J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII

[AndrewS]

I don't think this answer is satisfactory. As I said before, "no pound for air-to-ground" approach of the F-22 is no longer valid in the modern battlefield. look at ukraine war, how many actual plane-vs-planes fights have occured? Very little. Planes are mostly getting shot down by air defense missiles. Russia did not shoot down too many Ukrainian jets which are still flying in numbers. Russia has failed achieve air-superiority due to Air-defense missiles. Air to Ground is now the main mission of fighters these days.

Air-to-Ground missions against important targets such as SAMs, Factories, Ships will be the main mission of all combat air crafts. J-20's ability to use stealth to evade Air Defense Radars should be a huge asset. So, I do hope PLA is taking this into account. If all J-20 does is carrying 4 Pl-15 then it feels like a waste. Right now the only capability we have seen out of J-20 is carrying 4 PL-15. We haven't seen it carrying anti-radiation missiles for SEAD. We haven't seen it perform anti-shipping roles. It should be able to carry different types of missiles and different mission sets.

Ukraine is not really relevant to the usage of Chinese stealth aircraft in an air-sea war in the Western Pacific.

Ukraine is a ground war where there are SAMs next to the frontline. In comparison, there are very few ships with SAMs in the waters of the Western Pacific. Most of it is open water where aircraft will battle aircraft.

Ukraine has relatively safe areas in the rear - hundreds of kilometres from the frontlines. Stealthy aircraft would only be able to carry a small payload if they have to cross this distance and remain stealthy. In the Western Pacific, the only landmasses are small, vulnerable "islands" where the bulk of population, industry and economic activity hugs the coastline. Non-stealthy aircraft equipped with glide bombs of 70-130km ranges would be able to launch safely offshore and still reach most targets in Taiwan for example.

I would say that the Ukrainian Air Force has effectively been wiped out. In comparison, the USAF and USN have a larger, more modern air superiority fighter fleet than China. And the US would be able to keep feeding in air superiority fighters into the Western Pacific. So it makes sense for the J-20 to focus on air superiority first.

We can see the SEAD role is being covered by a J-16 variant. But once there are enough J-20 in service, a SEAD role makes sense.

But I don't see additional roles to include anti-shipping, because anti-ship missiles are huge and would have to be carried externally, so it's pointless using a stealth aircraft like the J-20 as the platform. You might as well use a J-16 if you want to do air-launched anti-ship missiles.

For air-to-ground generally, I think drones and missiles are the way to go. There was the CCTV newsreel where they visited a factory with the capacity to produce "components for 1000 cruise missiles per day". And you can consider a Shaheed-136 (and its variants) as comparable to a JDAM in terms of cost and guidance, but with the ability to fly to target come 1500km+ away. Then you also have Loyal Wingman type aircraft which can carry ground-attack munitions as well.

 

[lcloo]

I don't think this answer is satisfactory. As I said before, "no pound for air-to-ground" approach of the F-22 is no longer valid in the modern battlefield. look at ukraine war, how many actual plane-vs-planes fights have occured? Very little. Planes are mostly getting shot down by air defense missiles. Russia did not shoot down too many Ukrainian jets which are still flying in numbers. Russia has failed achieve air-superiority due to Air-defense missiles. Air to Ground is now the main mission of fighters these days.

Air-to-Ground missions against important targets such as SAMs, Factories, Ships will be the main mission of all combat air crafts. J-20's ability to use stealth to evade Air Defense Radars should be a huge asset. So, I do hope PLA is taking this into account. If all J-20 does is carrying 4 Pl-15 then it feels like a waste. Right now the only capability we have seen out of J-20 is carrying 4 PL-15. We haven't seen it carrying anti-radiation missiles for SEAD. We haven't seen it perform anti-shipping roles. It should be able to carry different types of missiles and different mission sets.

You cannot use Ukraine war as example for a China-US war. Russian airforce is a faint shadow of former Soviet Air force in terms of number of fighters and strike jets. China has the largest number of Flanker jets than all of Russian's functioning comba jets and these Chinese jets will be the main strike jets, especially J16. And they will be sufficient for strike roles on land and sea. There is no need for J20 to be a strike jet. More-over, when J35 starts joining PLAN Aviation, they are also expected to be multi-role and should be able to be used for strike missions, though J15 will be the main strike force from the navy.

J20 should be deployed where it is best at, i.e. destroying enemy air assets, be they stealth fighters or others. A Chinese proverb, 牛刀杀鸡 meaning using big butcher knife for cow to kill chicken, is to illustrate "Over kill" as meaningless. Using J20 for surface strike role is overkill for a very expensive stealth fighter jet which was designed to kill enemy aircraft.

 

[lcloo]

Really? Since when you see a canard that is NOT a fighter. Canards have greater nose authority compare to conventional design, which tends to indicate a higher emphasis to maneuverability. I really fail to see what reasoning that allow you to make such a definite claim. As for the lack of gun, the advances of short range air to air missiles makes gun an omittable design choice.

Yes, a stealth aircraft shouldn't get into dogfight if it is avoidable. But that does not mean it can be ignored -- there are other means of detecting radar stealth aircraft which as IR sensors. In fact, it can be argued that it may in fact force stealth fighters into dogfights precisely because they are forced to rely on shorter range sensors and/or shorter effective radar detection range.

I NEVER SAID J20 is not a fighter. I said it is not arena fighter, i.e. not meant to be a dog fighter. Don't put your words in other people's mouth. A PLAAF J20 instructor said on video screen capture that it is STUPID to get a J20 into a dogfight. It is in this thread but probably hundred of pages before.

 

[TOKYO DRIFT ABC]

It's ridiculous to think that an expensive asset like the J-20 can only be used for air-to-air missions, or that it becomes useless once the battlefield moves from the Western Pacific to the Ukraine.

 

[AndrewS]

It's ridiculous to think that an expensive asset like the J-20 can only be used for air-to-air missions, or that it becomes useless once the battlefield moves from the Western Pacific to the Ukraine.

Given that the J-20 faces a larger number of opposing US stealth fighters, there would be a shortage of J-20 for air-to-air missions.

And what do you mean by "the battlefield moves from the Western Pacific to the Ukraine"?

 

[Blitzo]

J20 is designed with different war doctrines between China and other countries, particularly US's F-35 design concept. And J20 is designed with China's geography in mind, especially East China sea and South China Sea.

J20 is not designed for dog fight, the lack of gun supports this indication It is more like a deterence air assets against foreign air attacks and keep foreign aircraft - fights, strike jets, bombers, AWACS, aerial refuelling tankers etc safely away from China's important places. It is a hunter rather than an arena fighter.

Comparing J20 to F-35 is like comparing F-22 to F-35, and you will see the obvious. Comparing J35 (and may be J31) to F-35 would be more appropriate. J35 has an internal weapon bay about the same size as that of J20.

Lastly, it is not impossible that J20 can carry air to ground/surface weapons but IMO that's not what PLAAF want.

I don't think this answer is satisfactory. As I said before, "no pound for air-to-ground" approach of the F-22 is no longer valid in the modern battlefield. look at ukraine war, how many actual plane-vs-planes fights have occured? Very little. Planes are mostly getting shot down by air defense missiles. Russia did not shoot down too many Ukrainian jets which are still flying in numbers. Russia has failed achieve air-superiority due to Air-defense missiles. Air to Ground is now the main mission of fighters these days.

Air-to-Ground missions against important targets such as SAMs, Factories, Ships will be the main mission of all combat air crafts. J-20's ability to use stealth to evade Air Defense Radars should be a huge asset. So, I do hope PLA is taking this into account. If all J-20 does is carrying 4 Pl-15 then it feels like a waste. Right now the only capability we have seen out of J-20 is carrying 4 PL-15. We haven't seen it carrying anti-radiation missiles for SEAD. We haven't seen it perform anti-shipping roles. It should be able to carry different types of missiles and different mission sets.

This is a bizarre exchange.

To answer the question, we have had credible rumours from the late 2010s from the grapevine that a standoff powered air to ground missile was in development for J-20 (something akin to JSM or KH-659MK2).


There's nothing else that needs to be said or asked.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

There is a distinction between capabilities and doctrine. There is a difference in what capabilities J-20s should have vs what roles J-20s would likely be employed in. Having A2G capabilities is always preferable to not having them, even if J-20s primary role in most foreseeable conflicts would be primarily focused on airspace denial and disruption of opposing air operations.

 

[nemo]

I NEVER SAID J20 is not a fighter. I said it is not arena fighter, i.e. not meant to be a dog fighter. Don't put your words in other people's mouth. A PLAAF J20 instructor said on video screen capture that it is STUPID to get a J20 into a dogfight. It is in this thread but probably hundred of pages before.

You are the one who claims "J20 is not designed for dog fight". I claim that dog fight is one of the design priority of J20. You claim that J20 does NOT need to get into dog fight. I claim regardless of what tactical preference, J20 may in fact NEED to get into dog fight due to reduced sensor effectiveness due to opponent stealth.

 

[BoraTas]

You are the one who claims "J20 is not designed for dog fight". I claim that dog fight is one of the design priority of J20. You claim that J20 does NOT need to get into dog fight. I claim regardless of what tactical preference, J20 may in fact NEED to get into dog fight due to reduced sensor effectiveness due to opponent stealth.

If you are meaning turning gun fights by dogfight then the J-20, for certain, doesn't have that as a design priority. It doesn't even have a gun to start with. Stealth vs stealth would still be overwhelmingly BVR. It would be from 20-50 km instead of 100+ but it would still be BVR. No nation with VLO fighters diverted focus from BVR or even mentioned anything in that direction. Any little WVR would be with SRAAMs and would mostly be about who would launch first.

 

[plawolf]

If you are meaning turning gun fights by dogfight then the J-20, for certain, doesn't have that as a design priority. It doesn't even have a gun to start with. Stealth vs stealth would still be overwhelmingly BVR. It would be from 20-50 km instead of 100+ but it would still be BVR. No nation with VLO fighters diverted focus from BVR or even mentioned anything in that direction. Any little WVR would be with SRAAMs and would mostly be about who would launch first.

Super-manoeuvrability is literally one of the core design requirements for the J20.

It does not carry a gun because of the need to prioritise airframe performance with sub-optimal engines. But it has a gun bay in the designs, and there have been at least one prototype that tested the gun, meaning the J20 was always meant to have a gun and designed to have it.

With the WS15, the J20 finally has its full spec engines, but there has also been a significant evolution in how the PLAAF seeing air combat to go with 5th gens based on its own operational experience and DACT results with the J20. If they still do not fit the gun on the J20, then that would be due to an informed choice, and not because the J20 couldn’t dogfight.

The reason for why is quite simple, in most scenarios where it’s multiple J20s vs enemies, getting into a gun fight is too risky. You might score a kill with the gun, but is likely to leave yourself exposed to the enemy wingman in order to get the shot. In such scenarios, the J20s would get better results taking advantage of its super cruise and stealth to break contact to come at the enemy again from an unexpected direction than try to brute force dogfight to victory. The J20 can do that if it needs to, but it would suffer a worse K/D ratio as a result so it is a suboptimal strategy.

The J20 is like a sniper, it is supposed to shoot you from afar before you even know you are being shot at and not get into pistol duals or knife fights.