J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

tankphobia said:

With all these discussion about flight performance, it seems to be only really relevant when the planes enter dog fighting range which is a big no no in modern air doctrine, I believe that the most important aspect for any 5th gen aircraft is frontal RCS, radar, range and sensor fusion , everything else including dog fighting should be set aside as duels would occur far beyond visual range, so there's no need to get too hung up on the flight performance between f-22 and J-20, only supercruise is important as it means faster time to intercept and longer legs.

Click to expand...

I agree. I think a lot of us are just venting after being told that the J-20 is incapable of any significant aerial maneuvers by mainstream Western media for the better part of a decade. As for PLAAF's attitude towards knife fights, it is best summed up by this power point slide.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

I'm certainly on board with that sentiment, but you were speaking about how there are "cracks in America's propaganda that the Raptor is an alien bird that's best at everything, can out-maneuver a helicopter, etc..." when those are hardly the US's position on the platform

Click to expand...

I don't know if the US has an official government position but if you were to look online (and even at the comments of a former moderator here: Airforcebrat) it is commen sentiment amongst Americans that the Raptor, without a doubt, has no rival anywhere in the world. They call it the Alien bird for that reason. I have no doubt that part of it comes from the believe-what-you-want-to-believe effect but another one comes from America's continuous propaganda (not always official government in origin) that the F-22 is the best when they really don't know what its rivals can do nor would they be honest about it if they did. So my position, is that we know not nearly enough about any 5th gen platform to draw a conclusion on superiority.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

, and even if it were, I can't think of any publicly available "cracks" in the tactical capabilities of the aircraft which would lend credence to or detract from those claims.

Click to expand...

It's not the overall tactical capability; it's, as I said, that in certain envelopes such as maneuverability. Perhaps not from the US government, but many American fanboys say it cannot be outmaneuvered by anything out there as it has better hover control than a helicopter but the fact is that in exercise, it was outmaneuvered by at least the Typhoon so it would be a crack to the claim, regardless from what source, that the F-22 is supreme/unchallengable in all aspects.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

The aircraft and it's associated sensors, data processing, signature management, and other major factors are all but a black box to most if not all the folks on here, yet I still see many trying to make claims about the performance, capability-set (or lack-thereof), and/or comparative standing of the platform as a whole.

Click to expand...

I have certainly never done that; I'm the one saying not to do that. I don't know why you keep addressing this to me.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

lol, lmao.

Click to expand...

Patchwork_Chimera said:

NASIC would like to have a word with you about that.

Click to expand...

Let them have it then. I'm here. PM or reply to the thread? LOL

Patchwork_Chimera said:

J-20-chan is neat, but also comes from a time when the PLA's opsec was notably worse.

Click to expand...

It's also a platform that continuously evolves with China's modern technology while the F-22 was designed in the 90's. America's the one always complaining about getting its designs stolen from nuclear warheads to F-35 plans so I wouldn't bring up opsec if I were you.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

Say, you ever wondered what the difference between a jammer and a radar is? (hint: not much these days)

Click to expand...

Your point is?

Patchwork_Chimera said:

I'm not going to play classification chicken by going into anything, but I absolutely insist that for as great as the J-20 may be, and despite its marked superiority in terms of the impact it can achieve within its own overall counter-air system - the F-22, as a tactical platform, brings more to the table.

Click to expand...

The propaganda table only. Your absolute insistence violates your own principles to draw no assertions about what is unknown, not only one one side but both. Is it because the Chinese don't have a blabbermouth like the Americans about their machines or are you also a victim of believing what you want to believe?

enroger said:

Just the lift coefficient is not enough, you need drag coefficient versus AoA as well to tell the whole picture. It is possible that J-20 has higher max lift coefficient at a certain AoA but also has higher drag as well.

Click to expand...

Everything is possible without data. Proposing a possibility just because of lack of evidence to prove either way is just wild, isn't it?

The paper does not give exact data. However, it emphasizes in multiple times that the improvement is NOT only lift in low speed, BUT also in lift-drag ratio.

This is what J-20 did

Increase the static instability from commonly used 3% to 10%. That leads to improve subsonic and trans-sonic lift-drag characteristic.



You have to read the full paper to get a feeling of where J-20 may be. Bits and pieces from my unprofessional translation is not enough.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

You got me bro, I can't believe it. I've been had.

It's not like my career has been spent trying to glean an accurate picture of PLA threat systems, and therefore I end up with access to a teensy bit more data on said systems (as well as our own capes on the other end of the stick) or anything. I've simply been jingoistically singing along to the "kill those backwards orientals!" tune in a fit of confirmation-bias driven analytical ineptitude.

I try to be very reasonable in my discussion about the PLA, and if you've read any of what I've written, I nearly always portray them in a very favorable light when it comes to the capabilities they can bring to bear. I can't think of very many WESTPAC vignettes I've dived into in which the PLA comes out on the losing side, in fact. It's senseless, unknowing confidence that the people who do their best to understand both sides are misguided idiots or blinded by their own nationalism whenever they disagree with you that makes said reasonable discussion very difficult sometimes.

Click to expand...

You are being pounded from the both sides now lol.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

You got me bro, I can't believe it. I've been had.

It's not like my career has been spent trying to glean an accurate picture of PLA threat systems, and therefore I end up with access to a teensy bit more data on said systems (as well as our own capes on the other end of the stick) or anything. I've simply been jingoistically singing along to the "kill those backwards orientals!" tune in a fit of confirmation-bias driven analytical ineptitude.

I try to be very reasonable in my discussion about the PLA, and if you've read any of what I've written, I nearly always portray them in a very favorable light when it comes to the capabilities they can bring to bear. I can't think of very many WESTPAC vignettes I've dived into in which the PLA comes out on the losing side, in fact. It's senseless, unknowing confidence that the people who do their best to understand both sides are misguided idiots or blinded by their own nationalism whenever they disagree with you that makes said reasonable discussion very difficult sometimes.

Click to expand...

I can't imagine how hard you'd get it from Indians if you did an analysis of their armed forces vs. the PLA, especially with them believing their Su-30s can detect the J-20s from hundreds of km away

luosifen said:

I can't imagine how hard you'd get it from Indians if you did an analysis of their armed forces vs. the PLA, especially with them believing their Su-30s can detect the J-20s from hundreds of km away

Click to expand...

Surely you meant “several kilometers away”, which was the original wording from BS Dhanoa. I can attest that they definitely could detect J-20 from several kilometers away using advanced biological light detecting sensors since that’s how they found the J-10, a much smaller aircraft, barrel rolling around Ladakh several months ago.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

You got me bro, I can't believe it. I've been had.

It's not like my career has been spent trying to glean an accurate picture of PLA threat systems, and therefore I end up with access to a teensy bit more data on said systems (as well as our own capes on the other end of the stick) or anything. I've simply been jingoistically singing along to the "kill those backwards orientals!" tune in a fit of confirmation-bias driven analytical ineptitude.

Click to expand...

Oh, is that your career? And you ended up with a teensy bit more? There's 2 ways to look at it.

1. A teensy bit doesn't cut it when it comes to top secret platforms comparisons. You still don't know nearly enough even if it's a bit more. A 5th grader doesn't know any better than a 3rd grader how to design a car engine even though he does know a teensy bit more.

2. If you knew (or rather, think you knew) more than a teensy bit more (or really even anything at all) from your career in said area, you'd have to be out of your mind coming onto a public forum to discuss it. It's to be point that it's not very believable.

3. Last time US intelligence told Bob Gates where China was along the J-20 system, how well did that turn out? Did they know what they think they knew?

"Defense Secretary Robert Gates had said last year that China 'is projected to have no fifth-generation aircraft by 2020' and only a 'handful' by 2025."

Patchwork_Chimera said:

I try to be very reasonable in my discussion about the PLA, and if you've read any of what I've written, I nearly always portray them in a very favorable light when it comes to the capabilities they can bring to bear. I can't think of very many WESTPAC vignettes I've dived into in which the PLA comes out on the losing side, in fact. It's senseless, unknowing confidence that the people who do their best to understand both sides are misguided idiots or blinded by their own nationalism whenever they disagree with you that makes said reasonable discussion very difficult sometimes.

Click to expand...

The most reasonable thing you said is that you can't draw a conclusion based on unknowns and then you violated it immediately after.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

Such is the price of being correct. Folks skewed too far to either side want to rip you in half.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what everybody thinks when they get pounded in an argument. Ask the flat-earthers if they're getting shit on because they're crazy or because they're right.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

lol, lmao.

NASIC would like to have a word with you about that. J-20-chan is neat, but also comes from a time when the PLA's opsec was notably worse.

Say, you ever wondered what the difference between a jammer and a radar is? (hint: not much these days)

I'm not going to play classification chicken by going into anything, but I absolutely insist that for as great as the J-20 may be, and despite its marked superiority in terms of the impact it can achieve within its own overall counter-air system - the F-22, as a tactical platform, brings more to the table.

Click to expand...

Surely in the years since then the j-20 should have markedly more advanced sensor suite and avionics than a 20 year old design? With the caveat that the F-35 be equivalent/better than J-20 correspondingly.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

Only midwits without a clue are making fantastical claims about it being this magical invincible aircraft.

Click to expand...

The midwits abound and have had the floor for a very long time. Accepting that it's a very capable aircraft while rejecting the mythos of the F-22 because the people promulgating it are obviously stupid is perfectly reasonable and is my exact stance.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

In reality, as someone familiar with F-22 mission systems, it's a fantastic aircraft and still the most tactically capable air to air platform out there, with the only rival even in the same ballpark being the J-20, or the F-35

Click to expand...

I'd put a very large asterisk beside that assertion. It might be true today, but it certainly won't be once the J-20 gets its intended engines.

Having said that, I'm sure you have excellent reasons for believing what you do given the information you have access to. Given how sharp your intellect is, I'm sure you see that it's unreasonable to expect everyone here to concur with your conclusion just because of your access. If we had access to the same information, we might come to very different conclusions. Plenty of your colleagues with the same access do.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

Just because this is true does not make those other, more fantastical, claims true.

Click to expand...

Sure, I can agree that the F-22 is a fantastic aircraft. It's the latter part of your statement that gets my skepticism itchy. Now, I'm perfectly happy to be proved wrong, and I'm sure you could give more detail about where you don't think the J-20 matches up without the alphabet soups knocking on your door. Consider it a writing prompt - you've written splendid essays over far shittier prompts.

Patchwork_Chimera said:

You saying you "don't believe the hype" because you don't know is a bit like me saying I don't believe you're well endowed because I haven't seen what's in your pants. Both are kind of silly premises to make either conclusion from.

Click to expand...

That analogy, amusing as it is, fails because my genitals are not behind government classification. It's a question that can be settled relatively easily (you'd have to buy me dinner first). This isn't. You have access to information we don't and even then your information is at best incomplete (not a knock on you, your government doesn't know nearly everything about the J-20). Unless you're willing to be forthcoming with some facts, you can't just deploy the "trust me, bro" and expect unquestioning agreement.