J-20 Chinese Stealth Fighter

New and old developments in aviation technology.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

snake4420

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 23:39
  • Location: conn.

Unread post06 Jan 2011, 15:25

The chinese are trying to keep up with russia and the us to get a stealth fighter operational the us is the only one so far russia is not too far behind and now the chinese are throwing thier hat in the ring are they more advanced than we think? let me know what you think
Offline

txagg

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 02:01

Unread post07 Jan 2011, 02:36

Are they more advanced than we think. Yes but by only a few years. The J-xx has long been known of. The aircraft was shown taxiing not flying. The video I saw was mere taxiing not high speed. This would indicate, if you take american timing, that high speeds taxiing will happen in a few weeks then initial flight testing in two to three months. This aircraft may have alot to do with the Lockheed Martin hacker inicident where plans for the F-35 were partially stolen. Indeed the frontal aspect of the plane speaks alot to this incident. Also, this J-20 prototype does not appear to have thrust-vectoring. However, whether this plane is even an all apsect stealth is unknown. However, the point to make here is whether this plane will see anything near large production in the near future. Remeber the Yf-22 flew in 1990. USAF received them STARTING in 2001. Thats 11 years for american production. China will take atleast as long. In addition, it is questionable how many the chinese or how rapidly they will be procured. The Chinese have just begun production of the J-11 (Su-27). The J-10's are still fresh. This would indicate a relaxed rather than hurried procurement and even then with a "golden-bullet" force similiar to the fleet of F-22's versus F-35's.


Now for the Russian's . The Russian's since the end of the Soviet Union have been much more interessted in SELLING weapons rather than upgrading there own defense. Far more T-80 and T-90 tanks have been sold to foreign nations than Russian forces. This continues with the PAK FA with Indian being the largest buyer. However, outside of Indian, who's buying? Iran can't nor Libya, and Syria can't maintain its current force. The Putin Regime released a report stating that they wanted 200-250 for the current Russian Air Force. That payment would be several times the size of the entire Russian AirForce budget. The recent reproduction of Su-160 blackajacks is more face than teeeth consideiny half of the current force is in need of upgrades. This entire project may be just another Su-35/37 act. The "Super Flanker" was produced in extremely small numbers(currently 12). It was developed for the foreign market not Russian forces. The recent Georgian conflict confirmed that the Russians owns a paper fleet. See Combat Aircraft Monthly article. Of the 292 Mig-29's in russian service, less than 100 are operational. The rest are rusted hulkes that have been cannabalized.

While this is still bad news for American forces, its not end game or even really game changing. However, for european forces who have just ordered or received the typhoon or the the rafael. This is extremely bad news. The typhoon is an extremely effective 4.5 generation fighter. But its not stealth and due to the redicolous amount of political discourse by the nations involved brought up the price. Again is is an excellent aircraft. However its a wooden ship and the guys next door have or are building dreadnoughts. And there is little chance of any sort of new "european collective" fighter. They will not have time to develope a new plane to counter this new threat. it may be argured that the low cost and "ease to maintian" capablities of ther Gripen excuse its developement. The New rafale is less expesnsive and more tailored to french needs but its is less surviable in this new stealth enviorment. However, for the next 15 years this planes still will be an effective force
Offline

Kryptid

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 343
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2008, 01:16

Unread post07 Jan 2011, 05:44

I think all of these J-XX/J-20 threads need to be merged together.
Jesus is coming soon. Be prepared for Him.
Offline

haavarla

Banned

  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 19:36

Unread post09 Jan 2011, 12:58

[quote]Now for the Russian's . The Russian's since the end of the Soviet Union have been much more interessted in SELLING weapons rather than upgrading there own defense. Far more T-80 and T-90 tanks have been sold to foreign nations than Russian forces. This continues with the PAK FA with Indian being the largest buyer. However, outside of Indian, who's buying? Iran can't nor Libya, and Syria can't maintain its current force. The Putin Regime released a report stating that they wanted 200-250 for the current Russian Air Force. That payment would be several times the size of the entire Russian AirForce budget. The recent reproduction of Su-160 blackajacks is more face than teeeth consideiny half of the current force is in need of upgrades. This entire project may be just another Su-35/37 act. The "Super Flanker" was produced in extremely small numbers(currently 12). It was developed for the foreign market not Russian forces. The recent Georgian conflict confirmed that the Russians owns a paper fleet. See Combat Aircraft Monthly article. Of the 292 Mig-29's in russian service, less than 100 are operational. The rest are rusted hulkes that have been cannabalized.

