J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[siegecrossbow]

They will find a way to churn out several hundred J-20s. My estimates is 400+ jets at minimum; 150 J-20A (WS-10s and AL-31) and maybe 250+ J-20B (WS-15) by end of decade 2030.

In reality, looking at how South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and US are all arming up with the F-35 and F-16s, F-15s upgrades, PLAAF will need close to 1000 5th gen non-carrier born fighter jets to even things out; (700 J-20 variants and 300 some medium-weight fighter) + a 4.5 gen lightweight fighter but the J-10 fills this role fine.

They can't station that many fighters within general vicinity of China simultaneously.

 

[localizer]

Well, the point of a 5th gen fighter is that you're not supposed to have to even out rival 4th gens on a 1 to 1 basis.

One huge obstacle to China churning out massive numbers is that Chinese tech improves so fast that before you can make too many of one thing (say J-20A), you get a stop order to change up your factory to upgrade for improvements (say J-20B) so the PLAAF tends to build in small batches with many pauses in between. The most recent example is the pause in J-20 manufacturing due to an engine upgrade from the AL-31 variant to the newer WS-10 variant, causing many people to think that perhaps they had run into serious problems. That's why the factories don't make nearly as many as they could if they just went on an uninterrupted marathon of building a locked design.

That's why China needs to buy time for development. Time is the most valuable thing for China right now. If GDP slows by 30%, but hostilities come in 20 years instead of 10, then China will still do fine. Every year without war is a win.

 

[manqiangrexue]

That's why China needs to buy time for development. Time is the most valuable thing for China right now. If GDP slows by 30%, but hostilities come in 20 years instead of 10, then China will still do fine. Every year without war is a win.

I don't think that's how it works. China's GDP is growing at over 6%, not declining by some massive 30%. You don't sacrifice GDP to delay war; there's not a mechanism for that. The correct way is to grow stronger economically then militarily so that no one, in 10, 20, or 50 years will dare think about war with you. What you wrote sounds like a North Korean tactic, sacrificing GDP to prepare for an imminent conflict. The result is they become poorer with a weaker military because they lack development funds. China's strategy is in stark contrast; it is to give up nothing on the GDP so it is richer, able to afford a stronger military, and thus deter all aggression.

 

[localizer]

I don't think that's how it works. China's GDP is growing at over 6%, not declining by some massive 30%. You don't sacrifice GDP to delay war; there's not a mechanism for that. The correct way is to grow stronger economically then militarily so that no one, in 10, 20, or 50 years will dare think about war with you. What you wrote sounds like a North Korean tactic, sacrificing GDP to prepare for an imminent conflict. The result is they become poorer with a weaker military because they lack development funds. China's strategy is in stark contrast; it is to give up nothing on the GDP so it is richer, able to afford a stronger military, and thus deter all aggression.

No I was just saying 30% slower GDP Growth rate. Say in the case it drops to 4.2% per year growth due to fiscal problems or whatever. When you have time, you don't have to worry about not being able to finance the research or mass production. Even if WS-20 comes out in 2030, but other improvements are being made in other areas, the finished product should be better than mass producing some inferior product.

 

[Inst]

2% slowdown over 20 years amounts to about 50% less growth or 33% smaller GDP. China's GDP grows about 4.4% faster than the US GDP, at 6.5% growth and 2.5% inflation vs 2.5% growth and 2% inflation. If, say, it slows down to 5% and 2.5% inflation vs 2% and 2% inflation, the relative rate of growth is only 3.5%.

In China's case, the economy DOES NOT MATTER anymore, because the critical problem for China is the R&D gap and bypassing that to get past the middle-income trap. At 2.5% of GDP (projected) this year, it'll be lower than the 2.8% or environs the US achieves this year. Hitting 3-4% of GDP in R&D is more key to China than an 8% growth rate; capital has accumulated massively in China and it's more the quality of capital that matters more.

 

[antiterror13]

200 J-20s would probably not be enough, but given China's economic slowdown (and U.S.-China Trade War and economic isolation starting to bite), I am not sure if the PLA could afford several hundred J-20s during the mid. 2020s.

I don't think money is is the main issue here, but producing too many may be not a good idea considering the technologies advancing very very quickly ... I meant 15 year old fighter may be already obsolete now

 

[Inst]

600 J-20s comes out to about 70 billion, without considering operating costs. 2000 F-35s comes out to 160 billion. China's official military budget comes out to about 150 billion. If production is spread over 5 years, the total cost comes out to 14 billion per year.

 

[SpicySichuan]

That's why China needs to buy time for development. Time is the most valuable thing for China right now. If GDP slows by 30%, but hostilities come in 20 years instead of 10, then China will still do fine. Every year without war is a win.

But U.S and its allies are not going to give China anymore time. F-16V sales have just been passed. The Trump administration is using salami slicing tactic to gradually rollback Beijing's geopolitical, economic, and political gains. Yet, Beijing is totally unprepared to respond to Trump. Having dozens of J-20s and several naval vessels armed with railguns won't change the overall balance of power. Japan and ROK (possibly Taiwan in the future) are arming F-35s and upgraded 4th generation jets much faster than China. The U.S.-led alliance structure is there to stay. With the U.S. no longer bounded by the INF Treaty, the Allies could implement the Air-Sea Battle Concept much more efficiently.

 

[Skywatcher]

The soonest Taipei is going to get F-35s is 15 years, if they're very, very lucky.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Every time, it's like you're reading a different set of news.

But U.S and its allies are not going to give China anymore time.

How so? Is a war about to start? Is something stopping Chinese military tech from advancing?

F-16V sales have just been passed.

F-16V doesn't mean anything; it's not even an aircraft that requires J-20 in any form to deal with. That's not to mention that Trump changes his mind 3 times a day.

The Trump administration is using salami slicing tactic to gradually rollback Beijing's geopolitical, economic, and political gains.

Be specific. I don't see any Chinese rollbacks. Salami-slicing is what Western analysts call China's tactics to make very real gains in the SCS. Trump was doesn't know how to use it. All the islands are still there, China's military is only getting stronger by the day (in relation to the US), and China's economy is accelerating its growth relative to the US. Q1-Q2 US GDP was 3.1% down to 2.1% while China's was 6.4% down to 6.2%. That means that China's GDP growth rate was twice that of the US and now it's 3 times. Huawei up 23%, Qualcomm down 10%. Chinese exports to the world increased as well as trade surplus with the US; exports to the US are slightly down while imports have plummeted. Chinese consumption up pretty much 10% a year. US economy just blared warning signs not seen since the 2009 recession. (Trump's so desperate he even tried to flatter Xi into talks before he got called out on how weak that sounded and tried to cover it up by saying he was recommending a meeting with rioters LOL.) US still has no plan in the SCS other than sailing around in circles as China builds its islands, basically the same since Obama. I see absolutely nothing here that suggests that anything of China being rolled back. It's all USA hurting itself trying to contain China in vain. The longer this goes on, the better for China.

Yet, Beijing is totally unprepared to respond to Trump.

China is totally unprepared to deal with the US on Twitter and in media shouting matches. But numbers show that the US is the one totally unprepared to deal with the Chinese in meaningful actions.

Having dozens of J-20s and several naval vessels armed with railguns won't change the overall balance of power. Japan and ROK (possibly Taiwan in the future) are arming F-35s and upgraded 4th generation jets much faster than China. The U.S.-led alliance structure is there to stay. With the U.S. no longer bounded by the INF Treaty, the Allies could implement the Air-Sea Battle Concept much more efficiently.

Get actual numbers because I don't see anything happening faster in Japan or the ROK than in China. Japan has 12 F-35 right now (not sure if this figure includes the crashed one). ROK has 6, and they have to deal with North Korean artillery targeting them (North Korea's declaration, not my words). In addition, these are problematic jets limited to mach 1.4. So I don't see what you're concerned about. What does the INF pull-out mean? It changes nothing in regards to nuclear warfare. Look up air-sea battle and tell me what part mentions nuclear Armageddon.