Sensor advantages are proliferating beyond long range. 360 sensor coverage is going to reduce the need for nose pointing in WVR.
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
A rare occasion where that guy does something useful for once.
I also like how the slides are pretty poor in quality lol, that's just perfect, e.g.:
Last edited:
I know that. There is a reason why the Soviets had developed huge interceptors with radar guided missiles really early. They started developing them when Stalin was still alive. The main advantage of long range missiles is they make it easier to cover to large expanses of the Soviet Union with less aircraft. Then there is the fact that after WW2 the Soviets always hugely feared they would be bombed with strategic bombers.
But for several reasons, their mainline fighters initially did not come with radar guided missiles. The MiG-15, 19, 21 did not have enough space to put a large radar on it. There were issues with miniaturization of radars which meant they could only be carried with expensive twin jets. Not to mention that early radar guided missiles were extremely unreliable. Which meant in a lot of cases using them wasn't cost effective. So they did not bother with them for those aircraft. This only started to change for the Soviets when the MiG-23 came out.
The Soviets/Russians typically used to fire missiles in pairs of IR and radar guided missiles. This was done to better ensure a target would be killed. Because of that a lot of their missiles had optional IR or radar sensors. This includes the R-4, R-8, R-40, R-23, R-27 missiles. Because of this in the mid and late Cold War period the Soviets had much longer range IR missiles than the US which kept using the Sidewinder.
I doubt that. For weight, cost, energy use, and sensitivity reasons, there is always going to be a higher resolution sensor in front. While there will be increased use for 360 sensor coverage, you won't have the same sensitivity and range all over the sensor bubble.
The same technology uplift that gives your frontal sensors extended range and span for BVR engagements are also likely to improve your auxiliary and peripheral sensor options for good 360 coverage in WVR engagements.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I think people are missing the point a little by seeming to think the J20 needs to be some sort of superhero plane that is designed to fight everything head on in every possible scenario and win, and that is how the PLAAF will use them.
But that’s not how top tier militaries operate. It’s all about how all platforms operate as a system and maximising your advantages while minimising your opponents’.
The point is that while the J20 is most certainly capable of dominating in WVR, that’s not where it should be spending its time. So they don’t want to invest heavily to make it better at something it ideally shouldn’t be doing in the first place. This was already abundantly evident when they decided to not install a gun despite it being in the original design.
The J20 is supposed to be engaging enemies at extended range to maximise its own VLO and super-cruise advantages, which are its biggest assets. That may also be the reason the PLAAF prefers 4 PL15s to 6 PL12s as it’s principle load.
Right now, the J20 is supposed to super-cruise in as the tip of the spear and punch through enemy frontlines with its PL15s from ranges the enemy cannot effectively fight back, and then the rest of the PLAAF is supposed to charge in to mop up in dogfights if needed, while the J20s either RTB to rearm and refuel for the next round, or push on to hunt for other targets like enemy second wave fighters or HVTs like tankers/AWACS.
In the future, loyal wingmen will supplement J20s with more missile load and scrap with enemy survivors in WVR.
The point is J20s shouldn’t voluntarily be on dogfights, so of course they don’t want to heavily invest to allow them to do a tiny bit better in WVR.
And I think the chief concern with TVC for China is less the weight and costs, and more to do with the increased maintenance downtime and possibly for mechanical failures.
Where China will use TVC will be in UCAVs, as that is where the true full potential of TVC can be unlocked without needing to worry about the physical limits of human pilots.
But that’s not how top tier militaries operate. It’s all about how all platforms operate as a system and maximising your advantages while minimising your opponents’.
The point is that while the J20 is most certainly capable of dominating in WVR, that’s not where it should be spending its time. So they don’t want to invest heavily to make it better at something it ideally shouldn’t be doing in the first place. This was already abundantly evident when they decided to not install a gun despite it being in the original design.
The J20 is supposed to be engaging enemies at extended range to maximise its own VLO and super-cruise advantages, which are its biggest assets. That may also be the reason the PLAAF prefers 4 PL15s to 6 PL12s as it’s principle load.
Right now, the J20 is supposed to super-cruise in as the tip of the spear and punch through enemy frontlines with its PL15s from ranges the enemy cannot effectively fight back, and then the rest of the PLAAF is supposed to charge in to mop up in dogfights if needed, while the J20s either RTB to rearm and refuel for the next round, or push on to hunt for other targets like enemy second wave fighters or HVTs like tankers/AWACS.
In the future, loyal wingmen will supplement J20s with more missile load and scrap with enemy survivors in WVR.
The point is J20s shouldn’t voluntarily be on dogfights, so of course they don’t want to heavily invest to allow them to do a tiny bit better in WVR.
And I think the chief concern with TVC for China is less the weight and costs, and more to do with the increased maintenance downtime and possibly for mechanical failures.
Where China will use TVC will be in UCAVs, as that is where the true full potential of TVC can be unlocked without needing to worry about the physical limits of human pilots.