While this is still bad news for American forces, its not end game or even really game changing. However, for european forces who have just ordered or received the typhoon or the the rafael. This is extremely bad news. The typhoon is an extremely effective 4.5 generation fighter. But its not stealth and due to the redicolous amount of political discourse by the nations involved brought up the price. Again is is an excellent aircraft. However its a wooden ship and the guys next door have or are building dreadnoughts. And there is little chance of any sort of new "european collective" fighter. They will not have time to develope a new plane to counter this new threat. it may be argured that the low cost and "ease to maintian" capablities of ther Gripen excuse its developement. The New rafale is less expesnsive and more tailored to french needs but its is less surviable in this new stealth enviorment. However, for the next 15 years this planes still will be an effective force.[/quote]

Why do i get a backflash vibe reading your post?
RuAF is under the largest upgrad and procurment sinse Soviet times..
Its all over the news, so why do u digg up old new dating long back to the 90's?
This is not the situation today, pls try to keep up.
Offline

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 767
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post11 Jan 2011, 21:29

China's J-20 has flown. By an Amazing Coincidence, this took place at the start of Defense Secretary Robert Gates' visit to China. It touched down @ 1:11 PM on 1/11/11, no doubt another Amazing Coincidence. Not to worry, the SECDEF has predicted in the past that China will not have an operational stealth fighter in service before 2020, by which time we'll have pretty much what we have now.

In other news,

The Washington Times

8:23 p.m., Monday, January 10, 2011 [Jan 11 in China]

China's defense minister on Monday rebuffed an offer from Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to hold strategic nuclear talks,...

Probably another Amazing Coincidence.

I wonder if Rachel Maddow will be covering this.
Offline

turbowei

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2011, 03:03
  • Location: needham

Unread post12 Jan 2011, 03:13

arm race with the new paper tiger?

AFAIK, J-20 is not even using Chinese engine.
Offline

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 767
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post12 Jan 2011, 04:28

turbowei wrote:arm race with the new paper tiger?

AFAIK, J-20 is not even using Chinese engine.


Doesn't matter.

If true, could be that they're using other engines to start the flight testing while the "real" engines are perfected. That was the original plan on the F-14 (the F-14A was not intended to go into production).

It could be using WS10s, or ALF31s in the interim. If they run into continuing problems, such as the reported spool-up time issue, they'll clone what they need.
Offline

txagg

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 02:01

Unread post12 Jan 2011, 17:58

http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2011/ ... s-for.html
this is a picture of the j-20 aircraft engines. There are two different engine configurations. I have no idea whether this is two planes or one that had been modified with new engines.

As for haarvla, look at the magazine article i mentioned. Russia had to hire retired Russian pilots because the air force is so undermanned. Often these pilots would cross the Georgian border and drop there ordance before even approaching the target. Russian pilots still only fly 80 hours a year. NATO minimum is 140.

"In February 2009, the Russian newspaper Kommersant reported that 200 of the 291 MiG-29s currently in service across all Russian air arms were unsafe and would have to be permanently grounded.[19] This action would remove from service about a third of Russia's total fighter force, some 650 aircraft.

On 5 June 2009, the Chief of the General Staff, Nikolai Makarov said of the Russian Air Force that "They can run bombing missions only in daytime with the sun shining, but they miss their targets anyway".[20] Maj. Gen. Pavel Androsov said that Russia's long-range bombers would be upgraded in 2009 with the aim of being able to hit within 20 meters of their targets.[21]"

maybe some of us should tone down the kool-aid drinking and ignore the three shiny new airplanes and look at the hundreds of rusted hulkes
Offline

irshlad321

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2011, 01:32

Unread post02 Mar 2011, 22:58

In my opinion i don't we will see a front-line fighter that will reach squadron capability from china until 2015-2020
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post09 Mar 2011, 03:53

The Chinese aren't playing catchup like the Russians. They don't appear to be in a rush and the J-20 looks to represent the fulfillment of a Chinese requirement rather than some knee-jerk desire to get into a pissing contest with the U.S. Unlike the PAK-FA (which is more airshow tumbler than actual stealth fighter), the J-20 concept represents an effort to learn from the shortcomings of the American 5th generation designs (short range, overspecialization [F-22], and under-specialization [F-35]). The Chinese have apparently decided to use the new fighter as a supplement rather than a replacement for current types, a more sustainable and economical rout compared to what the USAF has chosen. In retrospect, we should have focused on replacing the F-111/F-15E with a stealth design instead of replacing the F-15C and F-16, but that's just one of the pitfalls of being an early adopter.

