J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
by78 said:
From one of the unofficial official photographers...

(1200 x 1600)
31895512037_7b008d55ba_o.jpg
Click to expand...


Would like to see the serials :rolleyes: ... however it looks like 7Xx7x and is therefore most likely 176th Brigade.
 
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
That photographer lives in Chengdu though. How can you be sure?
Click to expand...

Not sure, in fact it's pure guesswork by some sort of excluding one option via a small - and indeed maybe wrong - observation. I must admit when I posted my first reply I've only seen on my mobile ... but now after a second look at home it looks indeed a bit different:

IMO the first number looks like a 2 or a 7. Since 2 would not make sense I assume it to be a 7, which would fit to the numbers of the 172. (78x3x) and 176. (78x7x) Brigade. The second number could be an 8, the third is IMO most likely a 2 - which would fit to all J-20s we know from both the 176. and 172. Brigades - and the fourth number again looks more like a 8 but could also be a 3... So you are probably correct, that the 176. is unlikely and it is more likely the 172. Brigade ... the final fifth number is not readable.

One of the most recent 9. Brigade J-20As is IMO unlikely since then their numbers should start with a 62x0x.

J-20A 2x serial.jpg
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
I know I am 14 pages behind. But
BagPiper said:
F4 designers at McDonnell Douglas thought the same, but soon realized they still can't ditch the guns. China hasn't fought a major war since the Sino-Vietnamese war in 1979 and even then the airforce didn't see any combat actions. There are no precedence for China to rely on. No one knows if guns on stealth jets are necessary, but Lockheed still put guns on both F22 and F35.
Time will tell.
Click to expand...
No. Only USAF variants had integrated guns. The gun came in from two reports on what was happening in the kill ratio vs Veitnamese Migs. The Navy report said it was training for ground crew and pilots. The Air force said it was technical issues that would be fixed with a gun. End of the war. The Navy had improved it's kill ratio. The Air force remained unchanged.
People bring up the gun myth over and over but the truth is the gun was not the flaw. Even with it most kills were missile kills.

Inst said:
This is like an obsession with bayonets or swords after automatic infantry firearms became a thing. The F-4 is a Vietnam-era fighter, and rules of engagement vs an outmatched opponent prevented the F-4s from firing BVR missiles freely.
Click to expand...
No in Vietnam as today pilots make the call on what weapon to use. The issue was that at the time pilots were not trained to asymmetric air to air engagements and missiles suffered a higher than expected failure rate. Caused by a combination of environment and poor training.

Bayonets are a whole other argument I could go into but not here. Feel free to pester me on that in the army forum
Inst said:
If there is a slot for the J-20 to include guns, that's great, because if it turns out it needs guns, they can be equipped. Otherwise, this obsession with dogfights and so on is retrograde when even WVR missiles can achieve a 20 km NEZ.
Click to expand...
Gun systems are also lived for close air support. Which statistically is far more common missions for fighters then specialists.
Bltizo said:
I consider a gun for a fighter aircraft to be equivalent to CIWS for a ship -- it's last ditch defence and going without one by design is needlessly risky considering its relatively small penalty in space and weight.
Click to expand...
that is one of the main reasons. Especially with fifth gens having restricted internal payloads.
 
Hyperwarp

Hyperwarp

Captain
Deino said:
Not sure, in fact it's pure guesswork by some sort of excluding one option via a small - and indeed maybe wrong - observation. I must admit when I posted my first reply I've only seen on my mobile ... but now after a second look at home it looks indeed a bit different:

IMO the first number looks like a 2 or a 7. Since 2 would not make sense I assume it to be a 7, which would fit to the numbers of the 172. (78x3x) and 176. (78x7x) Brigade. The second number could be an 8, the third is IMO most likely a 2 - which would fit to all J-20s we know from both the 176. and 172. Brigades - and the fourth number again looks more like a 8 but could also be a 3... So you are probably correct, that the 176. is unlikely and it is more likely the 172. Brigade ... the final fifth number is not readable.

One of the most recent 9. Brigade J-20As is IMO unlikely since then their numbers should start with a 62x0x.

[*ATTACH=full]50845[/ATTACH]
Click to expand...

Check whether this helps,

Untitled-1.jpg
 
A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Inst said:
So, at least 26 units have been manufactured. Possibly 52 based on two production lines working at approximately the same pace. Let's see what's the highest serial number this time next year?
Click to expand...

52 is a good number ... hopefully would get to 200 by 2025 with new engine WS-15

A question from me .. whether China would replace all Al-31 engines on J-20 with WS-15 when it is ready and in full production ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top