Operational use of LR-AAMs in aerial combat - Interceptor role

Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
weig2000 said:
Is the above a question or a definite statement expressing a strong opinion? I'm confused by the multiple questions marks.
Click to expand...

My point is that the J-20's will be based at a very specific airfield, if their target is a tanker or formation of tankers??? they will be coming from that airfield to the target area, and as Terran noted those tankers will be "standing off", so their vector will be somewhat predictable.

Those question marks are kind of a "pregnant pause" to encourage people to ask the simple questions, and take some time to come to an accurate, logical conclusion?? hopefully we can all arrive at the objective truth, even if we have to change our mind.

My point was that although those tankers/AWACs are no doubt a vulnerability, we've taken considerations to protect them? that's all
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Blackstone said:
Do the F-22 and F-35 also carry thousands of gallons JP5 too?
Click to expand...

yes, they do if they are carrying aux tanks, and in spite of the increased RCS, those tanks will take you way back in the sticks?? hopefully you'll have enough internal fuel to get you back to the "highway"?
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Blackstone said:
And what happens when the air tankers carrying JP8 fail to meet the F-22 and 35 on their way back to base? Do they have buddy tanks to transfer fumes to each other?
Click to expand...
Like I said Conventional tankers would hang back in less contested Airspace and there are a number of Buddy options.
Turning that on it's head The US is working on a Stealth Tanker concept. Given the PLA limited Tankers and limitations and the fact we know they are looking into atleast 1 stealthy bomber possibly 2 and both the US and Chinese have from time to converted bombers into Tanker types. This makes me wonder if we could see a Tanker bomber type I mean the floating regional "JH18" concept
JH18 concept.jpg
could trade internal weapons for fuel and given the Chinese Probe and Drogue system could be employed from wing tips.
 
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
Air Force Brat said:
yes, they do if they are carrying aux tanks, and in spite of the increased RCS, those tanks will take you way back in the sticks?? hopefully you'll have enough internal fuel to get you back to the "highway"?
Click to expand...
And what happens when some slippery J-20s get in the rear echelon and send supporting air tanker(s) to Davie Jones' locker? I'm not saying the J-20s could actually do that, because I'm confident of US countermeasures, but for the sake of discussion, let's say one or two of them didn't get shot down on their way to the air tankers?
 
I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
Inst said:
About J-20 interception capabilities; the US is working on anti-missile missiles. Once they come online, the J-20 better be prepared for a more conventional air superiority role, probably using micro-missiles for WVR.
Click to expand...
The J-20 will be less effective in air superiority with its current engine setup and IMO is probably going to primarily used against AWACS and tankers. Even after it gets its WS-15 engines, targeting AWACS and tankers will be a high priority mission for the J-20. They would really be the only PLAAF fighters that could conceivably succeed in this role, or would at the very least be the primary forward sensor platform for a non-stealthy missile truck.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Iron Man said:
The J-20 will be less effective in air superiority with its current engine setup and IMO is probably going to primarily used against AWACS and tankers. Even after it gets its WS-15 engines, targeting AWACS and tankers will be a high priority mission for the J-20. They would really be the only PLAAF fighters that could conceivably succeed in this role, or would at the very least be the primary forward sensor platform for a non-stealthy missile truck.
Click to expand...
Why use the J-20 as a primary sensor platform when you have AWACS and drones?
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Iron Man said:
The J-20 will be less effective in air superiority with its current engine setup and IMO is probably going to primarily used against AWACS and tankers. Even after it gets its WS-15 engines, targeting AWACS and tankers will be a high priority mission for the J-20. They would really be the only PLAAF fighters that could conceivably succeed in this role, or would at the very least be the primary forward sensor platform for a non-stealthy missile truck.
Click to expand...

Beyond being used as a long range anti-force multiplier role and beyond being a stealthy forward sensor platform, I think there's no reason why it can't act as a general air superiority aircraft in its current role where it leverages its combination of stealth, long endurance and avionics to nail opposing fighter aircraft as well, even if they are not opposing 5th generation aircraft.

And even with the current less than optimal engine set up, I imagine J-20As would still be the air force's most capable overall air superiority platform against all potential opposing fighter aircraft whether they're 4th or 5th generation.


