They are committing themselves to a very expensive fleet if they don't add a lower end component to their fleet. J-20 is likely an extremely expensive aircraft, and the added expense only increases capabilities For certain missions. For other missions the cost adds nothing and only puts investment at risk.
New single engine stealth fighter by chengdu?
- Thread starter Richard Santos
- Start date
They are committing themselves to a very expensive fleet if they don't add a lower end component to their fleet. J-20 is likely an extremely expensive aircraft, and the added expense only increases capabilities For certain missions. For other missions the cost adds nothing and only puts investment at risk.
Lethe
Captain
In the near-term J-10 will remain in production, and it will remain in service for at least the next 20 years.
In the 2030s and beyond it is an open question as to whether, within Chinese airspace, light combat aircraft will even be needed on the one hand (advancement in IADS capabilities and coverage densities coupled with further pushing out of the "bubble" within which China expects and desires to operate), and on the other whether even an F-35-sized aircraft is able to fully exploit the technologies of the era, i.e. directed-energy weapons.
It is widely acknowledged that China has no use for a J-7 class aircraft, nor even a JF-17 class aircraft. It is also widely acknowledged that any successor to J-10 is likely to be larger than J-10. The general trend towards larger aircraft is also widely acknowledged. What I am suggesting, therefore, is merely a modest acceleration of processes already in evidence, where this acceleration reflects the fact that we are talking about an aircraft of the future (with basic design characteristics likely finalised some twenty years after F-35) and in the context of China already having a highly capable light aircraft in hand that will remain relevant over the near- and medium-term.
The need for a new VLO aircraft larger than J-20 (to carry a greater quantity and variety of A2G munitions and replace JH-7/J-16) is readily apparent. The need for a new VLO aircraft smaller than J-20 is not, and indeed the prospects for such an aircraft would seem to be tied largely to the desire for a STOVL and/or carrier-based aircraft if J-20 cannot be adapted to the task.
In the 2030s and beyond it is an open question as to whether, within Chinese airspace, light combat aircraft will even be needed on the one hand (advancement in IADS capabilities and coverage densities coupled with further pushing out of the "bubble" within which China expects and desires to operate), and on the other whether even an F-35-sized aircraft is able to fully exploit the technologies of the era, i.e. directed-energy weapons.
It is widely acknowledged that China has no use for a J-7 class aircraft, nor even a JF-17 class aircraft. It is also widely acknowledged that any successor to J-10 is likely to be larger than J-10. The general trend towards larger aircraft is also widely acknowledged. What I am suggesting, therefore, is merely a modest acceleration of processes already in evidence, where this acceleration reflects the fact that we are talking about an aircraft of the future (with basic design characteristics likely finalised some twenty years after F-35) and in the context of China already having a highly capable light aircraft in hand that will remain relevant over the near- and medium-term.
The need for a new VLO aircraft larger than J-20 (to carry a greater quantity and variety of A2G munitions and replace JH-7/J-16) is readily apparent. The need for a new VLO aircraft smaller than J-20 is not, and indeed the prospects for such an aircraft would seem to be tied largely to the desire for a STOVL and/or carrier-based aircraft if J-20 cannot be adapted to the task.
Last edited:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
You always need a very light bird for combat training and in the case of fifth gen fighters those trainers are more critical. If you haven't already noticed none of the existing fifth generation fighters have two seaters no F22, F35, T50, J20, JF31 are currently in the trainer configuration. Although PAKFA is planned to and the Israelis want a F35 two seater today the only multi seat stealth are bombers and black Helicopters. Light weight trainers with comparable avionics are must for stealth users.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Well I think it's a bit early to talk about a J10 successor, but if we are talking about High and low mix the most obvious should be J20 High then FC31 low. I know some don't like FC31 but it's there and in a lower priority status just like one would expect of a follow on, and could leverage technology from J20.
No one in his right mind would want a STOVL combat aircraft except the US Marines and RN because of the inadequate flattops they need to use: no traps and no cats or ski ramps. That's politics, not technology.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
And the Spanish, and the Italians, and for a time the Russians. Basically Delft your argument is wrong.
The Advantage of Vstol fighters is that for far cheaper than the cost of a full CV you can get a CV type capacity.
The Spanish know this.
they moved off of them by choice ( budget mostly but choice). When they order the Queen elizabeth class they had the option of cats and traps, They could have bought F35C or Super Hornets or even Rafale's they chose not to.
As for the USMC it was also a choice, they added the Harrier. The USN has full CVN's. The LHD and LHA types were operating helicopters they chose to add the Harrier because they saw an advantage and they see F35 has a step up from the harrier.
The Russians only in the last 30 years had a carrier with traps, before that they used the Yak 38
Take a good look, a Vstol fighter, The Harriers Russian cousin. 
And They also created a short lived supersonic V/Stol type even as they were reading the Kuznetsov.Look around the Globe Delft, All those helicopter carriers, Canberra class, Mistral class, Izumo, Hyuga, Dokdo, even the HTMS Chakri Naruebet could be a carrier by adding a Vstol fighter. The only reason it doesn't happen is mostly budget. You say no one in there right mind, you politics not technology. I say that although ramps, Cats and traps allow you to pack on more weapons the ability to take off and land under your own power without fear of catching a wire, or said wire breaking ( happens ) is far safer.
Erm, nothing personal, but main pursuer and operator of Harrier force(and, by the way, of F-35B) in UK was Royal airforce.
For WW3 reasons.
