Quickie
Colonel
To me, the 2 images are photo-shopped and are likely based on quick multi-shots (within split seconds of each other) of the same aircraft.
Last edited:
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
To me, the 2 images are photo-shopped and are likely based on quick multi-shots (within split seconds of each other) of the same aircraft.
My rough calculations, which seem to be borne out by data, is that an increase of about 26% thrust results in an increase of 12.6% STR, in that the increased thrust counters the energy bleed of both increased drag and change of velocity. Using a 24 degree STR, we get 27 degree STR.
That said, regarding Blitzo, I disagree on two points. First, the J-20 has EODAS apertures as well as datalinks. The only feature the F-35 has that the J-20 lacks is the dazzler system due to be mounted on later F-35s. There is little preventing the J-20 from exceeding the F-35 as an air superiority system; it is larger, better radared, and faster. It has more potential as an airframe than the F-35, given its larger size and better wing loading.
Second, dog-fighting in a HOBS environment is insanity, and things like subsonic STR matter less than supersonic STR as well as ITR to reduce enemy missile NEZ.
That said, regarding Blitzo, I disagree on two points. First, the J-20 has EODAS apertures as well as datalinks. The only feature the F-35 has that the J-20 lacks is the dazzler system due to be mounted on later F-35s. There is little preventing the J-20 from exceeding the F-35 as an air superiority system; it is larger, better radared, and faster. It has more potential as an airframe than the F-35, given its larger size and better wing loading.
Second, dog-fighting in a HOBS environment is insanity, and things like subsonic STR matter less than supersonic STR as well as ITR to reduce enemy missile NEZ.
I do fully expect J-20 to be a superior air superiority fighter to F-35 when both reach a similar level of maturity, if a circumstance occurs where both are facing each other in equal numbers with an equal depth/capability of supporting force multipliers.
However, as a system of systems, the F-35 system may for a while prove to be the most capable air superiority system on the planet, due to a combination of its networking, sensors, but mostly due to the sheer number of F-35s that will be available.
edit: for example, it doesn't matter if J-20 is hypothetically even twice as effective as an F-35, if there are three times as many F-35s that can sortie in a conflict versus the number of J-20s.
Yes, I agree supersonic kinematic performance and related kinematic performance parameters in a BVR environment will be especially relevant for air combat in the foreseeable future.
Interestingly, I recall one of the J-20 pilots interviewed after the recent military parade saying that J-20's subsonic performance is "quite good" but that it's supersonic maneuvrability was "legendary" or something of that expression.
"Without equal".
As a "system", how the J-20 will match up to the F-35 will depend more on the support and multiplier assets around them than just a one to one comparison of their avionics and electronics.
Yes, but also note my edit of my post, where I emphasize the importance of the sheer number of fighters of each type that can sortie at one time in a given conflict.
Of course, any hypothetical match up of two air forces must also consider the geography of the theatre of conflict, and many other warfare domains and capabilities like long range missiles, naval forces, cyber warfare etc, which may help to even things out. And even having more fighters available to sortie in the F-35s case may not necessarily be an inherent advantage as it depends on how well their bases and logistics chain can be adequately defended, which are important to allow them to bring numerical superiority to bear.
But holding other things equal, even taking the reasonable assumption that on a one to one basis the J-20 is/will be meaningfully superior to F-35 in air to air, and even assuming the force multipliers on both sides are equal, we also have to acknowledge the F-35's numerical factor.
Militaries don't match fighter with fighter but counter capability with capability. From a networked capabilities standpoint if the number of J-20 were less than F-35 in a theater of conflict I'd expect support and multiplier assets for China would be greater than the US to compensate. This is the challenge of making a one to one comparison to assess which one is the better "system". The exercise falls outside the scope of the particulars of each design rather quickly. (Is assuming that there will be more F-35s than J-20s holding all else equal? It may certainly be an accurate statement/prediction, but it seems not to follow a ceteris paribus baseline).
Yes, any such comparison will not be comprehensive and I definitely didn't mean a comparison of J-20 and F-35s as systems of systems to be comprehensive in accounting for the full spectrum of a multi domain conflict and the other capabilities of various domains that each side would bring into a conflict.
If we did want to dig deeper into this, we would have to project what reasonable force multipliers and other domain capabilities both sides may be able to bring to bear against each other's air forces. In this hypothetical situation, it can not necessarily be assumed that the Chinese side would have the support, other domain, and multiplier forces sufficient to balance the F-35's numerical superiority to an acceptable degree.
We can only say that in such a situation, both sides will have to try and emphasize their own multi domain capabilities and strengths to offset the opposing side's strengths in other domains, but the ability to successfully do so is far from guaranteed.
You couldn't make soundly necessary assumptions either way though, and again, this escapes the original scope of the comparison (an exercise which I don't have much love for tbh).
Indeed, but this "pretty close match" is anyway different enough to say it's more likely a pretty close match by coincidence than that two very similar images - made by a well-known photographer - were NOT real and in fact a PS or even CG.
- Status