The J-20 Challenge: Can India Bridge the Fighter Jet Gap With China?

[LeGenD]

Loads of bravado statements when in reality the american general knows sweet f all of the real capabilities of the J20. To claim otherwise means they have a J20 at hand which they have studied and found out all of its strengths and weaknesses. That is just wishful thinking.

What is the sensor package of J-20? How good is the radar system and sensor fusion? Any demos? How LO the jet is? Have a look at this post.

Maybe have a look at what NSA can do. How it collects information from all over the world. What else US use to collect information from all over the world. How threat libraries are created and updated.

If a military officer explains how it will go down, he is dreaming. If an ill-informed journalist say China wins, it is gospel. American military tech is not in doubt, it is top notch. Others need to catch-up which is the hard part.

 

[UKBengali]

What is the sensor package of J-20? How good is the radar system and sensor fusion? Any demos? How LO the jet is? Have a look at this post.

Maybe have a look at what NSA can do. How it collects information from all over the world. What else US use to collect information from all over the world. How threat libraries are created and updated.

If a military officer explains how it will go down, he is dreaming. If an ill-informed journalist say China wins, it is gospel. American military tech is not in doubt, it is top notch. Others need to catch-up which is the hard part.

We have no idea whether it is "top notch" when compared to China.

Where is your evidence that US military technology, apart from engines, is ahead of China anymore?

A WS-15 powered J-20 could indeed be the most advanced fighter jet in the world or it may not.

Literally NO ONE on this planet knows whether the latest upgraded F-22 can beat J-20(with WS-15) in a BVR duel.

F-35 does not even come into the high altitude air supremacy arena as that is not what it is designed to do.

 

[LeGenD]

We have no idea whether it is "top notch" when compared to China.

Where is your evidence that US military technology, apart from engines, is ahead of China anymore?

A WS-15 powered J-20 could indeed be the most advanced fighter jet in the world or it may not.

Literally NO ONE on this planet knows whether the latest upgraded F-22 can beat J-20(with WS-15) in a BVR duel.

F-35 does not even come into the high altitude air supremacy arena as that is not what it is designed to do.

Mate, let's have a look at following information:

"The problem with J-20 (and most PLAAF Fighters) is that there’s very little reliable data available, most are speculative which makes it very hard to make an accurate assessment. For example, we don’t have any clear picture of J-20’s radar antenna (or that of any frontline PLAAF Fighter), the widely circulated pictures are CGI which come with its own set of problems.

There is no published data on J-20’s RCS. Years ago Air Power Australia (APA) ran their simulation which showed J-20 having a frontal RCS around 5.5 dBsm to -5 dBsm (in most of the nose cone, canopy and inlet).[1][2] Now, APA is not a reliable think tank by a long shot but it does provide some context since they’re heavily skewed towards Russian and Chinese equipment.

The J-20 has quite good RCS-reduction measures in the frontal section. You can see the continuous curvature on the nose cone and canopy resemble that of Raptor. The engine face is shielded with Serpentine intake and the IRST sensor is housed in an EOTS like structure with faceted glass panels instead of a spherical dome as in Su-57 – two main problems that ruin Su-57’s RCS.

J-20 also have quite extensive use of RAM coatings, both on leading and trailing edges as well on the surface unlike Su-57 where RAM usage is largely limited to the rear portion of the IRST dome, air intakes, and big RF apertures such as the radome.

However, we don’t know anything about the thickness of RAM coatings on J-20 or it’s characteristics (such as range of frequency where it’s effective). In the F-35 for example, from an early engine fire accident we know that its surface coatings are pretty thick. Also, the CNT based RAM on F-35 is particularly effective at a wide range of frequency from L through K band,[3] a range unheard in commercially available RAM. Given the 40 year head-start that the US enjoys in this area since the F-117, it’s very likely that RAM coatings on J-20 is decades behind the F-22 and especially F-35 in terms of both effectiveness and durability (ease of maintenance).

Developing RAM that’s effective against a wide range of radar bands is one thing, developing one that’s also durable enough to last longer and can be applied on the flight-line without specialized hangars with Temperature and Humidity control is a whole lot different thing. The fact Su-57 as well as the recently unveiled Checkmate show negligible use of surface coatings further highlight the disparity.

While the J-20 has good RCS-reduction from the front, the same is not the case from non-frontal aspects especially the rear. Take a look at J-20 (WS-15) and F-35’s (F135) engine nozzles.

Both are serrated circular nozzles in theory but there’s a significant difference in their effectiveness. F135’s unique petal like structures not only offer much better RCS-reduction but also large cooling vents for the exhaust.

Then there are canards, and all-moving vertical stabilisers that can act as a large source of specular reflection from a wide angle including the front. These surfaces are also particularly susceptible to Rayleigh scattering at lower bands leading to poor RCS at those bands. Their relatively small size also limit the thickness of RAM coatings that could be used to mitigate the problem.

It’s not that you can’t use canards in LO designs but that their impact is a lot harder to deal with. The canards as well as all-moving vertical stabilisers are something you want to avoid on a VLO airframe. So their presence does shed some light on the overall LO characteristics of J-20.

Another problem with J-20 and Su-57 is that both lack any sort of LPI datalink like Raptor’s IFDL or F-35’s MADL, which ultimately limit their networking capability in a contested airspace. Such a restriction in data sharing will ultimately reduce their Situational Awareness. This is one reason why the former USAF Chief of Staff compared J-20 with F-117.[4]

In all likelihood the J-20 appears to have smaller RCS than Su-57 but I seriously doubt it to be stealthier than F-117, which put its RCS about 2 to 3 order of magnitude bigger than that of F-22 and F-35.

Avionics

With ~1,800 TRMs J-20 appears to have a bigger radar than all but APG-77 on F-22. Although other than the size there’s little to no data about it. China recently unveiled LKF601E, a small AESA radar for export Fighters like the JF-17. The radar reportedly has a SAR resolution of 1 meter,
[5] which is actually worse than a decade old Mechanical radars in the West. For instance, the F-16’s APG-68v9 from 2004 has 0.6 meter (2 feet) SAR resolution[6] and it too was designed exclusively for exports as a low-cost alternative.

LKF601E unveiled at an Air Show

Since radar’s bandwidth is the principle factor determining the SAR resolution, this does raise some serious doubt about the actual bandwidth. And it’s not as if it fares any better in other areas, F-15’s Mechanical radar from 1990s could track 14 targets and engage 6, Rafale’s 20 year old RBE2 PESA radar which had similar (small) size could track 40 targets.[7] If this is any indication of the state of Chinese AESA radars then they’re no better than Russia, which is at least a generation behind the West. Any advantage of J-20’s radar will only come from the bigger aperture.

Another important thing worth mentioning is that while the J-20’s EOTS-like sensor (called EOTS-86) looks similar to F-35’s EOTS, there’s a distinct difference in their functionality. Unlike F-35’s EOTS which is a true Targeting Pod + long-range IRST sensor with emphasis on the former, the J-20’s EOTS-86 is more of an IRST sensor with emphasis on air-air. This is because it has quite limited FoV for a targeting pod, only having a lens in the forward section unlike F-35’s EOTS which can look at steep angle to the sides or even rear.

F-35’s EOTS bellow

Also, while J-20 has DAS-like apertures for spherical IR coverage, these sensors have more in common with F-22’s AAR-56 Missile Warning System (MWS) than F-35’s DAS. The J-20’s EODAS sensors are very likely to be limited to MWS role. This is because Chinese IR sensors are still behind the West. This is evident with J-20’s weapons bay for PL-10.

The only reason to have a complicated ejection cycle as seen in J-20’s side-bays is when you lack the ability to have a reliable Lock-on-After-Launch (LOAL) capability on an IIR missile.

Putting the missile out on a rail instead of launching it directly from internal bay not only comes with prolong RCS penalty of having the missile hang outside but also a complex mechanism with increased risk of failure. All of this could be avoided by simply having an IR missile with a reliable LOAL capability. Maybe 15 years down the line J-20’s EODAS can be upgraded to have limited IRST functionality as is the case with F-22’s AAR-56 slated to be upgraded in coming years, but today there’s nothing to suggest that J-20’s EODAS is anything more than a Missile Warning System (MWS).