Modern fighter (stealth or not) is to fight when it's required. Gun isn't really a big a/a consideration nowadays, but a couple of dedicated WVR missile bays and that whole 360deg vision are here.
Nor 5th gen fighter is any particularly scarce resource to be kept back - they're being produced at the same rates and for similar prices to the previous generation fighters.
Losing older planes instead of J-20s made sense when J-7s were still around and J-20 were scarce. Not anymore.
The way to maximize VLO advantage is to come closer to targets than is possible otherwise, and aim for more closer range, unescapeable ambushes.
Staying at 200km cosplaying a su-35 with half a ton rockets doesn't really maximize it - both are out of reach, it's more of an invisible Joe strategy.
The goal of tip of the spear is to decisively get deep into something. Avoiding WVR(and closer quarters in general) when it's exactly a relative strength of J-20 is suboptimal.
I think the designer originally designed the J-20 to have enough maneuverability even without TVC.
On the other hand it does not mean they are ruling it out all together. They may have decided that with six gen coming online within the next 5-10 years to simply focus on putting TVC on that instead to spending time reworking the J-20. A tailless design would definitely benefit from having TVC.
On the other hand it does not mean they are ruling it out all together. They may have decided that with six gen coming online within the next 5-10 years to simply focus on putting TVC on that instead to spending time reworking the J-20. A tailless design would definitely benefit from having TVC.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
That’s the kind of everyone-must-be-a-superhero thinking that got the US military into the bind its in now where everything costs way too much and they don’t have enough numbers so everything is pushed way too hard for too long.
The airforce needs to be able to fight and win every fight does not mean every asset and platform within the air force needs to be able to do everything. Not recognising that basic distinction ends up with F35s strapping rocket pods doing gun runs.
Right now there are J10s that can do WVR mop up perfectly effectively, so why do you need J20s to do that? In the future, there will be swarms of loyal wingmen UCAVs to do that.
The 360 cameras and side weapons bays are there principally for contingencies and emergencies, not proactive use. Just because I have a fire extinguisher in my kitchen does not mean I want to be setting me meals on fire even once.
Firstly, that’s a gross misunderstanding of what stealth is meant to achieve. It’s not a means to allow you to troll your opponents by trying to get close enough to teabag them while they are still breathing. It’s to allow you to get close enough to shoot at them before they can shoot back. Getting close enough to make the shot within the NEZ of your BVR missile is optimal, getting close enough to be in a WVR fight is stupid.
Overly focusing on KP is an idiots game, because as you get closer to the enemy, sure you increase your own KP, but you also multiply the dangers to yourself. Take a small risk enough times and it’s inevitable you will get unlucky one day.
You know who also played such a stupid game in real life and won the stupid prize? The Imperial Japanese Navy, who kept throwing its best pilots at the Americans until they all inevitably died, and then the combat capability of the entire Japanese navy nosedived as a result. It will be exactly the same if you kept throwing your stealths into needless dogfights chasing high K/D ratios.
Against even purely legacy enemies, if the enemy has good AWACS and other off-bored support assets, getting in close with a stealth is a genuine risk. Against enemies with all of that and stealth fighters themselves is just being needlessly stupid.
I don't know, as far as my understanding goes the idea of using VLO to get closer is to take a very potent BVR shot with high kill probability before your enemy could rather than to try a WVR approach. This would make it harder for your enemy to defend, allowing you to take follow up shots. Using stealth to go to a WVR scenario would be stupid in my opinion, its like using your biggest advantage to create a fair fighting chance for your enemy. But I can agree that a BVR engagement between two 5th gen could occasionally lead to WVR situations but I think a more sensible pilot would prefer to retreat from such a uncertain scenario.
And I do not think losing older to newer planes has much to do with production, especially when multiple generations of aircrafts are involved. An aircraft like J-20 is extremely versatile and can take on a variety of missions, including many missions that can only be performed by VLO aircrafts. Losing them by attempting uncertain WVR situations would greatly hinder PLAAF's ability to conduct many complex missions. Higher production helps but reducing loses of critical equipment plays a big part too (the resourced could be allocated to more important things).
It is this way. But if for some reason ambush failed - it is up to the attacker if he wants to continue or call off the attack.
If anything, it may be reasonable to continue the attack just to retain the initiative, not giving any space to counterattack.
I personally suspect that it's actually medium-to-low range combat where in a fight between two modern air combat systems, modern aircraft will have the most advantage.
Upgraded 4th gen aircraft, such as F-16V, can lob BVR missiles at 5th gen opponents under ground/AWACS control. Their datalinks are reasonable, their radars are modern, their weapons are the best in the west. Their weaknesses in a controlled environment are solvable.
How F-16V will perform, say, in night group dogfight against 5th gen opponent, relying only on helmet night vision and only your own forward-looking FoF, because aggressive 5th gen force simply merged in - I wonder.
Fighting blind against a stealthy, fully interlinked opponent who isn't blind at all - doesn't sound fun.
There is often some sort of unspoken truth, that close-range fighting is fairer to older fighter designs with the newest upgrades. I honestly wonder if it's the case...
Last edited: