J-20 Weapons Load

mixelflick · by **mixelflick** » 10 Dec 2018, 17:04

Damn, the J-20's looks are growing on me...

jakobs · by **jakobs** » 10 Dec 2018, 18:46

Unlike the SU-57 this actually looks like a serious plane!

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 11 Dec 2018, 08:16

The J-20 carrying a sea skimming cruise missile is actually a more effective threat to me. Is the internal bay large enough for those? Used in conjunction with other offensive weapons like DF-21s, ships etc. They could saturate the CSG's defenses and score a few hits.

wrightwing · by **wrightwing** » 11 Dec 2018, 15:26

zero-one wrote:The J-20 carrying a sea skimming cruise missile is actually a more effective threat to me. Is the internal bay large enough for those? Used in conjunction with other offensive weapons like DF-21s, ships etc. They could saturate the CSG's defenses and score a few hits.

The bay on the J-20 doesn't look large enough, to carry much in terms of anti-ship cruise missiles. If anything, it'd probably have to carry them externally.

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 11 Dec 2018, 16:35

wrightwing wrote:The bay on the J-20 doesn't look large enough, to carry much in terms of anti-ship cruise missiles. If anything, it'd probably have to carry them externally.

My thoughts exactly. And the Chinese doesn't seem to have VLO cruise missiles yet. so any external carriage would mean almost certain death to the J-20.

Anyway, I believe China's strategy to take out even 1 of the USN's CVNs would be to saturate it with everything they got.
-J-20s
-DF-21s
-Anti ship cruise missiles
-subs.

So how do you defend against that.
J-20s would loose their VLO due to external carriage so the Arleigh Burke class or BARCAP can take it out

DF-21s need a lot of ISR from satellites and unmanned assets. The CVNs are fast, talked to a crew member once and all he had to say was, its really fast, not just 30 knots. So hitting it with require a lot of ISR and data linking, take those out and you got a better chance.

Subs: Virginia and Sea wolves will eat them up

Anti Ship cruise missiles, same problem with ISR dependence and ECM vulnerability, SEA RAM is also a good last line of defense.

All them put together. Thats the hard part. Can a CSG defend against that type of saturation?

Scorpion1alpha · by **Scorpion1alpha** » 12 Dec 2018, 04:00

I think we all agree that a big missile will have to be carried externally on the J-20. I think we all also agree that by carrying externally, you concede your aerodynamics and LO.

The J-20’s mission is clear, to me at least. A unique thing about it is that it’s large enough to fill additional roles it may or may not have been originally envisioned for. Because China is looking to expand influence and gain and maintain a foothold in the South China Sea area, it knows it needs to cover a large area (those artificial islands is a big example). J-20s, with its large size and presumably large fuel faction would be just one tool that can fill that need for a long range A2A/striker.

Like I said before, dependent on how good their systems are, one thing they could do is have a mixed formation of J-20 and J-16s (or whatever) with the J-16s (or even other J-20s) carrying external weapons. Some J-20s could be in their full-up LO mode and with their long range, go down range and guide the weapons that are launched by the strikers to their intended targets.

Yes, I believe that China will use multiple means and systems to attack a target. Just like we do. You do not rely on just one means to do so.

I think the J-20 (along with other air assets) used in this manner would be a very viable and credible threat. Again, it depends on how good and mature their systems are at this point, the level of experience their aircrews are or are gaining in using the J-20s and how much their military culture has/have changed to allow their personnel to become innovative in achieving these goals.

weasel1962 · by **weasel1962** » 12 Dec 2018, 04:20

There is no evidence that the J-20 will be used in an A2G role. More likely the new H-20 that will be unveiled in 2019.

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 12 Dec 2018, 14:27

garrya wrote:
zero-one wrote:My thoughts exactly. And the Chinese doesn't seem to have VLO cruise missiles yet. so any external carriage would mean almost certain death to the J-20.
So how do you defend against that.
J-20s would loose their VLO due to external carriage so the Arleigh Burke class or BARCAP can take it out

what if they use very long range missile similar to Kinzhal or Silver Sparrow?

Then the missile will get shot down.

weasel1962 · by **weasel1962** » 13 Dec 2018, 02:45

Aviationist confirms the "J-20" seen in Georgia is a replica used by USMC for training purposes...non-flying version apparently.

https://theaviationist.com/2018/12/09/u ... ine-corps/

Scorpion1alpha · by **Scorpion1alpha** » 13 Dec 2018, 15:20

weasel1962 wrote:There is no evidence that the J-20 will be used in an A2G role. More likely the new H-20 that will be unveiled in 2019.

Quite possibly.

weasel1962 wrote:Aviationist confirms the "J-20" seen in Georgia is a replica used by USMC for training purposes...non-flying version apparently.

https://theaviationist.com/2018/12/09/u ... ine-corps/

I saw that. Interesting the Marines are using it. Guess they also want to know how to either blow it up, strip it or steal it.

Scorpion1alpha · by **Scorpion1alpha** » 24 Dec 2018, 06:00

Don't know if this is photoshopped or not, but first time seeing bags on it (looks big too).

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 24 Dec 2018, 06:41

Scorpion1alpha wrote:Don't know if this is photoshopped or not, but first time seeing bags on it (looks big too).

Nothing new....been around since at least 2016

https://youtu.be/3-1JfX4wWbA

Scorpion1alpha · by **Scorpion1alpha** » 24 Dec 2018, 07:03

Ah. I see.

weasel1962 · by **weasel1962** » 03 Jan 2019, 06:18

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... ils-emerge

During the Zhuhai Airshow in November, a pair of J-20s showed off the type’s missile-carrying capabilities for the first time by opening their weapon bay doors to show four PL-15 medium-range missiles in the main bays, and PL-10 short-range missiles in the side bays. The latter are notable for being able to deploy the PL-10 missile while having the bay doors closed. This mechanism enables the aircraft to reduce its radar signature while having a missile deployed externally to allow it to seek its target. The F-22, on the other hand, has to ensure that the doors are open during the engagement process, compromising its stealth features.

Don't think AIN got the above entirely correct. The F-22 doesn't need to keep the bay doors open to acquire the target, just to fire. Hence the amount of time the bay doors will be open is minimal and roughly the same amount of time it takes for the J-20 to open its doors for the PL-10 to pop out and close again. After the PL-10 is out, that's where the rcs probably grows larger. Its more likely a workaround for IR missiles that the F-22 does not fire.

The bigger issue is the reliance of the F-22 on radar-guided missiles (at least until they resolve the AIm-9/HMS but still think a longer ranged IR is useful).

mixelflick · by **mixelflick** » 03 Jan 2019, 16:19

I'm not convinced the J-20 is going to have the legs some people attribute to it...

Can it carry a lot of gas? Potentially, sure. But those Chinese engines are a good deal less advanced than even the Russians, proof of that being China's token SU-35 orders (24?). Undoubtedly for the motors. But even these likely won't give it super-cruise, at least not in any economical sense. Two fuel thirst engines and a draggy airframe doesn't speak well to great range.

I'd suggest the 4 big bags she's been seen flying with add to that evidence. It's unclear though how much additional range they'd offer, especially given their drag penalty. Eventually it will get more fuel efficient engines, but like the SU-57, it'll likely be a long time. Then again, they surprised us with its first flight - a lot earlier than intelligence on the matter suggested.

If there's one area where we've done a good job keeping our lead/advantage, it's in engine tech. The quantum leap with the F-22's F-119 and the F-35's F-135 was enormous, and with ADVENT/Variable cycle engines on the way - they'll keep us way ahead.

You can have stealth. You can have super-maneuverability. And you can have ultra long range AAM's/sensor fusion... but sub par motors will bite you every time. Pratt and GE are really knocking it out of the park, and it only looks to be getting better. Pratt in particular, after it's F-14/TF-30 debacle has made an amazing comeback. GE hit a grand slam with the F-110, it made the F-14 the fighter it always should have been. GE motors are powering Saudi F-15SA's and I think Quatar's F-15QA. And the GE powered Vipers reputation speaks for itself. It wasn't always ordained that Pratt would win the great fighter engine war, but as of today - they're the clear leader IMO. Still, its good to know GE is still in the game and innovating too..