J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
plawolf said:
In reality, it will probably be the other way around in terms of numbers.

When you are defending, especially so against stealth opponents, you cannot deploy and redeploy your own forces according to the disposition and movement of the enemy forces, since you won't be able to detect the enemy forces at far enough ranges to know where they will strike until the last moment.

You will need to balance the number of fighters you have available against the number of assets you have that need to be protected. So, just how many F35s can the USAF afford to assign as escorts for each AWACS and tanker? Unless we are talking about a war tomorrow, with just the J20 prototypes being rushed into service, I really cannot see any scenario where the USAF can routinely field an escort of F35s 3-4 times the size of the largest J20 strike package the PLAAF can easily pull together for each and every AWACS or tanker.

That is why it is so important to seize the initiative and go on the offensive. If you are forced into adopting a defensive posture and tactic against an enemy using 5th gens, you have as good as lost half the battle before a single shot has been fired.
Click to expand...
At the same time though more F-35s are expected to be in service than J-20.
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Inst said:
You're comparing American production practices to Chinese production practices. The Chinese don't do technical demonstrators and production models tend not to exhibit significant changes from the prototype. Compare the J-10 to the J-10A; most people don't make a distinction between the first tranche and the J-10A variants.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? Please go look at some pictures of the J10 prototypes and compare them to production models and tell me you cannot see the difference.

As far as aggressive maneuverability requirements goes, on the J-31; note the lack of canards, lerxes, and TVC. It's not even determined yet that the J-31 will use body lift; sans body lift, the J-31 will have significantly inferior performance in comparison to the F-35 due to a lack of lifting area.
Click to expand...

Circular reasoning and baseless assumptions.

As far as the engine goes; you assume that past trends will continue indefinitely unless there's any evidence otherwise. Chinese engine development has been consistently a weakness; the WS-15 has been in the pipeline for way too long, and there's no definitive evidence that a mature 150+kn engine, whether with 1000 hours MTBF or 10,000 hours MTBF is nearing completion.
Click to expand...

Purely logical fallacies.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Inst said:
As far as aggressive maneuverability requirements goes, on the J-31; note the lack of canards, lerxes, and TVC. It's not even determined yet that the J-31 will use body lift; sans body lift, the J-31 will have significantly inferior performance in comparison to the F-35 due to a lack of lifting area.
Click to expand...

You've got to be kidding me... At least make sure you know what you are talking about before making comments like these.
 
N

no_name

Colonel
The LERX don't have to be big enough like the JF-17s or F-18s before it qualifies as one. And J-31 has them if one look carefully at the picture shot of its bottom.

Also, if J-31 don't have good lift capability, it wouldn't make it as a carrier based fighter candidate. Observers present at it's first flight commented that it has good lift for short take off.
 
ladioussupp

ladioussupp

Junior Member
As 2002 changed its nose to fit in AESA radar, is it possible for J-20 having side looking arrays just as planned APG-77 option on F-22?
 
P

Player99

Junior Member
ladioussupp said:
As 2002 changed its nose to fit in AESA radar, is it possible for J-20 having side looking arrays just as planned APG-77 option on F-22?
Click to expand...

Not sure about that, but we have recently seen a video clip (I think I posted the link in this thread some days ago) that indicates that the aircraft has what's called "electro- optical, synthetic-aperture radar" on the sides...
 
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
no_name said:
The LERX don't have to be big enough like the JF-17s or F-18s before it qualifies as one. And J-31 has them if one look carefully at the picture shot of its bottom.

Also, if J-31 don't have good lift capability, it wouldn't make it as a carrier based fighter candidate. Observers present at it's first flight commented that it has good lift for short take off.
Click to expand...

If you want a good LERX design for vortex generation it must be long and sharp, in example Su-27, F-16 or F-18.

F-22 and F-35 also generate vortices with their chines.

However the reality is the main reason F-22 is so good in agility is TVC nozzles and no external weapons.
Without TVC nozzles and carrying external weapons F-22 won`t beat an Eurofighter or Rafale specially if they have HMS and IRS-T missiles.

TVC nozzles increase turn, pitch and roll rates on F-22 and internal weapons reduce drag
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
no_name said:
The LERX don't have to be big enough like the JF-17s or F-18s before it qualifies as one. And J-31 has them if one look carefully at the picture shot of its bottom.

Also, if J-31 don't have good lift capability, it wouldn't make it as a carrier based fighter candidate. Observers present at it's first flight commented that it has good lift for short take off.
Click to expand...

You're quite right again no-name, the J-31 has lots of wing, plenty of flaps and leading edge devices, it will turn quite handilly, and should be effective air to air against any thing other than the T-50 or Raptor, and with larger engines, those caveats will be greatly reduced. Fine reasoning gentlemen, some of the suppositions aren't quite accurate, but overall a nice thread of reasonable conversation, the J-31 will do well and may end up in LRIP before the J-20?
 
ladioussupp

ladioussupp

Junior Member
Player99 said:
Not sure about that, but we have recently seen a video clip (I think I posted the link in this thread some days ago) that indicates that the aircraft has what's called "electro- optical, synthetic-aperture radar" on the sides...
Click to expand...

Do you mean EODAS, "electro-optical distributed aperture system"? However, EODAS is not comparable with side looking radar antenna.

Stimulated by emerging J-20 and J-31, is it possible to resume the cancelled APG-77 option on F-22 middle life upgrade? As known, side looking radars help to provide middle course guidance data to AAM on the way while keep launch aircraft flying about a right angle against the AAM. Side looking antennas also help in other ways for air-to-air duel. So it may be an important feature for future air dominance fighter, no matters J-20 or F-22.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top