Divine eagle? Again, the PLAAF developed a VLRAAM for a reason. If you have a VLRAAM it makes more sense for your stealth fighters to hang back and interdict adversarial bogeys going after your assets.
Operational use of LR-AAMs in aerial combat - Interceptor role
- Thread starter Air Force Brat
- Start date
My reply to you wasn't to disagree with you, and nowhere in my post did I say you claimed air superiority would not be a function of J-20. Instead, my reply was to complement your post...
Not every reply that people make to one another is to disagree with one another, sometimes it's just to smooth out some of the edges of the topic or elaborate on some of the nuances of the topic.
In this case, I'm elaborating on some of the nuance behind the anti-force multiplier role of J-20 that has been often discussed, not necessarily to disagree with you, but rather to write this out for the benefit of others and for the sake of general discussion.
I believe that having the PL-X for 4th generation aircraft adds a lot of flexibility to the way in which the Air Force is able to conduct anti force multiplier operations.
I think J-20s will still have a role in anti force multiplier operations, but it means they will likely have a more diverse array of responsibilities.
Instead of having J-20s to get in to within PL-15 range of opposing AEW&C or tankers, they can also operate at greater distances, using a combination of their passive and active sensors in conjunction with more distant/backline friendly AEW&C/ELINT where 4th gen fighters with PL-X would also operate and receive an array of targeting info from J-20s, AEW&C, ELINT aircraft, and launch PL-Xs from over 300km away.
That allows the J-20s to operate at a "distance" where they can fulfill their general air superiority role, as well as supporting anti force multiplier operations where the actual missiles being fired are from 4th gen fighters, but also at a distance where they can get in closer to opposing force multipliers if the situation or target arises.
I would say the lack of modern missiles on the J-20 is actually more of a limiter than the J-20's engines. The interceptor missiles the PLA developed, for instance, do not fit in the J-20's bays. Likewise, the PL-ASR is last-generation and will be outclassed by US agile kinetic kill missiles once they come out.
My point about the J-20 being forced to a more conventional air superiority duty is about the US anti-missiles. Once they become mature, in a couple of years, the interceptor function is out, and the J-20 now must expect to brute force its way through the opposition.
My point about the J-20 being forced to a more conventional air superiority duty is about the US anti-missiles. Once they become mature, in a couple of years, the interceptor function is out, and the J-20 now must expect to brute force its way through the opposition.
Pardon, but "no modern missiles" ???? What's about the PL-10 ?? The latest PL-12-based PL-15 (aka cropped fins PL-12) ?? and YES, this mega-monster LR-AAM does not fit, but it won't fit into the F-22 either; upps ... I forgot, the USAF does not even have such a system.
He is obviously putting way too much weight into these things, as if they were some kind of silver bullet against missiles. If they even work they will just be another tool in the arsenal, much less having some kind of magical ability to shut down interception missions.
But you just explained that the statement could refer to any number of years. Hence, removing any worthwhile information from the post.
Well, it leaves us to judge for ourselves what "not a long time" means, doesn't it?
I mean, if you're trying to suggest that the options are "WS-10IPE" vs "no useful information," then is your first option not indirectly making an interpretation of what "not a long time" means as well?
And my last post 4578 wasn't to suggest that the statement lacked worthwhile information, but rather that the statement needs to interpreted with some sensible sort of time span in mind, with that being the subject of debate.
Thing is, AEW&C can detect the J-20 at 300-400km. If we assume the E-2D Hawkeye has 600-800km detection range vs 0 dbsm, and the J-20 has -10 dbsm in UHF frequencies, then it can be detected at 300-400km ranges. Assuming that a derivative of the PLAAF's interceptor missile is readied for the J-20, how many missiles can the J-20 carry? And considering the bulk and weight of the interceptor missile, how many anti-missiles can the OPFOR carry in return?
Meteor, for instance, sports a 300+ km range and weighs 185 kg. The PL-ASR, on the other hand, weighs about 90 kg. This implies that for a single interceptor missile, the opponent can launch 2 anti-missiles, and what's more, if the opponent keeps 4th generation aircraft as escorts for their AEW&C, the defensive payload can easily hit 64 or more per AEW&C.
Meteor, for instance, sports a 300+ km range and weighs 185 kg. The PL-ASR, on the other hand, weighs about 90 kg. This implies that for a single interceptor missile, the opponent can launch 2 anti-missiles, and what's more, if the opponent keeps 4th generation aircraft as escorts for their AEW&C, the defensive payload can easily hit 64 or more per AEW&C.
As with many of these hypothetical tactical encounters that you described over on CDF in the past, I think this one in particular has an issue where your conclusion is dependent on some rather questionable premises of capability that I think many would raise their eyebrows at.
Some being like E-2D's effective tracking range, or even the viability of an anti-missile to intercept one's AAM in the first place.
The "PL-ASR" refers to the PL-10 as far as I can locate on the internet, so unless you provide a link I have no idea which missile you are referring to. As for how many of your hypervaunted antimissile missiles OPFOR can carry, that's that many missiles that they won't be carrying to shoot down your fighters. Before you start speculating about "64 or more" of these you need to provide sources for your claims.