J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

Status
Not open for further replies.

ChongqingHotPot92

Junior Member
Registered Member
Why the hell does Mainland need to use j20 to attack Taiwan?
Actually the J-20s would be vital maintaining air superiority over Taiwan. J-20s would be responsible for shooting ROCAF aircrafts already in the air (clearing the sky). Once the majority of Taiwan's F-16s were to be shot down, the J-16s and J-10s could then move in to conduct SEAD operations (using mostly YJ-91s). Amid SEAD, the J-16Ds would try to blind Taiwanese radars before other aircrafts blow them up. The PLARF would simultaneous destroy key immobile infrastructures like non-nuclear power plants, bridges, railways, highways, airports, etc. Following SEAD, the J-16s and J-10s would should theoretically being able to track down every army formation and obliterate them with cluster or laser-guided munitions. If things go according to plan, the PLA joint forces should be able to cripple Taiwan's air, naval, missile, and air defense forces before US and Japanese reinforcements arrive. However, lots of could still go wrong in the process, say Taiwanese HF-2E and YunFeng missiles successfully cripple a number of key PLAAF airfields, or say Taipei decides to carry out the nuclear options by targeting nuclear power plants in Fujian. Ultimately, your enemy gets a vote, too. Also, Taiwan could simply hide its mobile anti-ship units in caves and wait until the PLAN begins amphibious operations. Under these circumstances, you will need J-20s and J-16s be in a constant look out for mobile launchers. However, as US invasion of Iraq has shown, it is usually extremely difficult to track down mobiles missile launchers.
 

phrozenflame

Junior Member
Registered Member
Actually the J-20s would be vital maintaining air superiority over Taiwan. J-20s would be responsible for shooting ROCAF aircrafts already in the air (clearing the sky). Once the majority of Taiwan's F-16s were to be shot down, the J-16s and J-10s could then move in to conduct SEAD operations (using mostly YJ-91s). Amid SEAD, the J-16Ds would try to blind Taiwanese radars before other aircrafts blow them up. The PLARF would simultaneous destroy key immobile infrastructures like non-nuclear power plants, bridges, railways, highways, airports, etc. Following SEAD, the J-16s and J-10s would should theoretically being able to track down every army formation and obliterate them with cluster or laser-guided munitions. If things go according to plan, the PLA joint forces should be able to cripple Taiwan's air, naval, missile, and air defense forces before US and Japanese reinforcements arrive. However, lots of could still go wrong in the process, say Taiwanese HF-2E and YunFeng missiles successfully cripple a number of key PLAAF airfields, or say Taipei decides to carry out the nuclear options by targeting nuclear power plants in Fujian. Ultimately, your enemy gets a vote, too. Also, Taiwan could simply hide its mobile anti-ship units in caves and wait until the PLAN begins amphibious operations. Under these circumstances, you will need J-20s and J-16s be in a constant look out for mobile launchers. However, as US invasion of Iraq has shown, it is usually extremely difficult to track down mobiles missile launchers.
Even if F-16s dont encounter J-20s, they'd have another problem...where to land.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
Even if F-16s dont encounter J-20s, they'd have another problem...where to land.
Actually the J-20s would be vital maintaining air superiority over Taiwan. J-20s would be responsible for shooting ROCAF aircrafts already in the air (clearing the sky). Once the majority of Taiwan's F-16s were to be shot down, the J-16s and J-10s could then move in to conduct SEAD operations (using mostly YJ-91s). Amid SEAD, the J-16Ds would try to blind Taiwanese radars before other aircrafts blow them up. The PLARF would simultaneous destroy key immobile infrastructures like non-nuclear power plants, bridges, railways, highways, airports, etc. Following SEAD, the J-16s and J-10s would should theoretically being able to track down every army formation and obliterate them with cluster or laser-guided munitions. If things go according to plan, the PLA joint forces should be able to cripple Taiwan's air, naval, missile, and air defense forces before US and Japanese reinforcements arrive. However, lots of could still go wrong in the process, say Taiwanese HF-2E and YunFeng missiles successfully cripple a number of key PLAAF airfields, or say Taipei decides to carry out the nuclear options by targeting nuclear power plants in Fujian. Ultimately, your enemy gets a vote, too. Also, Taiwan could simply hide its mobile anti-ship units in caves and wait until the PLAN begins amphibious operations. Under these circumstances, you will need J-20s and J-16s be in a constant look out for mobile launchers. However, as US invasion of Iraq has shown, it is usually extremely difficult to track down mobiles missile launchers.
Honesty even the J-16 and J-10C, with multiplier assets in support, present a pretty extreme overmatch for Taiwan’s F-16s.
 
Last edited:

latenlazy

Brigadier
I would argue that they are roughly equal match, cuz the F-16s are being upgraded to the V version with AESA radars. But against J-20s, that would be easy target practice for the J-20 pilots.
Most of Taiwan’s fighters won’t be F-16Vs. Furthermore a lot of their advantages over older F-16s will be neutralized by the J-16D’s electronic attack capabilities, which the ROCAF doesn’t have an equivalent for. Especially with the difference in EW capabilities China’s 4th gen fighters will be able to get firing solutions long before Taiwan’s can.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I would argue that they are roughly equal match, cuz the F-16s are being upgraded to the V version with AESA radars. But against J-20s, that would be easy target practice for the J-20 pilots.

You can have two opposing sides with 4.5 gen fighters of equal capability and of equal fleet size, but if one side has far superior AEWC and EW capability and they also have far superior long range strike (SRBM, LACM, SOM) capability, then that "equal capability and equal fleet size" means the other side will be at a significant, even crippling disadvantage.
Those can be considered to be differences in "force multipliers".

In the case of the PLA and ROC, on top of those force multipliers advantages that the PLA holds, not only is the PLAs fleet of fighters larger, but it is also more advanced as well especially if one includes J-20s.


So yes, even without J-20 it is arguably already quite extreme overmatch due to those force multipliers differences.
 

enroger

Junior Member
Registered Member
Actually the J-20s would be vital maintaining air superiority over Taiwan. J-20s would be responsible for shooting ROCAF aircrafts already in the air (clearing the sky). Once the majority of Taiwan's F-16s were to be shot down, the J-16s and J-10s could then move in to conduct SEAD operations (using mostly YJ-91s). Amid SEAD, the J-16Ds would try to blind Taiwanese radars before other aircrafts blow them up. The PLARF would simultaneous destroy key immobile infrastructures like non-nuclear power plants, bridges, railways, highways, airports, etc. Following SEAD, the J-16s and J-10s would should theoretically being able to track down every army formation and obliterate them with cluster or laser-guided munitions. If things go according to plan, the PLA joint forces should be able to cripple Taiwan's air, naval, missile, and air defense forces before US and Japanese reinforcements arrive. However, lots of could still go wrong in the process, say Taiwanese HF-2E and YunFeng missiles successfully cripple a number of key PLAAF airfields, or say Taipei decides to carry out the nuclear options by targeting nuclear power plants in Fujian. Ultimately, your enemy gets a vote, too. Also, Taiwan could simply hide its mobile anti-ship units in caves and wait until the PLAN begins amphibious operations. Under these circumstances, you will need J-20s and J-16s be in a constant look out for mobile launchers. However, as US invasion of Iraq has shown, it is usually extremely difficult to track down mobiles missile launchers.

Not just ashm launchers, imagine what a well hidden mlrs can do to the landing zone. Therefore no landing attempt will be made until absolute air superiority is achieved with massive drone fleet combing every square kilometers in the area.
 

ChongqingHotPot92

Junior Member
Registered Member
You can have two opposing sides with 4.5 gen fighters of equal capability and of equal fleet size, but if one side has far superior AEWC and EW capability and they also have far superior long range strike (SRBM, LACM, SOM) capability, then that "equal capability and equal fleet size" means the other side will be at a significant, even crippling disadvantage.
Those can be considered to be differences in "force multipliers".

In the case of the PLA and ROC, on top of those force multipliers advantages that the PLA holds, not only is the PLAs fleet of fighters larger, but it is also more advanced as well especially if one includes J-20s.


So yes, even without J-20 it is arguably already quite extreme overmatch due to those force multipliers differences.
Sorry I meant to just compare the F-16Vs with PLAAF's 4.5 generation fighters. But I definitely agree with you that the PLA overall has way more force multipliers not only because of all the available options to PLA commanders you mentioned, but also numerical superiority. Without US intervention, the ROC does not stand a chance.
 

Mohsin77

Senior Member
Registered Member
You can have two opposing sides with 4.5 gen fighters of equal capability and of equal fleet size, but if one side has far superior AEWC and EW capability and they also have far superior long range strike (SRBM, LACM, SOM) capability, then that "equal capability and equal fleet size" means the other side will be at a significant, even crippling disadvantage.

+ the most annoying is the space-based dependency for CMs (terrain, nav, imaging). Hard to get, but a potentially decisive force multiplier.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top