Why? as a rough estimate from 2020 it is not that far off. The number of J-10s is IMO higher today as the number of J-16 and most likely J-20 too, but again for 2020 it is not that "deadly wrong" IMO?
Why do you think so?
PLA Air Force news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Why? as a rough estimate from 2020 it is not that far off. The number of J-10s is IMO higher today as the number of J-16 and most likely J-20 too, but again for 2020 it is not that "deadly wrong" IMO?
Why do you think so?
My estimates:
J-10 x 500-550
Su-27/J-11 x 330-500 (most likely around 350 but I saw claims that up to 450 J-11s were produced)
Su-30 x 76-100
Su-35 x 23 (one crashed)
J-15 x 40-50
J-16 x 180-210
J-20 x 70-90
Is this close to your estimates guys?
Su-30 closer to 100, though a number (~3?) were lost to accidents
No Su-35S were lost yet, I believe
J-20 estimate seems excessive. Also, no Su-35 was ever lost.
I thought about this and my guess would be it's something to do with:
First part of the whole SSPS program is to establish a stratospheric solar power station, to come on line in 2025. The facility in Chongqing is part of it. This could be other half of the program where the airship is actually being built.
There is another number coming from JDM white paper of 2020, which the number is from 2019. JDM thinks the number of J20 only +2 after a whole year. What I mean is if Japan thinks China is an enemy, They may need to count more about these numbers to be well prepared. That mind of thinking is "deadly" when things happen. It's just my opinion.
I agree that it is the number of J-10s (specifically, likely J-10Cs), J-16s and J-20s that they are getting wrong and undercounting, which is not unexpected because it's difficult for them to follow the latest numbers.
But at the same time, those three types -- J-10C, J-16, J-20 -- are also easily the most capable aircraft that the PLAAF have in service, and so undercounting those types by whatever percentage that they are, could be fairly said to be "concerning" for them.
In particular, for J-20, the idea of there being 24 J-20s in service is of course very different to the more recent numbers that we got evidence for (specifically the number of aircraft in 9th brigade as indicated by 622xx serial)....
Given the importance of J-20 as a 5th generation fighter, undercounting of J-20s (if the true number is say, 40, or 50, or especially if it's more say up to 60 at present, or more?) then estimates of 24 J-20s certainly would be wrong and potentially a deadly underestimate.
At the end of the day, I expect military forces to be more prudent with their estimates than us -- the fact that they give specific numbers instead of not even giving a "range" of in service aircraft, is a bit silly IMO.
Lethe
Captain
If these numbers are from a public document, then listing a range of figures is to admit that your intelligence services are less than omnipotent.
The difference is that this paper I think is focusing more on combat ready aircraft. You're more referring to air frames made. A lot of the J-20 production happened pretty recently back in 2020 so maybe a large number of them weren't combat ready.
Western standards of combat ready are also much higher so that's probably how this Japanese paper is getting this number.