It is just what the F-35A carries. It changes from jet to jet. The Su-35 has 150, albeit with 30 mm rounds. The Rafale has 125. The F-16 has 511 but with much smaller 20 mm rounds. Etc, etc...
We are off topic
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
We are off topic
J-20 should carry a torpedo. If it sees a submarine launching the first cruise missile, it will launch the torpedo to kill the sub before the latter can fire 144. Even better is to remove everything from the J-20 and carry just torpedoes.
Obviously, you don't understand what role the J-20 is intended to play. It's role is air-superiority, not interceptor (or ASW). For interception, there is J-8, J-11, J-15, J-16, even J-10.
Otherwise, why stop at a J-20 with a gun? Put a gun on the Xian Y-20 transporter as well; it has a higher mtow, can carry more rounds.
_____
Del
Last edited:
The J-20 should BE a torpedo. Attach it to a helicopter and drop it on a fishing boat. Also, you should probably just ignore list that guy. Something is wrong with him.
I want to point out that @kwaigonegin is wrong about the J-20's intended role; it's a F-22 analogue intended to provide an 80% counter at substantially lower costs. In fact, the J-20 is superior to older blocks of the F-22 given the latter's lack of IRST.
The PLAAF is not the Soviet Air Force; China's strategic situation (some land borders, but mostly maritime borders) mean that airpower is crucial for the PLA's functioning in a way completely unlike the Soviets, as the PLAN cannot function with merely an air denial (anti-ship missiles are more capable than that of the USN, but anti-air missiles are less so) air force.
Likewise, given the limitations of naval power, China's paltry amphibious landing capability, and not to mention counterforce anti-ship missiles, the PLAAF is likely to be the main striking arm of the PLA in its region, with the PLAN operating more as area denial and as a meatshield.
***
Considering the cost difference between lobbing bombs and lobbing missiles in a sustained fashion (bombs are far cheaper because their delivery vehicles are reusable), the PLAAF requires strike capabilities, but the J-20 is ill-suited for the task, given that it's considerably difficult and costly to extend stealth aircraft. An interceptor variant with a larger bay is possible (and rumored), but extending it to full strike will require considerable changes and time, time the PLAAF doesn't have with NGAD coming online within the decade.
Better to work with the JH-XX and the 6 generation fighter.
The PLAAF is not the Soviet Air Force; China's strategic situation (some land borders, but mostly maritime borders) mean that airpower is crucial for the PLA's functioning in a way completely unlike the Soviets, as the PLAN cannot function with merely an air denial (anti-ship missiles are more capable than that of the USN, but anti-air missiles are less so) air force.
Likewise, given the limitations of naval power, China's paltry amphibious landing capability, and not to mention counterforce anti-ship missiles, the PLAAF is likely to be the main striking arm of the PLA in its region, with the PLAN operating more as area denial and as a meatshield.
***
Considering the cost difference between lobbing bombs and lobbing missiles in a sustained fashion (bombs are far cheaper because their delivery vehicles are reusable), the PLAAF requires strike capabilities, but the J-20 is ill-suited for the task, given that it's considerably difficult and costly to extend stealth aircraft. An interceptor variant with a larger bay is possible (and rumored), but extending it to full strike will require considerable changes and time, time the PLAAF doesn't have with NGAD coming online within the decade.
Better to work with the JH-XX and the 6 generation fighter.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Pray tell what I was wrong about considering my last post was like 2 weeks ago. When you tagged someone may I also suggest including their post you were referring to; to mitigate people searching all over to what you were responding to.
Along the same line, I still have no idea what you are talking about nor which of my post of mine you were actually refering to.
I do know I've never said PLAAF was like the old USSR so definitely not sure where you got that from.
Posters who are consistently wrong should just be ignore listed. There is no use trying to reason with a wall.