J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

Hi
To take out best of the cream from a badge or base let’s say 2 pilot each
from a badge shouldn’t be too much as the J20s production might not be
more than 46/50 per year
i am sure there will be more or less 8/9 best pilots in one badge or on a single
base munis couple of them shouldn’t have much pressure on the rest of the badge
thank you

luosifen said:

The segment on the Wang Hai brigade with English subtitles:

Click to expand...

PLA Air Force's Wang Hai Air Group fully equipped with J-20 fighter jets, expels foreign aircraft by giving full play to stealth capability

By Published: Jan 17, 2023 09:18 PM


A J-20 stealth fighter jet performs during Airshow China 2022 in Zhuhai, South China's Guangdong Province, on November 9, 2022. Photo: Cui Meng/GT

The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force recently expelled foreign aircraft threatening China's territorial airspace with J-20 fighter jets, giving full play to the aircraft's stealth capability. Experts said on Tuesday that PLA forces are well-equipped and well-trained in dealing with all sorts of threats.

As the first combat unit of the PLA Air Force that is fully equipped with J-20 fighter jets, the Wang Hai Air Group under a brigade of the PLA Eastern Theater Command carried out missions that safeguard China's national sovereignty and territorial integrity, including combat alert patrols in the East China Sea and the Taiwan Straits, China Central Television (CCTV) reported on Tuesday.

In an emergency sortie mission, the leader of the air group Yang Juncheng and pilot Wei Xin took off with two J-20 fighter jets to intercept two foreign aircraft. The two closely coordinated, took advantageous positions and resolutely safeguarded China's airspace security, CCTV reported.

"The J-20's stealth capability is its biggest advantage. It means that the enemy radar can see nothing, but we can already launch attacks," Wei told CCTV.

"You can imagine how much psychological pressure the enemies would have. They can only take hasty evasive maneuvers to avoid our threats. If we push forward, they would fall back," Wei said.

With an outstanding combat history of downing and damaging 29 hostile aircraft in the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea (1950-53), the Wang Hai Air Group has recently completed key missions including the routine management of control of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone, combat alert patrols in the South China Sea, and patrols around the island of Taiwan, flying across the Bashi Channel, the Miyako Strait and the Tsushima Strait in the process, according to CCTV.

"When I look down on the motherland's precious island [of Taiwan] from the cockpit of my warplane, I could clearly see the island's entire coastline and mountain range," Yang was quoted by CCTV as saying.

"I told myself at the time, I will come again, as [the island of Taiwan] is our country's territory, and [the Taiwan Straits] have no line [dividing us]," Yang said.

The defense authority on the island of Taiwan releases its monitoring of PLA aircraft activities around the island on a daily basis, but it had failed to report a spotting of a stealth-capable J-20 as of press time.

A brigade under the PLA Western Theater Command, which is the first unit to receive delivery of the J-16 fighter jet, also carried out combat alert patrol missions that saw foreign warplanes expelled.

In a recent nighttime patrol, pilot Li Chao was approached by two foreign fighter jets. Li had to break away from the pursuit by shutting off all active electronic devices and flying low, before closing in on one of the foreign aircraft from its tail, gaining the upper hand, CCTV reported on Saturday.

Equipped with advanced warplanes of different types and well trained, PLA units deployed across the country are ready at all times to take measures against unidentified aircraft flying into their watch, including expelling such planes when necessary, Fu Qianshao, a Chinese military aviation expert, told the Global Times on Tuesday.

Taiwan not releasing details if spitting

theforgotten0007 said:

So we've established you're NOT working within the MIC then? Good. Again I remind you my intentions for posting the graph was two-fold:

1) For posterity so new members can look up past discussions on the subject since the graph WASN'T posted before.
2) More importantly, to speculate on the unknown with a given set of limitations. Is there a hard rule stating that new imagery/dataset posted here have to be accurate with realities on the ground? Preferable? Sure. Always? Certainly not.

Click to expand...

1) I have stated in my role as a moderator why we specifically do not want this topic to be brought up again, and indeed the very intent of letting new members be aware of the past discussion is actively not useful for this thread.
2) I have stated that we do not want any further discussion on this topic as it has already been done to death in the past and was distracting for the thread and will be distracting again, in context where none of us can speculate with anything resembling insider information. The fact that you posted that chart and tried to restart the discussion is not against the rules.
The fact that you have continued to challenge it when other members have patiently explained to you why your post is unhelpful, and when challenged it and quoted it when I in a moderator role with red text has explained the same to you, however is poor etiquette with the latter being against the rules. Yes, if a moderator says "stop" then it means one is expected to stop.

theforgotten0007 said:

So unless otherwise stated in the rules of the forum, members are free to rehash old discussions e.g. How many times have the Taiwan contingency thread repeated old talking points? How often have members speculated on J-20 estimates only to end up being so far off their initial hypothesis? Feel free to point out if I got THIS PART wrong.