The question is about where the deployment of J-20A (or WS-15 equipped J-20) would be most cost effective, and in that regard I agree that it would make sense that targeting the opposing side's force multipliers would be a significant mission of theirs, but probably only one significant mission among a number of other significant missions, and also it won't necessarily be that much more or less of a mission for them than targeting Chinese force multipliers would be a mission for US 5th generation fighters during a conflict as well.


The discussion about J-20A's role as an anti-force multiplier platform I think is often framed too much in regards to preconceptions about its capabilities that have been put forward by English speaking defence media, which leads to an incorrect conclusion where its role is limited by its capabilities IMO -- instead, I think the discussion about J-20A's role as an anti-force multiplier platform should be discussed within the context of force structure and the number of J-20As in service when a hypothetical conflict occurs. For example, I can envision that when only one combat capable unit of J-20As are in service that the air force would use them heavily in the most cost effective way they can, like to try and destroy opposing force multipliers. But when many more units of J-20As are in service, I imagine only a smaller portion of their sorties would be used for that mission as only a certain number of J-20A sorties would be judged as necessary for completing that mission and in the meanwhile there would be a large number of opposing 5th generation fighters taking on your own 4+ generation fighters which could use some friendly 5th generation support of their own.
 
I

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
Bltizo said:
Beyond being used as a long range anti-force multiplier role and beyond being a stealthy forward sensor platform, I think there's no reason why it can't act as a general air superiority aircraft in its current role where it leverages its combination of stealth, long endurance and avionics to nail opposing fighter aircraft as well, even if they are not opposing 5th generation aircraft.

And even with the current less than optimal engine set up, I imagine J-20As would still be the air force's most capable overall air superiority platform against all potential opposing fighter aircraft whether they're 4th or 5th generation.


The question is about where the deployment of J-20A (or WS-15 equipped J-20) would be most cost effective, and in that regard I agree that it would make sense that targeting the opposing side's force multipliers would be a significant mission of theirs, but probably only one significant mission among a number of other significant missions, and also it won't necessarily be that much more or less of a mission for them than targeting Chinese force multipliers would be a mission for US 5th generation fighters during a conflict as well.


The discussion about J-20A's role as an anti-force multiplier platform I think is often framed too much in regards to preconceptions about its capabilities that have been put forward by English speaking defence media, which leads to an incorrect conclusion where its role is limited by its capabilities IMO -- instead, I think the discussion about J-20A's role as an anti-force multiplier platform should be discussed within the context of force structure and the number of J-20As in service when a hypothetical conflict occurs. For example, I can envision that when only one combat capable unit of J-20As are in service that the air force would use them heavily in the most cost effective way they can, like to try and destroy opposing force multipliers. But when many more units of J-20As are in service, I imagine only a smaller portion of their sorties would be used for that mission as only a certain number of J-20A sorties would be judged as necessary for completing that mission and in the meanwhile there would be a large number of opposing 5th generation fighters taking on your own 4+ generation fighters which could use some friendly 5th generation support of their own.
Click to expand...
Four paragraphs to not disagree with me? And where did I say that air superiority would NOT be a function of the J-20 straight out of the door? I said they would be less effective as air superiority fighters (without their WS-15s), and this is unambiguously and inarguably the case. Yes, in their current state they would still smoke 4th generation fighters and give the F-22 a run for its money. But really, a squadron of J-20s with AL-31s vs a squadron of F-22s would see the J-20s get smoked; they probably don't have the same eyes, they probably don't have the same reach, and they definitely don't have the same muscle. Would the PLAAF use the J-20 in its current state against the F-22? Probably, but IMO it would much more preferentially use them to penetrate fighter defense screens to attack AWACS and tanker aircraft, which would in turn make all of the USAF and USN's fighters far less effective, including the F-22, especially given its current strength of numbers, something you concluded yourself. Using a "smaller portion" of the J-20 fleet against AWACS/tankers is a self-evident point if and when you build up to a total force of hundreds of J-20s; who in their right mind would expect the entirety of these J-20 forces to be arrayed against AWACS and tankers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top