J-20... The New Generation Fighter

Status
Not open for further replies.

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
First of all no way could that airframe be that of a fighter.

Second of all why would Europe create a counter measure to the J-20?

Off Topic:
No agenda here, I was just trying to continue along the same vein as Subedei's post.(see below) However I thought that the "Taranis" by its description could provide some sort of answer, especially if several variants were to evolve over time

"Originally Posted by Subedei
I'm quite excited!

When this platform is fully operational -and, I'm betting that will be in 5 short years, and not 8 long years, it will be the first time in almost 3 centuries that a major Chinese miliatry platform is either technologically equal, or surperior to, those of European nations. With the budgetary constraints currently limiting European military spending, I doubt that either Saab, Dassault, or: Alenia Aeronautica; BAE Systems; and EADS (together as Eurofighter), or even ALL of these together, will be able to develop -and produce- an aircraft at the levels of sophistication that the USA, Russia, and now China, are now putting into production."
 

KYli

Brigadier
What China's Stealth Fighter Means

Jan 7, 2011

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



By David Fulghum, Bill Sweetman, Robert Wall
Washington, Washington, London

With the surprise rollout and high-speed taxi tests of China’s newest J-20 fighter, a stealth prototype, the U.S. Navy’s top intelligence official admits that the Pentagon has erred in its estimates of the speed with which Beijing is introducing new military technology.

The aircraft’s existence was not a surprise to the intelligence community, but “one of the things that is . . . true is that we have been pretty consistent in underestimating the delivery and initial operational capability of Chinese technology weapons systems,” says Vice Admiral David J. Dorsett, deputy chief of naval operations for information dominance and director of naval intelligence. Two recent examples of misanalyses have been the J-20 fighter and the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (AW&ST Jan. 3, p. 18). Moreover, there is evidence that China’s advances include high-performance engines and missiles that display a new level of technical maturity and performance.

“In terms of the [J-20] stealth photos, it’s not clear to me when it’s going to become operational,” Dorsett says. “Do we need to refine our assessments better? I think so.”

Other Washington-based intelligence officials say they are watching the J-20’s testing with interest. “They have done several high-speed taxis with the nosewheel off the ground,” says another veteran analyst. “They could still be working out some kinks before they try an actual first flight.”

There also are a lot of unknowns about the aircraft’s real importance.

“Operational impact is a tough call to make at this point, given that this plane, even if it flies, is not going to be a full-up fifth-gen [aircraft],” the analyst says. “In essence, this is going to be a novelty for the next decade before it starts to roll off the series production lines and gets to the line units in any numbers that would impact any of our mission planning. A lot of things can happen, good and bad, between now and then to either speed this up or severely put the brakes on things.

“As far as radar cross section goes, this is not [a Lockheed Martin] F-22, nor should we be thinking that they are going for low RCS right out of the chute,” he says. “We have to keep in mind that this is the first attempt and it’s also the very first prototype of that first attempt. There’s a lot of tweaking . . . before they get to the final version. I see too many people . . . making sweeping assessments. That has always been a mistake.”

Engines have been an Achilles’ heel for Chinese high-performance aircraft. The Chinese have not produced an indigenous engine that has the performance they need for a world-class fighter. Under earlier military doctrine, which favored mass over advanced technology, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force was equipped with adapted versions of 1950s-era Soviet aircraft designs using old-technology engines. Analysts offer different assessments of China’s first high-performance engine, the Shenyang WS-10; but recent images of the J-11B fighter—China’s bootleg version of the Sukhoi Su-30—appear to show a nozzle design that differs visibly from the Russian AL-31F and resembles that of WS-10 engines displayed at air shows.

Dorsett downplays the immediate impact of the new fighter and new anti-ship missile.

“I’m more worried about Chinese game-changing capabilities in nonkinetic [areas such as information dominance, network invasion and electronic warfare],” he says. “I am most concerned about China’s focus on trying to develop [the ability] to dominate the electromagnetic spectrum, to counter space capabilities and to conduct cyberactivities.


“The other concern I have is China’s ability to become operationally efficient in a sophisticated, complex, joint war-fighting environment,” Dorsett says. “I don’t see China with those capabilities now. I do see them delivering individual components and weapon systems [such as the J-20 and DF-21D], but until they acquire proficiency [with them], how competent are they really going to be?” The Chinese military’s self-proclaimed timeline is mid-century, Dorsett notes. In that context, he denies that the Pentagon is overestimating its threat.

“I’m not alarmed,” Dorsett says. “I am intrigued by developments and am quite interested in the quantities and different types of technologies that we didn’t expect or overestimated.”

There is a marked relationship between China’s booming economy and its military buildup, he points out. But there are equally obvious shortfalls.

“The Chinese don’t have a great integrated ISR capability or an anti-submarine capability at all,” Dorsett says. “They don’t demonstrate a sophisticated level in joint warfighting. They are at the early stages of operational proficiency across the board. What would be dangerous is underestimating the timeline of synchronizing these various elements.”

Dorsett returned to the unexpected appearance of the J-20.

“How far along are they?” he asks. “I don’t know. They clearly have an initial prototype. Is it advanced and how many trials, tests and demos do they have to go through before it becomes operational? That’s not clear to me.”

However, the evidence of the design’s sophistication is mounting. The J-20 is supposed to carry new weaponry with some of it tucked away internally. China is continuing an effort to expand the military’s air-to-air missile inventory. Although Avic officials have not discussed what comes after the PL-12A radar-guided medium-range missile, new information suggests that work is progressing on several enhanced versions. These include a combined solid-motor, ramjet-powered PL-21. The missile, with a single inlet for the ramjet, may have undergone ground tests last year.

Work may be slightly more advanced on the PL-12D, a ramjet upgrade of the basic PL-12 with more modest changes to the airframe and less endgame maneuverability than the PL-21 would feature. *Chinese industry also appears to be working on the PL-12C with smaller aft control fins for internal carriage on the J-20. The mid-body fins are believed to be similar to the basic PL-12 and PL-12B with improved electronic counter-countermeasures.

The close-in battle would use the PL-10, whose design may resemble South Africa’s Denel A-Darter. China’s ability to increasingly use standoff weapons, also in air-to-ground and anti-ship missile roles, is already affecting planning among potential adversaries. Japanese military officials are *showing interest in missiles with greater ranges to be able to engage Chinese threats earlier, and there are discussions in the U.S. about the need for weapons with greater engagement *capability.

Dorsett also expanded on earlier remarks about the DF-21D missile by U.S. Navy officials.

unknowns] about how proficient they would need to be to fully deploy it at this point.”

Meanwhile, the Navy has changed its assessment of the DF-21’s ability to threaten a ship. Until now, the service has essentially rated as “poor” the possibility of China’s hitting an aircraft carrier with a ballistic missile.

“The technology that the Chinese have developed and are employing in the DF-21 system has increased their probability of hitting a maneuvering target with a salvo of several missiles,” Dorsett says. “What that probability is, we don’t know. I’m assessing that they don’t know. To our knowledge they haven’t test-fired this over water against a maneuvering target.”

That leaves Dorsett with the problem of improving intelligence-gathering to make the Pentagon’s predictions more reliable.

“One area we haven’t made much progress on was processing, exploiting and disseminating [data],” he says. “It’s high on our list for the upcoming year. We’re tackling imagery exploitation first. I think an awful lot can be automated. You don’t need to look at every piece of electro-optical imagery. You need tools that alert you to key issues.”
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Off Topic:
No agenda here, I was just trying to continue along the same vein as Subedei's post.(see below) However I thought that the "Taranis" by its description could provide some sort of answer, especially if several variants were to evolve over time

"Originally Posted by Subedei
I'm quite excited!

When this platform is fully operational -and, I'm betting that will be in 5 short years, and not 8 long years, it will be the first time in almost 3 centuries that a major Chinese miliatry platform is either technologically equal, or surperior to, those of European nations. With the budgetary constraints currently limiting European military spending, I doubt that either Saab, Dassault, or: Alenia Aeronautica; BAE Systems; and EADS (together as Eurofighter), or even ALL of these together, will be able to develop -and produce- an aircraft at the levels of sophistication that the USA, Russia, and now China, are now putting into production."

So... you were effectively disagreeing with what Subedei was saying? Just come out with it...

Also, a UCAV like the Taranis isn't necessarily more advanced, and definitely less capable than a fully fledged 5th generation fighter (I know I'm comparing apples and oranges here, but the statement is generally true. If I had the money, I'd rather have a squadron of F-22s rather than a equivalent value of X-47Bs). And just for the record China has a similar UCAV project going on as well.
 
Last edited:

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Many didn't even think the J-20 was realistic and impossible for the Chinese until a mere couple weeks ago. Now were suppose to believe that the Europeans were thinking of the J-20 and how to counter it? Love all the desperate contradictions. Chinese inferior technology yet countries were scared enough to plan to counter it years before the fabled J-20 was unveiled.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
So... you were effectively disagreeing with what Subedei was saying? Just come out with it...

Also, a UCAV like the Taranis isn't necessarily more advanced, and definitely less capable than a fully fledged 5th generation fighter (I know I'm comparing apples and oranges here, but the statement is generally true. If I had the money, I'd rather have a squadron of F-22s rather than a equivalent value of X-47Bs). And just for the record China has a similar UCAV project going on as well.

No I dont disagree with Subedei,Europe barring germany is in a financial bind. thats why I suggested that the existing "Taranis" which by its description " Super fast speeds. Incorporating technology that matches the very best the world has to offer and carries offensive weapons ... yada yada, could be used in a manner similar to stealths of the j-20 f22 f35 class et etc.

Using cars as a analogy, during the sixties, the Rover car was often regarded as a poor mans Rolls Royce. Beautifully appointed trim with leather seats. Beautiful to drive it incorporated the latested safety standards that only cars several times in price possesed It was quite as anything, one could hear the clock tick when driving along at 100mph. The queen and other aristocrats often owned one.

BUt you are right a squadron of F22's would be far better, but you could launch the Taranis off small carriers, however in the end what choices do you have if youre broke.
 
Last edited:

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Many didn't even think the J-20 was realistic and impossible for the Chinese until a mere couple weeks ago. Now were suppose to believe that the Europeans were thinking of the J-20 and how to counter it? Love all the desperate contradictions. Chinese inferior technology yet countries were scared enough to plan to counter it years before the fabled J-20 was unveiled.

I think you really need to get the hang of understanding simple statements before sinking into the depths of complex interpretations

The E.U.nor I has ever stated that they were specifically building the Taranis to counter the J-20. That only exists in the figment of your imagination. Lastly if you took the trouble to read up on the Taranis from the link that I provided, you can only conclude that it was not designed to counter the J-20.

 
Last edited:

BAJRANGBAL

New Member
New Tree Climbing Photos and Photographers base near CAC...;)

1294033933_70691.jpg


Anyone in the forum is here?...:confused:

27_136179_3dcc561661232de.jpg


1294373988_89607.jpg


JZ2.jpg


Good job..keep going man..up, up, up...:eek:

1294399625_26593.jpg
 

Geographer

Junior Member
Hehe, we all owe those guys a big Thank You for their pictures that have kept us logging onto SDF a dozen times a day.

:D
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Poor guys they are doing it again today. I'd lol if the J-20 actually flies because hardly anyone is on CD today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top