The fact that you're a moderator speaks NOTHING to the value new members can add to the discussion. It's also not as if you're above allowing members to derail threads harmlessly or otherwise, evidenced here so the hypocrisy is telling. If a new account is all it takes to expose your double standards then I think it's time well spent.

So I ask again, is there a reason why you've advocated to police future discussions?

Click to expand...

It is in the rules that users are expected to accept the instructions of moderators, and I've given you two opportunities now to back off and let it go.
Yes, it means that moderators by virtue of experience and by virtue of their common sense and good judgement, are expected to have a sense for when a discussion can sufficiently be derailed in a given thread to intervene and say "let's not talk about this" and to block off an avenue of discussion.
I've been here a while, I've seen enough threads get derailed to know what can result in a page or so of temporarily off topic discussion and what has the potential to lead to a multipage long emotive argument.

====

I've deleted posts above regarding the resurrection of that RCS study discussion.
To everyone, please exercise some common sense. If a member (and especially a moderator) gives a signal that perhaps a particular post or line of discussion is not worth re-pursuing, take a step back and maybe consider if they have a good reason for it instead of immediately becoming combative and oppositional.

Taiwan not including j-20 in daily monitoring does not necessarily indicate Taiwan did not observe j-20 to whatever degree they may or may not have.

I think the plaaf and CPC is too smart to believe and operate that way (how the GT article is implying) and even if they have certainty in the low observability of the j-20, it wouldn't be something the CPC and plaaf assumed without caution. Retractable luneberg lens have something to do with it all but if plaaf is secure enough to fly j-20 with LL retracted, it is hopefully doing so with a well known control and full knowledge of adversary intelligence on the matter.

HeroOftheFerelden said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

From this report, when the 8th started their conversion to J-20, the 9th transferred one of their Gold Dart winning pilots, vice commander of their own brigade, 2 teams of ground crew to the 8th.

Basically, it has been the same story everywhere, like the 98th transferred several experienced pilots to the 99th for the J-16 conversion.

Click to expand...

Yes, that sort of inter unit support is very much sensible and appropriate.

Though what I was describing was something more like the USAF Weapons School -- an institutionalized way in which all units send their annual best pilots and crew for further subspeciality training and courses and to return to their home unit afterwards to teach and apply what they can learn, enabling better service wide dissemination of knowledge and competency.

ougoah said:

Taiwan not including j-20 in daily monitoring does not necessarily indicate Taiwan did not observe j-20 to whatever degree they may or may not have.

I think the plaaf and CPC is too smart to believe and operate that way (how the GT article is implying) and even if they have certainty in the low observability of the j-20, it wouldn't be something the CPC and plaaf assumed without caution. Retractable luneberg lens have something to do with it all but if plaaf is secure enough to fly j-20 with LL retracted, it is hopefully doing so with a well known control and full knowledge of adversary intelligence on the matter.

Click to expand...

Relax...it's just Taiwan..

Blitzo said:

Frankly that's a bit odd, because while I can understand the importance of having some more elite and experienced units, concentrating high end competence like that isn't really that wise at a military level.

What you really want to do is to distribute your highly competent individuals among different units, and send them periodically to a high yield intensive training course so they can return to their unit and teach the fruits of learning to their peers.

I suspect part of the video's description of the brigade is to partly ham it up a bit to make it seem "special" because for the general public the idea of a more "elite" brigade seems more appealing.

Click to expand...

That might be beneficial when you are actually engaged in live combat against a peer or near-peer where combat attrition and replacements is a major factor, in the peacetime, there is a lot of value in getting your best and brightest together so they can challenge and inspire each other.

The purpose of these elite units is more to help write the playbook and develop new tactics and strategies rather than to just have one super elite unit of ‘aces’. These units are basically going to be the instructors of the Chinese Top Gun, where they will play opfor against regular PLAAF and PLANAF regiments to kick their butts and then show them how it was done.

ougoah said:

Taiwan not including j-20 in daily monitoring does not necessarily indicate Taiwan did not observe j-20 to whatever degree they may or may not have.

I think the plaaf and CPC is too smart to believe and operate that way (how the GT article is implying) and even if they have certainty in the low observability of the j-20, it wouldn't be something the CPC and plaaf assumed without caution. Retractable luneberg lens have something to do with it all but if plaaf is secure enough to fly j-20 with LL retracted, it is hopefully doing so with a well known control and full knowledge of adversary intelligence on the matter.

Click to expand...

Of course you can detect even stealth aircraft on radar. The question is how close and whether the signal is lost in the background noise. As per ShiLao’s podcast most of Taiwan’s groundbased radar (bar PAVE PAWS) are very old, some of which were purchased during the 1970s. For them to not have a clear picture of enemy assets is perfectly normal.