PL-10 does have an Imaging IR seeker which should give it performance close to that of AIM-9x Block I and European counterparts, whereas Su-57’s K-74M2 with Russia’s first IIR seeker is still missing in action. China is at least a decade behind the West in Imaging IR sensors, although it does appear to be ahead of Russia in this area (PL-10 is operational from 2014).

PL-15 is J-20’s main BVR missile for air combat. We don’t know where it stands with respect to guidance and ECCM but with a dual-pulse motor it appears to have greater range than AIM-120D today and is the main reason for quick development of AIM-260 JATM which is slated to become operational on F-18E/F and F-22 next year.

Lastly, J-20 has the largest internal fuel load of any Fighter which should give it greater range than everybody else, with the difference being pretty large in case of Eurocanards, F-22 and Su-57. There’s no doubt about J-20 being designed specifically for the Pacific theatre. The F-35 would be the only aircraft that’ll come close to its endurance owing to single-engine, and the infancy of Chinese jet engines especially when it comes to fuel efficiency.

It’s worth remembering that there’s so much that we don’t know about J-20. China’s unique case of obscuring relevant information is a big problem for making reliable assessment about the state of its Aerospace sector. This may change a little in the future as they try to expand their export market.

That being said, based on everything we know so far there’s nothing to suggest that J-20’s avionics suite is notably superior to Eurocanards or modern US 4th gen. platforms. In fact, it appears to be quite behind (radar and IRST being prime example) with a possible exception in EODAS, using 6 IIR for MWS is likely to offer greater missile detection range.

However, the J-20 compensates this with notably smaller RCS which for all its fault would classify as a LO aircraft. Even a modest 50 times smaller RCS provides roughly 3 times smaller detection range. Despite carrying a more powerful radar almost no 4th gen. platform would be capable of negating J-20’s advantage in detection range. This is the power of stealth most people fail to grasp.

Even though the disparity isn’t as big as with F-22 and F-35 (>10 times smaller detection range), you don’t want to be facing J-20 or perhaps even Su-57 in a 4th gen. platform. So when you’ve around 150 J-20 in service today [8] (despite limited combat capability given lack of maturity) and China’s plan to procure over 300, it does become clear the kind of threat it pose.

It’ll be decades before China’s semiconductor industry becomes a peer competitor but by investing in a LO fleet, PLAAF will be able to bridge some of the gap in Situational Awareness.

Of course, it’s a different league when it comes to F-22 and F-35. Even in most optimistic scenario J-20 is nowhere near their level of Stealth, the gap is simply too big. That is an opinion unanimously shared by people having worked in B-2, F-22 or F-35 program as well as the USAF F-35 pilot community. The F-35A in 65th Aggressor squadron fly with external carriage and without full RAM treatment to simulate adversary LO aircraft (Su-57 and J-20) as a full LO mode simply put would be an overkill.

An F-35 pilot who talked us on condition of anonymity said that it makes sense to give the aircraft a full-body paint, even though it implies an LO (Low Observability) penalty. “U.S. combat pilots normally want to train against realistic replicas of the threats; hence, a full LO would not even be too realistic (at least, not yet)…” [9]

J-20 doesn’t pose a serious threat to the F-22 and F-35 fleet today in either Situational Awareness nor Stealth, but it is the biggest threat out there for European and American 4th gen. platforms especially given the numbers. Overall, J-20 is a significant step ahead of its predecessor(s) unlike the Su-57. In the coming years I think the biggest challenge for J-20 fleet will be the infancy of Chinese jet engine technology and durability of RAM coatings, both of which will have a big toll on availability rates.

Footnotes
[1] A Preliminary Assessment of Specular Radar Cross Section Performance in the Chengdu J-20 Prototype
[2] Image on ausairpower.net
[3] US20100271253A1 - Cnt-based signature control material - Google Patents
[4] https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/10/30/the_us_f-35_versus_the_prc_j-20_112550.html
[5] New Airborne AESA Radars from China - Defense Update:
[6] APG-68(V)9 Radar for Block 50/52 F-16
[7] Serious Squall - Aviation Today
[8] China deploys stealth fighter jets to units monitoring Taiwan Strait
[9] Exclusive: 57th Wing Confirms Plan To Use Threat Representative Color Scheme on the Aggressor F-35s"

@Abhirup Sengupta, what do you think of the J-20, relative to the SU-57, Eurocanards, and US 5th gens?

Answer (1 of 5): Abhirup Sengupta answered this question and his answer is full of groundless assumptions and displays significant bias. I will answer him point by point using screenshots. Screenshot 1: Here he shows a RCS simulation by a think tank called Air Power Australia (APA). The said thi...

www.quora.com

This information is 2 years old. The author was spot on about stealth aspects of J-20. Following comparison is based on the most comprehensive structural rcs simulation on the web:

This information came out recently.

I also disclosed some information in this post to highlight some of the differences. It looks like you did not understand it.

Chinese do not critic their hardware on a regular basis. Therefore, not many have an idea about its problems and limitations. Americans have a bad habit of over-criticizing their hardware on the other hand. Many were skeptical of B-2A design and capability when it was first rolled out but Operation Allied Storm showed to them.

 

[liuzhengdong]

Mate, let's have a look at following information:

"The problem with J-20 (and most PLAAF Fighters) is that there’s very little reliable data available, most are speculative which makes it very hard to make an accurate assessment. For example, we don’t have any clear picture of J-20’s radar antenna (or that of any frontline PLAAF Fighter), the widely circulated pictures are CGI which come with its own set of problems.

There is no published data on J-20’s RCS. Years ago Air Power Australia (APA) ran their simulation which showed J-20 having a frontal RCS around 5.5 dBsm to -5 dBsm (in most of the nose cone, canopy and inlet).[1][2] Now, APA is not a reliable think tank by a long shot but it does provide some context since they’re heavily skewed towards Russian and Chinese equipment.

The J-20 has quite good RCS-reduction measures in the frontal section. You can see the continuous curvature on the nose cone and canopy resemble that of Raptor. The engine face is shielded with Serpentine intake and the IRST sensor is housed in an EOTS like structure with faceted glass panels instead of a spherical dome as in Su-57 – two main problems that ruin Su-57’s RCS.

View attachment 48872

J-20 also have quite extensive use of RAM coatings, both on leading and trailing edges as well on the surface unlike Su-57 where RAM usage is largely limited to the rear portion of the IRST dome, air intakes, and big RF apertures such as the radome.

However, we don’t know anything about the thickness of RAM coatings on J-20 or it’s characteristics (such as range of frequency where it’s effective). In the F-35 for example, from an early engine fire accident we know that its surface coatings are pretty thick. Also, the CNT based RAM on F-35 is particularly effective at a wide range of frequency from L through K band,
[3] a range unheard in commercially available RAM. Given the 40 year head-start that the US enjoys in this area since the F-117, it’s very likely that RAM coatings on J-20 is decades behind the F-22 and especially F-35 in terms of both effectiveness and durability (ease of maintenance).

Developing RAM that’s effective against a wide range of radar bands is one thing, developing one that’s also durable enough to last longer and can be applied on the flight-line without specialized hangars with Temperature and Humidity control is a whole lot different thing. The fact Su-57 as well as the recently unveiled Checkmate show negligible use of surface coatings further highlight the disparity.

While the J-20 has good RCS-reduction from the front, the same is not the case from non-frontal aspects especially the rear. Take a look at J-20 (WS-15) and F-35’s (F135) engine nozzles.

View attachment 48873

Both are serrated circular nozzles in theory but there’s a significant difference in their effectiveness. F135’s unique petal like structures not only offer much better RCS-reduction but also large cooling vents for the exhaust.

Then there are canards, and all-moving vertical stabilisers that can act as a large source of specular reflection from a wide angle including the front. These surfaces are also particularly susceptible to Rayleigh scattering at lower bands leading to poor RCS at those bands. Their relatively small size also limit the thickness of RAM coatings that could be used to mitigate the problem.

View attachment 48874

It’s not that you can’t use canards in LO designs but that their impact is a lot harder to deal with. The canards as well as all-moving vertical stabilisers are something you want to avoid on a VLO airframe. So their presence does shed some light on the overall LO characteristics of J-20.

Another problem with J-20 and Su-57 is that both lack any sort of LPI datalink like Raptor’s IFDL or F-35’s MADL, which ultimately limit their networking capability in a contested airspace. Such a restriction in data sharing will ultimately reduce their Situational Awareness. This is one reason why the former USAF Chief of Staff compared J-20 with F-117.[4]

In all likelihood the J-20 appears to have smaller RCS than Su-57 but I seriously doubt it to be stealthier than F-117, which put its RCS about 2 to 3 order of magnitude bigger than that of F-22 and F-35.

Avionics

With ~1,800 TRMs J-20 appears to have a bigger radar than all but APG-77 on F-22. Although other than the size there’s little to no data about it. China recently unveiled LKF601E, a small AESA radar for export Fighters like the JF-17. The radar reportedly has a SAR resolution of 1 meter,
[5] which is actually worse than a decade old Mechanical radars in the West. For instance, the F-16’s APG-68v9 from 2004 has 0.6 meter (2 feet) SAR resolution[6] and it too was designed exclusively for exports as a low-cost alternative.

View attachment 48875
LKF601E unveiled at an Air Show

Since radar’s bandwidth is the principle factor determining the SAR resolution, this does raise some serious doubt about the actual bandwidth. And it’s not as if it fares any better in other areas, F-15’s Mechanical radar from 1990s could track 14 targets and engage 6, Rafale’s 20 year old RBE2 PESA radar which had similar (small) size could track 40 targets.[7] If this is any indication of the state of Chinese AESA radars then they’re no better than Russia, which is at least a generation behind the West. Any advantage of J-20’s radar will only come from the bigger aperture.

Another important thing worth mentioning is that while the J-20’s EOTS-like sensor (called EOTS-86) looks similar to F-35’s EOTS, there’s a distinct difference in their functionality. Unlike F-35’s EOTS which is a true Targeting Pod + long-range IRST sensor with emphasis on the former, the J-20’s EOTS-86 is more of an IRST sensor with emphasis on air-air. This is because it has quite limited FoV for a targeting pod, only having a lens in the forward section unlike F-35’s EOTS which can look at steep angle to the sides or even rear.

View attachment 48876
F-35’s EOTS bellow

Also, while J-20 has DAS-like apertures for spherical IR coverage, these sensors have more in common with F-22’s AAR-56 Missile Warning System (MWS) than F-35’s DAS. The J-20’s EODAS sensors are very likely to be limited to MWS role. This is because Chinese IR sensors are still behind the West. This is evident with J-20’s weapons bay for PL-10.

The only reason to have a complicated ejection cycle as seen in J-20’s side-bays is when you lack the ability to have a reliable Lock-on-After-Launch (LOAL) capability on an IIR missile.

View attachment 48877

Putting the missile out on a rail instead of launching it directly from internal bay not only comes with prolong RCS penalty of having the missile hang outside but also a complex mechanism with increased risk of failure. All of this could be avoided by simply having an IR missile with a reliable LOAL capability. Maybe 15 years down the line J-20’s EODAS can be upgraded to have limited IRST functionality as is the case with F-22’s AAR-56 slated to be upgraded in coming years, but today there’s nothing to suggest that J-20’s EODAS is anything more than a Missile Warning System (MWS).

PL-10 does have an Imaging IR seeker which should give it performance close to that of AIM-9x Block I and European counterparts, whereas Su-57’s K-74M2 with Russia’s first IIR seeker is still missing in action. China is at least a decade behind the West in Imaging IR sensors, although it does appear to be ahead of Russia in this area (PL-10 is operational from 2014).

PL-15 is J-20’s main BVR missile for air combat. We don’t know where it stands with respect to guidance and ECCM but with a dual-pulse motor it appears to have greater range than AIM-120D today and is the main reason for quick development of AIM-260 JATM which is slated to become operational on F-18E/F and F-22 next year.

Lastly, J-20 has the largest internal fuel load of any Fighter which should give it greater range than everybody else, with the difference being pretty large in case of Eurocanards, F-22 and Su-57. There’s no doubt about J-20 being designed specifically for the Pacific theatre. The F-35 would be the only aircraft that’ll come close to its endurance owing to single-engine, and the infancy of Chinese jet engines especially when it comes to fuel efficiency.

It’s worth remembering that there’s so much that we don’t know about J-20. China’s unique case of obscuring relevant information is a big problem for making reliable assessment about the state of its Aerospace sector. This may change a little in the future as they try to expand their export market.

That being said, based on everything we know so far there’s nothing to suggest that J-20’s avionics suite is notably superior to Eurocanards or modern US 4th gen. platforms. In fact, it appears to be quite behind (radar and IRST being prime example) with a possible exception in EODAS, using 6 IIR for MWS is likely to offer greater missile detection range.

However, the J-20 compensates this with notably smaller RCS which for all its fault would classify as a LO aircraft. Even a modest 50 times smaller RCS provides roughly 3 times smaller detection range. Despite carrying a more powerful radar almost no 4th gen. platform would be capable of negating J-20’s advantage in detection range. This is the power of stealth most people fail to grasp.

Even though the disparity isn’t as big as with F-22 and F-35 (>10 times smaller detection range), you don’t want to be facing J-20 or perhaps even Su-57 in a 4th gen. platform. So when you’ve around 150 J-20 in service today [8] (despite limited combat capability given lack of maturity) and China’s plan to procure over 300, it does become clear the kind of threat it pose.

It’ll be decades before China’s semiconductor industry becomes a peer competitor but by investing in a LO fleet, PLAAF will be able to bridge some of the gap in Situational Awareness.

Of course, it’s a different league when it comes to F-22 and F-35. Even in most optimistic scenario J-20 is nowhere near their level of Stealth, the gap is simply too big. That is an opinion unanimously shared by people having worked in B-2, F-22 or F-35 program as well as the USAF F-35 pilot community. The F-35A in 65th Aggressor squadron fly with external carriage and without full RAM treatment to simulate adversary LO aircraft (Su-57 and J-20) as a full LO mode simply put would be an overkill.

An F-35 pilot who talked us on condition of anonymity said that it makes sense to give the aircraft a full-body paint, even though it implies an LO (Low Observability) penalty. “U.S. combat pilots normally want to train against realistic replicas of the threats; hence, a full LO would not even be too realistic (at least, not yet)…” [9]

J-20 doesn’t pose a serious threat to the F-22 and F-35 fleet today in either Situational Awareness nor Stealth, but it is the biggest threat out there for European and American 4th gen. platforms especially given the numbers. Overall, J-20 is a significant step ahead of its predecessor(s) unlike the Su-57. In the coming years I think the biggest challenge for J-20 fleet will be the infancy of Chinese jet engine technology and durability of RAM coatings, both of which will have a big toll on availability rates.

Footnotes
[1] A Preliminary Assessment of Specular Radar Cross Section Performance in the Chengdu J-20 Prototype
[2] Image on ausairpower.net
[3] US20100271253A1 - Cnt-based signature control material - Google Patents
[4] https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/10/30/the_us_f-35_versus_the_prc_j-20_112550.html
[5] New Airborne AESA Radars from China - Defense Update:
[6] APG-68(V)9 Radar for Block 50/52 F-16
[7] Serious Squall - Aviation Today
[8] China deploys stealth fighter jets to units monitoring Taiwan Strait
[9] Exclusive: 57th Wing Confirms Plan To Use Threat Representative Color Scheme on the Aggressor F-35s"

@Abhirup Sengupta, what do you think of the J-20, relative to the SU-57, Eurocanards, and US 5th gens?

Answer (1 of 5): Abhirup Sengupta answered this question and his answer is full of groundless assumptions and displays significant bias. I will answer him point by point using screenshots. Screenshot 1: Here he shows a RCS simulation by a think tank called Air Power Australia (APA). The said thi...

www.quora.com

This information is 2 years old. The author was spot on about stealth aspects of J-20. Following comparison is based on the most comprehensive structural rcs simulation on the web:

View attachment 48878

This information came out recently.

I also disclosed some information in this post to highlight some of the differences. It looks like you did not understand it.

Chinese do not critic their hardware on a regular basis. Therefore, not many have an idea about its problems and limitations. Americans have a bad habit of over-criticizing their hardware on the other hand. Many were skeptical of B-2A design and capability when it was first rolled out but Operation Allied Storm showed to them.

The J-20 has been in service for more than 8 years, and the US radar has never detected it.
China's anti-stealth radar has detected F22 and F35 many times over the East China Sea, guiding the J-20 to intercept

 

[UKBengali]

@LeGenD : A lack of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Like I say NO ONE on earth knows whether J-20 or the latest upgraded F-22 is a better air supremacy fighter.

 

[lightning f57]

What is the sensor package of J-20? How good is the radar system and sensor fusion? Any demos? How LO the jet is? Have a look at this post.

Maybe have a look at what NSA can do. How it collects information from all over the world. What else US use to collect information from all over the world. How threat libraries are created and updated.

If a military officer explains how it will go down, he is dreaming. If an ill-informed journalist say China wins, it is gospel. American military tech is not in doubt, it is top notch. Others need to catch-up which is the hard part.

Your speculating here, sure where China has declared what the J20 has you can make comparison. Gary from F16.net can also make observations and come up with his hypothesis, but none of these are facts.

So I ask again, does the US have a J20 to say exactly how good or bad it is, you and everyone can speculate as much as you like it doesnt make it reality unless its comfirmed as such.

 

[lightning f57]

@LeGenD : A lack of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Like I say NO ONE on earth knows whether J-20 or the latest upgraded F-22 is a better air supremacy fighter.

People can make informed guesses no problem thats the purpose of this forum, and it makes an interesting discussion. One can not say these are facts unless they have confirmation.

 

[UKBengali]

People can make informed guesses no problem thats the purpose of this forum, and it makes an intetesting discussion. One can not say these ate facts unless they have confirmation.

Which is exactly my point.

All these US fanboys saying US IS ahead of China is frankly a little on the pathetic side.

I get it from US posters but why do non-US posters do it as well?!

US technology is proven to be better than Russian but they have not moved ahead in like 2 decades electronically, whereas China surpassed Russia around a decade ago and keeps moving forward.

 

[SolarWarden]

The J-20 has been in service for more than 8 years, and the US radar has never detected it.
China's anti-stealth radar has detected F22 and F35 many times over the East China Sea, guiding the J-20 to intercept

Tell me silly billy how on earth do you know no US radar has ever detected J-20? Were Yu in US classified briefings when they had that meeting?

 

[SolarWarden]

Which is exactly my point.

All these US fanboys saying US IS ahead of China is frankly a little on the pathetic side.

I get it from US posters but why do non-US posters do it as well?!

US technology is proven to be better than Russian but they have not moved ahead in like 2 decades electronically, whereas China surpassed Russia around a decade ago and keeps moving forward.

Lol. Celestials still can't make a fighter engine near the quality of late 90's early 00's US made engines. What's pathetic is yu living in denial that US is not far ahead it's like your coping mechanism. Stop reading western doom and gloom articles about US falling behind china they are bait articles for simpletons and a way for US MIC to keep the high funding going.

 

[UKBengali]

Lol. Celestials still can't make a fighter engine near the quality of late 90's early 00's US made engines. What's pathetic is yu living in denial that US is not far ahead it's like your coping mechanism. Stop reading western doom and gloom articles about US falling behind china they are bait articles for simpletons and a way for US MIC to keep the high funding going.

Well since you are American then it is perfectly fine to think US is on top and be a fanboy of US military technology.


Nope as the WS-15 engine is now being put on production J-20 fighters.

The specs released do put it roughly equivalent to F-119 engine of the F-22.

Now since the F-22 still is stuck with this engine that means in the engine department the J-20 and F-22 are now a match.

Yes we keep hearing the line "US MIC to keep the high funding going" but that is just a conjecture.

Anyway how would the US MIC know they are x years ahead of someone like China? They know what they have but absolutely little to no idea of the best that China has.

 

[SolarWarden]

Well since you are American then it is perfectly fine to think US is on top and be a fanboy of US military technology.


Nope as the WS-15 engine is now being put on production J-20 fighters.

The specs released do put it roughly equivalent to F-119 engine of the F-22.

Now since the F-22 still is stuck with this engine that means in the engine department the J-20 and F-22 are now a match.

Yes we keep hearing the line "US MIC to keep the high funding going" but that is just a conjecture.

Anyway how would the US MIC know they are x years ahead of someone like China? They know what they have but absolutely little to no idea of the best that China has.

Lol. How on earth would the likes of yu know the quality of F-119 and have the nerve to say the ws15 is now a match? Stop living in this delusion.

What PLA releases in info is propaganda and it is propaganda because they never report, unlike the US, delays and problems. F-35 and F-22 program was pretty much an open book when it came to its development the J-20 program has been smooth with no issues which fanboys like yu believe with no critical thinking. Five years ago Russia delivered SU-35's to china even though China stole/cloned Flankers of their own and reason why they got those su-35's was for their engines and yet somehow ws15 is now the same quality as F-119. Puh-leeze!

 

[UKBengali]

Lol. How on earth would the likes of yu know the quality of F-119 and have the nerve to say the ws15 is now a match? Stop living in this delusion.

What PLA releases in info is propaganda and it is propaganda because they never report, unlike the US, delays and problems. F-35 and F-22 program was pretty much an open book when it came to its development the J-20 program has been smooth with no issues which fanboys like yu believe with no critical thinking. Five years ago Russia delivered SU-35's to china even though China stole/cloned Flankers of their own and reason why they got those su-35's was for their engines and yet somehow ws15 is now the same quality as F-119. Puh-leeze!

Yet again, your assumptions are supposed to be accepted as fact?

For all we know the WS-15 could be technologically a superior engine than F-119 that is coming up to 30 years old anyway.

As for Chinese engines, they even sold Pakistan the single engined J-10CE with WS-10B engine. That shows how reliable their engines are these days.

Yes at this time USA leads China in engine technology but is this still going to be the case just 10 years from now when they both roll their 6th generation fighters off the production line? Maybe, maybe not.

 

[Hendarto]

Lol. How on earth would the likes of yu know the quality of F-119 and have the nerve to say the ws15 is now a match? Stop living in this delusion.

What PLA releases in info is propaganda and it is propaganda because they never report, unlike the US, delays and problems. F-35 and F-22 program was pretty much an open book when it came to its development the J-20 program has been smooth with no issues which fanboys like yu believe with no critical thinking. Five years ago Russia delivered SU-35's to china even though China stole/cloned Flankers of their own and reason why they got those su-35's was for their engines and yet somehow ws15 is now the same quality as F-119. Puh-leeze!

China bought Su-35 is not proof that She can't make an engine with TWR 10. It is more of a case of kicking the tire like when you buy a car. They want to know how their J11B or J16 compares to the latest Russian product. What advances have the Russians made since they bought J11 and J11A?

Every car manufacturer did that They purchased the product from the rival company and tore it up to see what inside China is no different. Well after buying and testing the product, They are not impressed There is no follow-up purchase it ends up with China only buying 1 brigade.

As for Engine, yes WS 15 is now in low production mode It takes roughly 2 decades for an engine to mature that is universal. The US has a lead because they start early But now the gap is small or non-existent. Even without WS 15 the present generation of J 20 can achieve supercruise ! as recorded by the J 20 pilot

 

[SolarWarden]

China bought Su-35 is not proof that She can't make an engine with TWR 10. It is more of a case of kicking the tire like when you buy a car. They want to know how their J11B or J16 compares to the latest Russian product. What advances have the Russians made since they bought J11 and J11A?

Every car manufacturer did that They purchased the product from the rival company and tore it up to see what inside China is no different. Well after buying and testing the product, They are not impressed There is no follow-up purchase it ends up with China only buying 1 brigade.

As for Engine, yes WS 15 is now in low production mode It takes roughly 2 decades for an engine to mature that is universal. The US has a lead because they start early But now the gap is small or non-existent. Even without WS 15 the present generation of J 20 can achieve supercruise ! as recorded by the J 20 pilot

With the exception of engines PLA flankers at the time were equal or even a bit more advanced than SU-35 export version. Yu don't buy two squadrons worth of SU-35's to "kick the tires" to know where the SU-35 is to their J-11B and J-16.