J-20 VERSUS F-35

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5565
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post21 Aug 2018, 13:53

gta4 wrote:I have not seen 2 sec interval from any official sources, and I have seen at least one time from a video showing a Burker launches 3 missiles simultaneously during an exercise.


Post it.

1-2 second interval is what you typically see in live Tomahawk launches. The Russian cruise missile launches shown were definitely faster by comparison.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 50
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post21 Aug 2018, 14:40

gta4 wrote:
As for testing, what you meant to say, was that as far as you know China hasn't conducted any tests against supersonic antiship missiles. I'd say, conservatively, you're approximately 100% incorrect there. China would conduct those types as a matter of course to determine the limits of the system. The US was doing that all the way back in the late 70s. You're telling me you think China can't do now what the US did almost half a century ago? Really?

Even Chinese official has not claimed this.


Is this a joke? Pretty much every Chinese naval air defense system on defense exhibitions show for export claim that they can shoot down supersonic missile. For example, here is the export version of HQ-10 (China's RAM)

http://defenseupdates.blogspot.com/2012 ... s-air.html

They have plenty of supersonic test drones that they've tested these things on.

And of course, the type 1130 CIWS on the new ships that they've put on all the new important ships can handle multiple supersonic missiles of up to mach 4.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2692
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post21 Aug 2018, 19:41

sferrin wrote:Jesus, I feel like I'm talking to a twelve year old.


You don't need to be rude! Was I ever rude to you by any chance?? :roll:


sferrin wrote:Bigger cells means you have the ability to deploy much more capable weapons. That's why the MK57s are bigger than the Mk41. That's why the USN was looking at bigger still cells. (Northrop Grumman's Modular Launch System for example.) You aren't going to stuff KEI capability in a MK41.


You could be theoretically right with "Bigger cells means you have the ability to deploy much more capable weapons" if you're comparing missile capabilities having the same technology.
However the point here is that US/West Missile technology is likely more advanced than Chinese (and Russian) so the fact that the Chinese are building bigger VLS is probably not to have more capable weapons (compared to US/Western weapons) but simply because their weapons/missiles needs to be bigger in order to have a competitive chance against US/Western weapons/missiles.


sferrin wrote:
ricnunes wrote:[For example the Soviet cruise missiles of the Colds War era were HUGE, much, much bigger than the ones from the US/NATO or the same era. Does this mean that they were better? I don't think so...


You're comparing apples and oranges. A supersonic anti-ship missiles with a thousand or two thousand pound warhead is not the same as a subsonic land attack missile.


No, I'm not. And this is actually related with what I said in my previous paragraph of this post - During the Cold War, Soviet missile technology lagged behind the US/NATO counterpart specially in terms of miniaturization which by its turn affected seeker size which means that the Soviets didn't have the capability to develop relatively small long range cruise missiles such as the Harpoon, Exocet, etc... So what was the alternative for the Soviets? To develop small-aircraft sized anti-ship cruise missiles that could be launched from warships and heavy bombers and due to their very big (I would say HUGE) size their were built to be supersonic in order to have a better chance penetrating enemy air defenses.

It's not much different to what the Chinese are doing with all the examples that you gave, although I concede (can a 12 year kid concede? And I'm conceding much more than you...) that the technological lag/difference between China and US is probably closer than the Soviet Unit and US gap specially during the later stages of the Cold War.


sferrin wrote:China is pouring more money, manpower, and effort into defense (where it matters. Most of our defense spending is on wages, pensions, and the VA.)


Again, because China still lags behind. I'm believe (or I want to believe) that once China gets really close to the US that we'll see the US pouring even more money on defense (where "it matters").
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

zhangmdev

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 157
  • Joined: 01 May 2017, 09:07

Unread post21 Aug 2018, 22:51

There is an old Chinese saying can be translated as "what comes later stays on top". Basically it means new things are supposed to be better than old things, and will replace old things. The strength and weakness of old things is known, so the late comer has the advantage. China constantly seeks to outdo what the West has done, or is doing. Make it bigger, faster, carrying more missiles, and build them as quick as possible. "No expense is spared."

The media is littered with "China has done in 5 years what the West did in a century." "Not even the US has similar weapon system deployed." "China mades it more capable at a fraction of the cost." The wikipedia page of FAST (radio telescope) keeps a section, with a vivid image, showing how much it is superior to the Arecibo Observatory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_hund ... bservatory

The media and internet treats China like some kind of celebrity. Every image of shipyard of Dalian or Shanghai sends the fanbase chasing tails. Every quote from some supposed insider conveys a sense of jubilance or foreboding, depends on who you are talking to. But remarkably how little information is out there. People can argue for years about the capabilty of certain system, how advanced it is, or how much a gap is still there, but the jury is still out. The producer don't release specifications. The military don't publicize operational record. The day of reckoning, aka a shooting war in the west Pacific, obviously is not something looking forward to.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post21 Aug 2018, 23:55

what comes later stays on top

That only applies when both sides of the equation are at equal tech levels.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7720
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 00:31

SpudmanWP wrote:
what comes later stays on top

That only applies when both sides of the equation are at equal tech levels.

It also wrongly presupposes that whoever is currently on top is complacent and does not build on his lead.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 00:41

The West's lead in engine tech is just one example of how that Chinese proverb is wrong.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 919
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 02:05

sferrin wrote:
gta4 wrote:I have not seen 2 sec interval from any official sources, and I have seen at least one time from a video showing a Burker launches 3 missiles simultaneously during an exercise.


Post it.

1-2 second interval is what you typically see in live Tomahawk launches. The Russian cruise missile launches shown were definitely faster by comparison.


It was 10 years ago, however, this capability is already confirmed officially, so no need to prove it again.
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 919
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 02:08

zhangmdev wrote:There is an old Chinese saying can be translated as "what comes later stays on top".

We have many counterexamples from china, like Yilong 2 the drone.
Comes later than the Reaper, and is significantly underperformed.

And think about J-31 vs F-35, Song Class Submarine vs Seawolf
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 919
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 02:22

sferrin wrote:China is pouring more money, manpower, and effort into defense (where it matters. Most of our defense spending is on wages, pensions, and the VA.)

Are you kidding?
1) How come you have the illussion that China is pouring more money into defense than US?
2) When it comes to man power, quality-wise or quantity-wise? Keep in mind: US defense corps have top science / engineering talents in their candidate pool around the globe because they can provide competitive compensation even compared to finance and / or banking, while in china and other asia countries, top talents seldom go to defense companies due to very low salary.

U.S has made gliders with L/D greater than 50 in 1970s, while china can't make it until now.
China has the greatest quantity of mathmaticians, but never won the Feilds Medal.
No inventions that changed human history were made by China P.R..
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2342
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 08:34

There was a time (Early 2000's to around 2014) when China really looked like it was going to overtake the US.
they said that the Chinese GDP (nominal) would be bigger by 2012, then it was pushed to 2015, then they said its gona be 2018, 2023, now I see figures like 2030.

China also had the fastest super computer for a while, that was unitl IBM made Summit and regained that top spot.

In 2012 the largest companies by market capitalization list was littered with Chinese companies, jump to 2017 and they have been pushed down to below top 5 spots. The top 10 is littered with US companies.

Face it, China had a good run for a while, but that is slowly drawing to a close, India has better economic growth prospects now. And Trump, like him or not, knows business. The US is making a comeback and I don't think China can catch them anymore

P.S. I'm not American
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 50
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 10:32

SpudmanWP wrote:The West's lead in engine tech is just one example of how that Chinese proverb is wrong.

You picked the one area that China is the weakest in to try to prove your point. Bravo. Missiles is not that. They got a lot of help from Russians on this area and it's one of the few areas that Soviet Union was probably close to par with West on.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3094
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 12:29

China is pretty seriously lagging behind in some key technological areas:

- Jet engines like already mentioned many, many times

- Domestic IC industry. Meaning their CPUs, memory products, FPGAs, DSPs etc. Here they are still at least 2-3 generations behind and have rather limited product types. Chinese companies buy most of these components from Taiwanese, South Korean, Japanese and Western sources. Especially the more advanced ones.

- Sensor technology. This is tied to domestic IC industry which limits their abilities in making advanced sensors. They can't make truly modern thermal imaging cameras or AESA radar components because of this. Sure they have made some IIR and AESA radar systems, but those systems have been available for USA for about 20-25 years.

- Advanced materials. Sure they have made composite materials and other similar, but the kind of products that have been made in Western countries for 30 years or so. For example this: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201806/1 ... 1ff3a.html

It seems like they are pretty far behind in this field as T800 is not nearly the current state of the art.

Sure they have advanced a lot and keep on improving, but they also still have a lot to do to match most advanced Western systems. Things might well look slightly different in 30-40 years, but now there is rather big gap between China and USA when it comes to technology. But China is definitely getting stronger compared to most other countries, most notably Russia and India.
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 919
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 13:35

tphuang wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:The West's lead in engine tech is just one example of how that Chinese proverb is wrong.

You picked the one area that China is the weakest in to try to prove your point. Bravo. Missiles is not that. They got a lot of help from Russians on this area and it's one of the few areas that Soviet Union was probably close to par with West on.


There are many areas, not just engine.
High gliding ratio glider is a very good example.
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 50
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post22 Aug 2018, 22:22

hornetfinn wrote:China is pretty seriously lagging behind in some key technological areas:
- Sensor technology. This is tied to domestic IC industry which limits their abilities in making advanced sensors. They can't make truly modern thermal imaging cameras or AESA radar components because of this. Sure they have made some IIR and AESA radar systems, but those systems have been available for USA for about 20-25 years.


They are definitely behind. But saying they can't achieve anything because of their weak engine industry is a stretch. Engine is their weakest field. And their platforms will always be hampered due to subpar engine solutions. But in other areas, they are less behind due to combination of getting more help abroad or more investment. Missiles is one area they actually do pretty well in. So it's kind of laughable to say they haven't tested against supersonic missiles, when they publicly advertise that an export system like FL-3000N can counter multiple supersonic targets.

And you significantly underestimate how well they do in IIR and AESA radar systems. In military field, they received tremendous help 15 years ago in these areas from Israel. And that has really fast tracked their deployment on platforms. Both KJ-2000 and 052C operationalized larger AESA platform 12 years ago. And since then, they have advanced to the point where the Russians were visiting CIDEX exhibition several years ago to source different Chinese components (including T/R modules) for Russian systems. J-10C operationalized AESA radar before any European fighter jet was able to do so.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests