Concerning fancy manoeuvres I don't know if this helps ... but anyway nice:
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Concerning fancy manoeuvres I don't know if this helps ... but anyway nice:
Nope. Here's the thing, what's China's objective military condition? China is a nuclear power, true, but it has a small arsenal that is potentially vulnerable to BMD. When it comes to the PLAN + PLAAF vs the USN / USAF, it's a no-brainer; the USAF and USN outsizes it, and if 10, or even 6 CSGs were to pop on the coast, with BMD defenses, while the USN / USAF would take losses, eventually there would be enough bombs falling on Chinese cities to throw it back to the 80s or even earlier.
Think about what the Sun Zi quote means. You appear weak because you are trying to provoke conflict and get your opponent to fall into a trap. You appear strong because you are vulnerable and wish to deter the opponent. In China's current state, where the USN and USAF pose credible threats, it has to appear strong to avoid conflict and a J-20 doing 24 deg / sec sustained turns deters, while not revealing its full capability.
This one is implied 5 second 180, or 36 deg / sec. That said, it seems to be sped up, as it's a compilation of multiple shorter videos.
The best way to infer, strangely enough, is based off whether afterburners are on or off. Since the Al-31 has a ratio of 1.64:1 between afterburner and dry thrust, we can probably just boost the implied turn rate by 64%. But we do not know exactly whether afterburners were on during the turn, nor do we know what the lift-drag curve looks like for the aircraft.
But we don't really know PLA's nuclear deterrence capabilities. What is "small"? How do you know the exact size of PLA nuclear arsenal? Even if it is small, it is enough to ensure global armageddon just from radiation poisoning of environments alone. Don't forget that modern high yield thermonuclear warheads can be manufactured several thousand times more destructive than the ones used in the 40s. Even India and Pakistan's nuclear deterrence is enough to guarantee them safety from destruction by any outside military force (BMD still isn't proven enough to guarantee safety from even weak nuclear inventories like NK's). Your post is built on pure speculation. By your logic, China (and everyone else who is militarily inferior and politically opposed to the USA) needs to reveal enough of their abilities (or pretend they have abilities beyond what is real) so they can deter the USA from declaring war on them whenever they find the right excuses to. Can you not see how that is a terrible strategy? China's both officially disclosed and hinted at plenty to keep the USA from all out war with PRC. That's enough, giving any more information is silly.
Sun Zi's words are meant to show the importance of always misleading the opponent whenever possible. Nothing to do with pretend this when that and taking it literally. The USA isn't led by 15 year olds. They have a good idea of what China's capable of and incapable of.
Last edited:
kwaigonegin
Colonel
A war between US and China is a lose-lose
preposition for EVERYONE. The only question is who gets destroyed more? but it's all rhetorical.
Are you willing to participate in an event where it is guaranteed you will lose an arm, an eye, both legs and a few family members even if it means the other person loses more limbs, organs, families etc. than you?
That's basically what nuclear deterrence is. Let's all hope no leaders will ever think the losses is ever acceptable at any price.
preposition for EVERYONE. The only question is who gets destroyed more? but it's all rhetorical.
Are you willing to participate in an event where it is guaranteed you will lose an arm, an eye, both legs and a few family members even if it means the other person loses more limbs, organs, families etc. than you?
That's basically what nuclear deterrence is. Let's all hope no leaders will ever think the losses is ever acceptable at any price.
Concerning most posts on Twitter I'm indeed not sure about this? ... sorry, couldn't resist.
There are those who seem to think threatening such a prospect brings a certain "gravitas" to their posting? one has to wonder how J-20 maneuverability or the lack thereof affects any of this?? The latest fighter dogma brings the focus back to BVR engagements, maneuverability takes a back seat to stealth and sensor fusion..
An all-out war will make the earth uninhabitable. It does not really matter who is hurt more. None will live.
I'm afraid there are those who have deluded themselves into thinking they can "win"? scary isn't it? What's truly scary is the thought that our beautiful world will likely be shattered by evil men? the more men have the tool's, the more likely some idiot will press the button!
Well Inst was trying to make the claim that the PRC can be wiped out by USA in a war unless they provide good deterrence and the implication of all this is that the PLA is not showing enough strength to deter the US from waging a war on PRC. Where this ties into J-20 is he thinks J-20 is not shown to be agile enough, trying to insinuate that J-20 actually is kinematically inferior since if it wasn't, PLA should be showing it off. The fact they don't must therefore mean J-20 is no good. BTW just to make it clear, this is just my interpretation of Inst's meaning, beyond this his post has zero substance.
- Status