J-20 News thread

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7291
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post05 Oct 2017, 11:43

Who would have thought that China would beat Russia in fielding their version of a 5Gen jet?

http://www.defencetalk.com/chinas-j-20- ... ice-70564/

China’s J-20 fighter jet put into service

China’s latest J-20 stealth fighter has been officially commissioned into military service, according to Wu Qian, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense on Thursday.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2279
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post05 Oct 2017, 17:46

There has to be something to the J-20 (other than the fact it's operational) that gives US pilots pause.

The F-22 driver I spoke to at this year's airshow was FAR more concerned about the J-20 than the SU-57
Offline

flighthawk128

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 163
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2011, 23:25

Unread post05 Oct 2017, 20:37

mixelflick wrote:There has to be something to the J-20 (other than the fact it's operational) that gives US pilots pause.

The F-22 driver I spoke to at this year's airshow was FAR more concerned about the J-20 than the SU-57


Because when China makes something, they tend to make a LOT of it, especially if it's military equipment.

Also, the Russkies are kind of a known factor; NATO's been wargaming using them as OPFOR since the Cold War began. China's a newer and less understood threat.

China also was the one hacking and stealing a lot of info, designs, tech, etc. Who knows what the heck they actually managed to clone and integrate into their systems and how well it all works?
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2279
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post06 Oct 2017, 13:56

His comment was, "China buys a lot of Russian equipment but then modifies it". These "modifications" are what seemed to concern him. I took it to mean air to air missiles vs engines or avionics (which we know they lag in).

I asked if we had anything that could out-stick the PL-15 (or whatever their long range AAM is). He said, "I don't know about that...".

Right... :mrgreen:
Offline

flighthawk128

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 163
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2011, 23:25

Unread post06 Oct 2017, 21:40

mixelflick wrote:His comment was, "China buys a lot of Russian equipment but then modifies it". These "modifications" are what seemed to concern him. I took it to mean air to air missiles vs engines or avionics (which we know they lag in).

I asked if we had anything that could out-stick the PL-15 (or whatever their long range AAM is). He said, "I don't know about that...".

Right... :mrgreen:


That assumes the ChiComms can see any F22s or F35s. American radar has always been miles ahead of Russian designs, and I find it hard to believe the Chinese have caught up in that department. Raptors and Lightning should be able to see any Chinese fighters far earlier than the Chinese fighters should be able to detect F22s or F35s, which gives a significant advantage for Blue Air.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2279
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 16:24

Do you think that'll also be true of the J-20?

Seems like from the front, it's going to be a lot harder to detect then from the back/side..
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1242
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post12 Oct 2017, 22:05

mixelflick wrote:Do you think that'll also be true of the J-20?

Seems like from the front, it's going to be a lot harder to detect then from the back/side..


It will obviously be harder to detect the J-20 compared to anything from the Flanker family for example, however I'm pretty sure that the advantage will be and by far in the F-22/F-35 side.
I'm pretty sure that the J-20 RCS is quite higher compared to the F-22/F-35 RCS's. Moreover I've also read that canards don't help RCS much and actually trend to increase it.

But now if you're flying a 4th or 4.5th gen fighter aircraft like the F-15, F-16, F/A-18 (both legacy or Super), Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, etc... things will in my opinion change drastically with the advantage changing to the J-20's favour.
Offline

warset

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2017, 19:20

Unread post03 Nov 2017, 19:53

ricnunes wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Do you think that'll also be true of the J-20?

Seems like from the front, it's going to be a lot harder to detect then from the back/side..


It will obviously be harder to detect the J-20 compared to anything from the Flanker family for example, however I'm pretty sure that the advantage will be and by far in the F-22/F-35 side.
I'm pretty sure that the J-20 RCS is quite higher compared to the F-22/F-35 RCS's. Moreover I've also read that canards don't help RCS much and actually trend to increase it.

But now if you're flying a 4th or 4.5th gen fighter aircraft like the F-15, F-16, F/A-18 (both legacy or Super), Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, etc... things will in my opinion change drastically with the advantage changing to the J-20's favour.


I think there is a misconception as to what the J20 was designed to do. When China designed the J20, the goal was not to have a plane that can fly into enemy airspace totally undetected and drop bombs. J20 was designed with specifics requirements in mind - that’s to serve as a part the greater defense system to take on US aircraft carrier battle groups, specifically in China’s surrounding waters, and win.

So how does this strategy work? To understand this, you have to understand the bigger defense system China has been building.

First, China is building a massive ground radar network on its coast and islands. This radar network has various modern radars, but more interestingly, is the addition of the long wave length radar network. This type of network can detect stealth aircraft but is very imprecise. Basically, it can tell approximately where a stealth aircraft is, but not accurate enough to be used for AA missiles. So the idea is to sent a stealth fighter over to the area and engage in a closed up fight.

Second, in a hypothetical event of US sending over it’s carrier groups to invade China, China examined the maximum flight radius of the F35s before they needed air refueling. The J20 was designed to have a much longer max flight range so it can take off from ground base and intercept the non-stealth air tanker. This significantly shortens the US carrier’s attack range, so the carriers would need to go closer to the shore if they are to use F35s without having tankers.

And third, this is where the DF26 anti carrier ballistic missiles comes in. They are ground based anti carrier missiles that are designed to deter aircraft carriers from going too close to land.

With tankers grounded and carriers unable to get close to shore. The US carrier groups will not be able to operate effectively in China’s surrounding waters and thus not able to do invade China. If the US chooses to do so forcefully with its carriers, it would likely lose (assume no nuclear weapon used).

This strategy is very important for China, as China sees its biggest threat is the US potentially intervening with its carrier groups should Taiwan ever declares independence.

Once you understand China’s concern and its defense strategy, the design of the J20 will start to make sense to you:
1) The J20 was never designed to fly into Syrian or UK air space undetected by SAMs.
2) It is designed to be a frontal stealth long range striker to take out air tankers and AWACS.
3) It is designed to sneak up to F35/F22 undetected, with the help of China long wave length radar networks.
4) It is designed to serve as a part of a larger system to counter the US carrier groups in China’s home turf.

Those are requirements the Su27/30/35/J10/11 etc cannot effectively fulfill.
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 770
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post04 Nov 2017, 02:30

Well China has a few problems with there plan.

1. Long wave radar is easier to jam, no guarantee on picking up stealth fighters (yes only fighters), while the shaping of a stealth fighter would be less effective with LWR RAM/RAC would still absorb the waves energy limiting the returns for the radar, this will cause ghosting for the radar operators. Another issues with LWR is they use large installations, this allows them to cover large spans of sky, but they are also not mobile, meaning a couple of tomahawks coming out of a Virginia class sub would disable them pretty well, or a AGM-86 off a B-52 or JASSM-ER off a B-1 from Anderson in Guam.

2. The targets the J-20 is going after arn't "stealthy" atm but they will be some of the most heavily defended targets flying, naval launched AWACs stay close to the boat and are under the ageis umbrella (250nmi SM-6 missile) from the escorting Cruiser and destroyers not to mention the destroyers operating outside the group on there own patrols, they all still on the same network. The tankers are super hornets, they would have to shoot down around 40 of those tankers to take away the tanking ability of the air wing.

3. If the J-20 is just frontal focused with it's stealth (which it is) it will be spotted, again you have the AEGIS system's on the escorting ships, that's a lot of powerful advanced radars designed to detect and track incoming aircraft, cruise missiles and MRBM and IRBMs. They are designed to track smaller targets at large distances and engage them, but the front RCS being lower would reduce there detection range a lot. The problem is the Awacs and the other ships around the carrier groups. They will catch the J-20's from the side and rear angles and give precise locations to the CAP as well as being able to engage them with there own on board missiles (again SM-6 250nmi range).

4. So now china decides to go ballistic missiles against the CBG, well that's risky, they just threatened us and our air group with stealth strike aircraft and we are now in a defacto state of war, launching a Ballistic missiles, even a conventionally tipped one against the largest (or second largest who cares we have waaaaaaayyy more nukes than China) nuclear power in the world is a pretty dumb idea, and the response may not be equal. Basically the USA could interpret a ballistic missile launch from China as a nuclear strike a retaliate as we would, ala unleash the Ohio class. Now assuming the missile goes off and the USA has determined it's a short range launch heading towards the CBG and decides to spare the millions of Chinese civilians lives (good choice) there is again all those lovely escort ships, again with the AEGIS combat system, and they are all going to be tracking that sucker as well and the Ground Based Radar back in the USA, and they will engage it in the Mid-course with SM-3's and the terminal stage with SM-2ERIV and SM-6 missiles. It may not be perfect but neither is trying to hit a aircraft carrier with a missile that you launched 8,000km away and that just traveled through the upper end of the atmosphere to get there.

In the end the Chinese strategy isn't that different from the Soviet strategy except the Russians came to 2 conclusions, air is good but subs are better for attacking CBG, and they were going to have to use nuclear weapons to have a decent chance of destroying the CBG.
Last edited by geforcerfx on 04 Nov 2017, 19:15, edited 2 times in total.
Offline

weasel1962

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post04 Nov 2017, 09:45

No one really knows how the J-20s would be employed yet, maybe not even the plaaf themselves yet.
Like the usaf realised once the f-22s and f-35s came online, new tactics appear. Same will be with the plaaf.

Low observables does complicate defense abit more. Previously, the usaf and usn are focussed more of taking out the targets, now its more of how do I defend which is already a signal that the j-20 works to suppport the airspace denial strategy.

The biggest complication will be for the usn as there arent any carrier based f-22s. That means the F-35C should be a priority (or cross basing of F-35Bs). Super hornets are incredibly effective aircraft but I am sure the drivers are as we speak thinking how to handle future LO aggressors.
Offline

madrat

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1909
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post05 Nov 2017, 01:29

The F/A-18 against J-20 might be like Buffalo warbirds against FW 190's over Finland. Never engage them head to head.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2793
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post05 Nov 2017, 02:56

By then it'd be a Block 3 F/A-18 networked with AEGIS, F-35C, and E-2D vs J-20.
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 770
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post05 Nov 2017, 04:28

wrightwing wrote:By then it'd be a Block 3 F/A-18 networked with AEGIS, F-35C, and E-2D vs J-20.

Potentially carrying a new missile that exceeds the 100nmi range of the AIM-120D, it could also have growler support making it harder for the J-20 to locate it.
Offline

weasel1962

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post05 Nov 2017, 07:23

geforcerfx wrote:
wrightwing wrote:By then it'd be a Block 3 F/A-18 networked with AEGIS, F-35C, and E-2D vs J-20.

Potentially carrying a new missile that exceeds the 100nmi range of the AIM-120D, it could also have growler support making it harder for the J-20 to locate it.


Interesting that the chinese are thinking along the same lines with a networked j-16 EW "growler" equivalent paired with he super long ranged pl-21s to deter the e-2ds.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2793
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post05 Nov 2017, 17:17

The J-20 would have to get past F-35C, SM6, and counter the electronic attack capabilities that AEGIS, F-35C, F-18E/F, and EA-18G, before their own AAMs could be brought to bear. They'd also have to deal with allied F-15C/E/K/J, F-16, F-35A/B, and F-22, in the event of any engagements on the scale of open hostilities between the US and China.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests