PLA next/6th generation fighter thread

[Wrought]

What matters for Saudis isn't just mil tech, but actual physical presence and protection - and not just against external opponents. The
US is a security guarantor for much of the middle east.
Until China intervenes in the Middle East the way US and Soviet Union did in the mid-late 1950s(basically throwing UK and France out) - it's a hopeless affair.

You are right about the protection, but that hardly means it's hopeless for Beijing. Providing another source of equipment gives the Saudis leverage, which they are of course happy to use against Washington to get a better deal. And even more US resources going to the Middle East instead of the Pacific is a great deal for China.

 

[Blitzo]

Let's leave the Saudis and effects of J-XD on other export products out of this.

Frankly the export of PRC military equipment is really just a novelty and largely inconsequential to both current PRC geopolitical strategy as well as their domestic MIC efforts.

 

[latenlazy]

Let's leave the Saudis and effects of J-XD on other export products out of this.

Frankly the export of PRC military equipment is really just a novelty and largely inconsequential to both current PRC geopolitical strategy as well as their domestic MIC efforts.

Yeah last thing we need is Chinese miltech overcapacity China should consumption stimulus their own military hardware!

 

[Blitzo]

Yeah last thing we need is Chinese miltech overcapacity China should consumption stimulus their own military hardware!

It's more that "wow Saudi might be Chinese military equipment" is largely uninteresting and unless it is accompanied by a geostrategic shift and/or change in PRC MIC capacity or developmental trajectory, then it isn't something worth anticipating.

A "successful" Chinese export MIC is still largely just a novelty regardless.

 

[AndrewS]

What matters for Saudis isn't just mil tech, but actual physical presence and protection - and not just against external opponents. The
US is a security guarantor for much of the middle east.
Until China intervenes in the Middle East the way US and Soviet Union did in the mid-late 1950s(basically throwing UK and France out) - it's a hopeless affair.

Let's say China and the US get into a military conflict.

It increasingly looks like the US will lose. The countries in the Middle East can see this.

Then what good is a US security guarantee?

This applies to any country that relies on a US security guarantee

 

[SinoAmericanCW]

Let's say China and the US get into a military conflict.

It increasingly looks like the US will lose. The countries in the Middle East can see this.

Then what good is a US security guarantee?

This applies to any country that relies on a US security guarantee

This would only kick in after the U.S. is actually defeated militarily.

Until then, status quo bias will prevail.

 

[leibowitz]

I think its mere existence emerging this soon (later this year or very early next year) is already evidence of a sense of humour.

Everything else is just gratuitous lol

Do you think the UCAV for CCA will be released alongside the 6th-gen, or only the 6th-gen airframe itself?

 

[Blitzo]

Do you think the UCAV for CCA will be released alongside the 6th-gen, or only the 6th-gen airframe itself?

There's no reason why they need to emerge in the same time period. In fact, the development of CCAs/UCAVs should probably be independent of the J-XD, because CCAs/UCAVs should probably be agnostic to which manned platform they operate alongside (i.e.: J-20/As, J-35/As, 4.5th gens should likely all have one degree or another of ability to operate alongside and benefit from CCAs/UCAVs).

 

[Wrought]

Let's say China and the US get into a military conflict.

It increasingly looks like the US will lose. The countries in the Middle East can see this.

Then what good is a US security guarantee?

This applies to any country that relies on a US security guarantee

Even if we assume the US would 100% lose a WestPac conflict (which is not at all certain), a US security guarantee would still be indisputable against anyone who can't project PLA-level force into the Middle East, or Europe, or anywhere besides Chinese near seas. Which is literally everyone, including China, because so many of the PLA's force multipliers only apply close to home.

Now that's not to say a US security guarantee would be worth as much as it was in say, 1999, but worth less is not the same as worthless.

 

[Index]

Let's say China and the US get into a military conflict.

It increasingly looks like the US will lose. The countries in the Middle East can see this.

Then what good is a US security guarantee?

This applies to any country that relies on a US security guarantee

They would still lose/struggle against actors that aren't China.

Saudi currently has both US and China as security guarantors. US was supposed to guarantee on Ansarallah (fail) and Israel (maybe? US can't actually control them well though). While China guarantees for Iran and Ansarallah. Guess which countries are now unable to threaten Saudis. Hint, not the ones US guarantee for.

US has the larger peacetime military. This is helpful sometimes, but it's only 1 method of guaranteeing your country that wouldn't work against anyone.

But as I said just because this relation exists with Saudis doesn't mean it's smart to give them air assets that PLA itself might heavily rely on. Saudis are not a good military nation. There's other weapons we can sell that are also gamechangers for them without being our own gamechangers.