One consultation: It's most likely a defensive weapon because obviously too large to fit onto China's new carrier, although a larger ship in the future might be able to handle it.
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2121
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post09 Mar 2011, 22:29

1st503rdsgt wrote:the J-20 concept represents an effort to learn from the shortcomings of the American 5th generation designs (short range, overspecialization [F-22], and under-specialization [F-35]).



Well considering that the F-22 can supercruise at M1.7+ for 30-40+ minute, plus subsonic legs, I'd say that it's not terribly short ranged. Would you care to clarify how the F-35 is underspecialized? It has excellent air to air, and air to ground capabilities, far exceeding the aircraft it's replacing(as well as its contemporaries).
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post10 Mar 2011, 04:15

wrightwing wrote:Well considering that the F-22 can supercruise at M1.7+ for 30-40+ minute, plus subsonic legs, I'd say that it's not terribly short ranged. Would you care to clarify how the F-35 is underspecialized? It has excellent air to air, and air to ground capabilities, far exceeding the aircraft it's replacing(as well as its contemporaries).





Despite APA's hand-wringing, the F-35 doesn't seem to be in any real danger of being outclassed, for now. But remember, there's no way around the fact that when you add a capability to an airframe, you also add weight. With 40,000 to 50,000 lbs of thrust on tap, there's still plenty of wiggle room in the CTOL versions, but one is still left to wonder if building a plane to do everything will result in a fighter that does nothing especially well (like the F-111). I'm also concerned the the F-35's airframe may have its potential nearly maxed out by the time it enders service.

As for the range issues on both fighters, it's been under discussion since the late 1990s when war-gamers noticed that CVNs and F-22s were of little use against China, while SSGNs and B-2s were scoring higher marks.

I'm not worried about F-35s falling in their droves to the J-20. The F-35 is way ahead in development and will no doubt have a much higher build quality (a factor that gets ignored by fanboys). That said, I still think the Chinese have hit upon a better concept for how to use stealth technology by applying it to a large, twin-engined platform that's optimized more for range and payload than either of the American 5th generation designs. The F-22 was constrained by the need to surpass the F-15 in air-superiority, and the F-35 design has been limited by the STOVL requirement.
Last edited by 1st503rdsgt on 10 Mar 2011, 06:31, edited 2 times in total.
Offline

johnwill

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1511
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007, 21:06
  • Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Unread post10 Mar 2011, 04:48

Care to explain why you think the F-111 did nothing well? I think most unbiased, knowledgeable people would say it's the best deep strike attack airplane ever built.
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post10 Mar 2011, 05:02

johnwill wrote:Care to explain why you think the F-111 did nothing well? I think most unbiased, knowledgeable people would say it's the best deep strike attack airplane ever built.




If it was so good, then why was the U.S. so eager to replace it in the early 1990s? Why did the F-4s purchased by the USAF as interim fighters until the TFX was finished end up being the mainstay fighter themselves? Fact is that the F-111 never "quite" lived up to its promise. Was pretty though :) Anyways, I'm getting tired of butthurt fanboys demanding explanations cited in the Chicago Style format every time someone criticizes one of their favorite planes. Get over it.

:ontopic: What I like about the J-20 concept is that its large size allows for the roles where a stealth fighter will be most useful: long range strike (land and maritime), and long range interception (especially against tankers and AWACS). As for air superiority, that remains to be seen since that mission does not necessarily require stealth when over one's own territory (although it helps). In any case, it will be several years before the J-20 reaches IOC, by which time the tactical picture could look very different.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2121
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post10 Mar 2011, 15:07

1st503rdsgt wrote:
johnwill wrote:Care to explain why you think the F-111 did nothing well? I think most unbiased, knowledgeable people would say it's the best deep strike attack airplane ever built.




If it was so good, then why was the U.S. so eager to replace it in the early 1990s? Why did the F-4s purchased by the USAF as interim fighters until the TFX was finished end up being the mainstay fighter themselves? Fact is that the F-111 never "quite" lived up to its promise. Was pretty though :) Anyways, I'm getting tired of butthurt fanboys demanding explanations cited in the Chicago Style format every time someone criticizes one of their favorite planes. Get over it.



It wasn't that the Air Force was eager to replace it so much as it was expensive to maintain. The Air Force also wasn't eager to get rid of the F-4G, but the costs of keeping these types in service were getting prohibitively high, as it was hard to get spare parts. Even at the time of their retirement, they were the best at their respective missions.
Next

Return to Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests