J-20 VERSUS F-35

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

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5298
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 14:12

gta4 wrote:
sferrin wrote:Show me Chinese fighter that has be proven by "research papers that passed peer review" to have such a low L/D that it is a terrible fighter.


If you compare this with the drag polar of F-16, this is a terrible fighter indeed.
j-10 grid.jpg


So overlay it with the F-16 (both armed, not clean) and show where the differences are significant and why. (Keep in mind that all fighters are a set of tradeoffs. What may be of primary importance to once customer may not be to another. For example an F-4 isn't as clean as an F-106 but an F-106 couldn't do what the USN wanted.)
"There I was. . ."
Online
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5298
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 14:23

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 13739.html

The US has nothing at all like this. Sure, it has airplanes. Their reaction time is a joke compared to missiles. Basically, China can hit anything it wants with conventional warheads, out to about 2500 miles from its border, within minutes. The US couldn't hit something 100 miles off it's coast in minutes, let along thousands of miles.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 828
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 14:27

You are a joke, completely.
Can China intercept US ballistic missile? At least US have developed several ballistic defense systems.
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 828
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 14:30

Basically, China can hit anything it wants with conventional warheads

Can't US do this already 50 years ago?
Online
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5298
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 17:40

gta4 wrote:You are a joke, completely.
Can China intercept US ballistic missile? At least US have developed several ballistic defense systems.


Wow. Pot/kettle much? The US doesn't HAVE any conventional ballistic missiles (outside of ATACMs anyway). :roll:
"There I was. . ."
Online
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5298
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 17:42

gta4 wrote:
Basically, China can hit anything it wants with conventional warheads out to about 2500 miles from its border, within minutes.

Can't US do this already 50 years ago?


With what?
"There I was. . ."
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1202
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 18:34

sferrin wrote:
gta4 wrote:
Basically, China can hit anything it wants with conventional warheads out to about 2500 miles from its border, within minutes.

Can't US do this already 50 years ago?


With what?


Um 270ish 1000+ mile (designed to limit German missiles range) Pershing II's with INS and active radar, maneuvering, dial a yield warheads? But then there was the whole INF treaty stuff. One can only speculate that the Russians were accomodating, because they didn't want to see what Reagan could actually deploy (Pershing III options) if the US started building with the tech they had in the 70's. But hey who knows? The Soviets could have just been being nice and sweet? And the US could have been clutzes who couldn't design and build anything ... yeah that's the Reagan era ... right. <sarc off>

The US had ready to deploy, and go, proven designs and technology, beyond Pershing, that could have whatever range, warhead, and guidance the services(Reagan) wanted... 50 years ago. The Chinese are just tackling the easier stuff from then (read "from Clinton/Israeli" gifts) and they may or may not be "proven." The US warplans as if they are, but that doesn't make it so.

FWIW,
BP
Last edited by blindpilot on 24 Aug 2018, 18:47, edited 2 times in total.
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 18:36

hornetfinn wrote:I don't think I underestimate their capabilities in IIR and AESA systems. I do think you underestimate the technological level achieved in USA, European countries, Israel, Japan and South Korea. Those countries have fielded first AESAs 20-30 years ago and now have large number of them operational. One difference to China is that those countries also had large number of very advanced MSA and PESA radars than what China had and have not always hurried to AESA technology. Making a decent AESA has not been a problem for those countries for some 30 years now, but making it significantly better than PESA or even MSA radar has not been always economical. For example there are E-2D, E-3 and AEGIS systems which use PESA technology but are still really powerful systems with huge capabilities. Sure they will be replaced with AESA systems sometime in the future, but there is no pressing need for that in the near future. China on the other hand had and have lots of rather unimpressive PESA and MSA radar systems.

IIR is another similar thing as technology has been available for 30 years also in USA and France at least. ASRAAM for example has been operational for 20 years already. Same with Javelin and Spike ATGMs. AIM-9R could've been even earlier than those, but was cancelled due to cost considerations. China has just shown their first IIR guided ATGM and PL-10 AAM. That's great improvement in their technology and increases their capabilities but ASRAAM, AIM-9X, MICA-IR, IRIS-T and Python-5 for example are at least equal in capabilties, likely a lot more mature and available in large numbers.

I do agree that China seems to have pretty clear lead over Russia in IIR and AESA systems.


In a way, I think we are not that far apart, but I would love for you to show me when was the first time European countries and South Korea operationalised their AESA radar. I don't think the gap between US and Japan/Europe are that large on civilian level. But I believe due to the amount of R&D America has injected into its military project, it has a fairly large gap in the performance of its radar system over Europe. As for Japan, they may have installed an AESA radar on F-2, but it doesn't have great performance. I think that speaks to their lack of experience and R&D in fighter jet development. And that will continue, because Japan will continue to rely on American MIC. My belief is that due to amount of R&D that China has put into its MIC in the past 25 years, increased interaction with West and increasing availablility of advanced COTS technology, that has allowed them to do better in military field than what you would expect. They were somehow able to put AESA radar on 052C and KJ-2000 12 years ago. They are certainly not as powerful as E-3C or SPY-1D, but they were huge achievements for China back then. And they would not have gotten there without Israeli help and a developing local industry that was aided by gov't measures to "encourage" foreign companies to share some technology.

When these systems first entered service, they had huge problems. It took several years before they built the 3rd 052C. In the recent PLAN buildup, the only other gap like this is with their nuclear submarine. And a newer AESA radar system was installed on 052D and now on 055 after they sorted out various production problems and cooling issues they encountered on the first generation radar. And they are now comfortable enough to add a X-band AESA radar on top of 055 mask also. That to me shows progression and maturation of their AESA technology. And eventually they got to the point where they are comfortable putting it on their fighter jet. And if you compare KLJ-7 with KLJ-7A, their advertised tracking range vs 3 m^2 targets almost doubled. Now numbers they provide is all advertising nonsense, but it shows the AESA radar is a huge upgrade over MSA radar developed less than 15 years ago.

At this point, they can't expect their systems to be as mature or capable as American/European ones. They just need to put something in the same ball park into service and then make incremental upgrade. That's kind of the deal with J-20. It has an underpowered engine, not as stealthy and all the sensors/softwares don't have the capability and sophistication of F-35. But you still have to put it into service, test it in action and improve it.

You simply don't see this kind of progress in engine field and I think that's due to how well the engine technology gets guarded by the major players like GE/RR/PW and how much R&D is needed.
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 387
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 20:39

hornetfinn wrote:
I don't think I underestimate their capabilities in IIR and AESA systems. I do think you underestimate the technological level achieved in USA, European countries, Israel, Japan and South Korea. Those countries have fielded first AESAs 20-30 years ago and now have large number of them operational. One difference to China is that those countries also had large number of very advanced MSA and PESA radars than what China had and have not always hurried to AESA technology. Making a decent AESA has not been a problem for those countries for some 30 years now, but making it significantly better than PESA or even MSA radar has not been always economical. For example there are E-2D, E-3 and AEGIS systems which use PESA technology but are still really powerful systems with huge capabilities. Sure they will be replaced with AESA systems sometime in the future, but there is no pressing need for that in the near future. China on the other hand had and have lots of rather unimpressive PESA and MSA radar systems.



So in your opinion, the Chinese AESA Radars are roughly on the same level as the latest western PESA/MSA?

BTW. I'm a bit confused with the Generation of AESA Radars. As far as understand a APG-63(v)2 and APG-77 is 1 Generation. APG-63(v)3, APG-79, APG-80, APG-77v1 and RBE2 AESA are 2 Generation. And the APG-81 is a 3 Generation AESA?
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 47
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 21:06

I don't get why this needs to turn into "my stuff is bigger" kind of contest. Are we grown ups here?

If you really care to know how plaaf looks at things. Back in the 80s, the Soviet backfire bombers can fly over Beijing without escorts and bomb the capital city and fly back without ever worrying about J-7s being able to intercept it. F-35 is the greatest single threat they face right now, but that's not more severe than what they've had to face before.

Anyway, the current model of j-20 is production. It's in service with FTTC. That's where a new jet entering service go to develop combat tactics, flight techniques and training programs. It's got a long way to go, but it has to start somewhere. WS-15 is estimated to be 5 to 7 years away from entering service. This is Chinese time line, not Russian time line. By that time, they should have a lot more experience with producing, maintaining something like J-20, having the entire situation sorted out and having the availability of J-20 raised to a more acceptable level. And through all the training, they will be able to continually improve on the software part of things. F-35 is fantastic machine. America has had a long experience with all this. It's going to take time for CAC to raise J-20's sensor fusion level. Fortunately, software upgrade is something that can continuously happen throughout the lifetime. If you look at what they did from J-10A to J-10B/C, you can see they are capable of making huge progress in that time frame. And that's the point of putting them into service, get feedbacks, discover the appropriate tactics, learn how to minimize weaknesses (like the rear profile) and improve into J-20A with the appropriate engine.

As for AESA radar, will they even be flipping that on? Wouldn't that just increase the likelihood of getting picked up by F-35? I guess they will be trying these scenarios out to figure out. They have enough assets near the border with AWACS, shipborne radar and various land based radar that J-20 really should just rely on other assets. But what do I know.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4229
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post24 Aug 2018, 21:32

swiss wrote:
BTW. I'm a bit confused with the Generation of AESA Radars. As far as understand a APG-63(v)2 and APG-77 is 1 Generation. APG-63(v)3, APG-79, APG-80, APG-77v1 and RBE2 AESA are 2 Generation. And the APG-81 is a 3 Generation AESA?

It isn't that simple.

APG-63(v)2/3, APG-79, APG-80, and RBE2 are all MSA radars that were upgraded with an AESA antenna (oversimplified). They were not designed from the ground up as an AESA radar integrated into a fused sensor suite. APG-77/(v)1 and APG-81 were. As such even APG-77 will be more advanced as a whole system than APG-63(v)3, as it has improved back-end processing capability. SABR is (oversimplified) an APG-81 with modified software and a resized antenna to be used in any platform.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1575
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post25 Aug 2018, 01:36

How many AWACS does China have, versus US/Coalition PACOM air forces?


Not easy to keep track of numbers as China is running multiple AEW/AWACS production and test programs. KJ-2000 and KJ-200 appear to have reached its maturity and has stopped production. The latter at ~11 with 6 in PLAAF and 5 in PLAN. Not surprising since balance beam tends to be less effective than the rotodome.

The current production variant is the KJ-500 with the rotodome is currently at least 16 to as high as 20s. The latest spotted being the 4th in PLAN and the remainder being operated by the PLAAF. Its easier to keep track today with the availability of sat pics covering known airbase locations like Shaanxi Aircraft Corporation's airfield at Hanzhong where 8 new KJ-500 were spotted earlier this year.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-sho ... -aircraft/

The program that is carefully watched by China watchers (and the Pentagon) is the KJ-600. With the 3rd aircraft carrier expected to be CATOBAR, the current variant (previously KL-200) is expected to be the likely variant that will operate off the aircraft carrier.

Japan operates 4 E767, 13 E2C + 2 E-2Ds, Korea eventually 4 E-7As, Taiwan 6 recently upgraded E-2Ks. PACAF doesn't forward base its E-3s. E-2s do accompany the CVN based in Japan.
Offline

mk82

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 15 Oct 2009, 18:43
  • Location: Australia

Unread post25 Aug 2018, 06:09

lrrpf52: So there isn't a production model J-20 yet......

The J-20 is actually in LRIP now (i.e. “Block 1” production model).
Offline

h-bomb

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 302
  • Joined: 26 Apr 2009, 20:07
  • Location: South Central USA

Unread post25 Aug 2018, 09:17

weasel1962 wrote:
How many AWACS does China have, versus US/Coalition PACOM air forces?


Japan operates 4 E767, 13 E2C + 2 E-2Ds, Korea eventually 4 E-7As, Taiwan 6 recently upgraded E-2Ks. PACAF doesn't forward base its E-3s. E-2s do accompany the CVN based in Japan.


You may want to look at a little base called "Kadena" try the home page: https://www.kadena.af.mil/

But I will give you a clue: 961st Airborne Air Control Squadron - E-3 AWACS
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1575
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post25 Aug 2018, 15:07

h-bomb wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:
How many AWACS does China have, versus US/Coalition PACOM air forces?


Japan operates 4 E767, 13 E2C + 2 E-2Ds, Korea eventually 4 E-7As, Taiwan 6 recently upgraded E-2Ks. PACAF doesn't forward base its E-3s. E-2s do accompany the CVN based in Japan.


You may want to look at a little base called "Kadena" try the home page: https://www.kadena.af.mil/

But I will give you a clue: 961st Airborne Air Control Squadron - E-3 AWACS


I stand corrected. 18th wing. Had the impression that the E-3s were only based at Elmendorf and Tinker. (missed Al Dhafra as well)

A simple google would have done the trick,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... _squadrons

31+1 test in service,
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets ... try-awacs/
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests