary investigator. We have to have back up plans and back up plans for the back up plans to show that we have contingencies for when our initial hypotheses don’t work.
So we don’t actually have any pressure to prove we are right. And in my opinion, this is the best way to conduct scientific research. Unbiased approach.
There probably wouldn’t be any severe political consequences for anyone, frankly. All planes anywhere are developed with very strict parameters defined and monitored by their clients. That’s the whole point of doing years of testing. If the J-20 falls short in real life use then that’s a doctrine problem with the proprietor, not a deliverance problem with the provider or engineering. If it’s a problem with how the PLAAF defined their design parameters, it’s also a learning experience for the PLAAF, not a punishable offense. Any good process design is defined around finding misjudgments early and rectifying them as you go so that they don’t accumulate. If China’s institutional practices on technological development were so draconian that they primarily focused on impressing principals and proprietors rather than well designed accountability mechanisms then they wouldn’t have come this far in the first place.
Last edited:
Two perspectives of "finding out J-20 being beaten by Su-35 in some scenario".
1. PR matter, never go public. The test range is far remote and off limit to civilians, easy to do, just imagine that we have not seen any wall-climber photos of J-20 in CAC since Xi put a stop.
2. The real matter and honest part, just do whatever change, update etc. to make J-20 better.
The truth is nothing can be the best in every single context, J-20 is not (just like other stealthy aircrafts). Su-35 has its top spot in some scenario (I won't be surprised). I never believe any aircraft can beat others in every fight, so I am not worried.
- Status