Sunday, January 19, 2014

J-20 high rez photo via Alert 5.


Tell me again that the F-35 will be good enough.

Really?

Seriously?

If you believe that, you're smoking crack.

25 comments :

  1. its a big plane, are you really convinced its as manueverable or is it meant to more of a stealthy F111? hit targets low and run before our fighter protection can even detect them,

    ReplyDelete
  2. sorry meant to say is my guess after comma.

    ReplyDelete
  3. is size a factor in maneuverability?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, everything is factor in case of maneuverability. Size, weight, shape, engines, avionics, external weapon systems... even the pilot. The last one can be a surprise in modern days but the human is the most weak link in whole plane, plane is able to do more G turn without pilot but he don't do this because human would blackout.

      Chengdu J-20 is a big prototype (he maybe stay in that way as flying testing platform for other 5th gen planes) but almost the same size as Sukhoi Su-27, then Chinese had not build something bigger then they already use in PLAAF. J-20 is only slightly bigger then PAK FA and that plane already show outstanding maneuverability not only on pair with everything in "western" country's but better then most of them. Supermaneuverability is something what Sukhoi engineers design from long long years and they just know that shit.

      Very important thing is engines, China don't posses a know how to build good jet engines. The can copy many things but design own engine on pair with some Russian, European or US engines, no sir they can't. The problem for us is that we don't know what will be the power of J-20 engines. Some sources say that it will be China home made WS-15 but there is absolutely no info about it. If it will be WS-15 then J-20 will be for sure under powered, but if Chinese get hands on Russian Saturn AL-31...

      The other case is unusual for 5th Gen fighter canards wings, this is something very interesting. Most of 5th Gen fighters are design to NOT go in to dogfight. But J-20 with that interesting design will be able to turn more rapidly, almost dance around other planes. Merge that with vectored thrust engines and you got some pretty sneaky bastards in any turn action.

      And the last thing, J-20 even at it size look like he will be able to out turn and out maneuver not only F-35 and F-22 but probably it will be able to do this with PAK FA. There is the problem with how much the construction, air frame of fighter can withstand and how much little Chinese boy can withstand before his brain start to leak from his ears.

      Delete
    2. i constantly accuse the chinese of copying. i accuse them of cheating on trade. i accuse them of being a totalitarian regime (ironic considering whats going on in the US).

      i will however never call them anything less than brilliant.

      brilliant. ruthless. cunning. formidable.

      having said that, we can kick their behinds back behind the great wall if we get our act together.

      Delete
    3. Yes they are, we don't need to like them but we need to respect them. They build good things, not the best, but many good things are always better then some perfect ones. Because "Even Hercules is an ass when people attack in mass".

      Delete
    4. Solomon

      Well, Flankers demonstrate that big birds can be super maneuverable, more so than little ones.

      Delete
  4. The Flanker is a big plane and very maneuverable.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting mental exercise. Two 5th gen fighters, unable to detect each other at beyond visual ranges through RADAR (their designed killing range with BLOS missiles) end up in a dog fight...

    In a dogfight, pilot experience and proficiency fueled by data input is key. Goes right back to Col. Boyd's OODA loop, the pilot who can see the fight the clearest can make choices that eventually make his opponent have no choices. So in terms of who wins in a dogfight, the J-20 or F-35, I would be looking to how well the pilots can see out of the canopy bubble, how well the instruments feed information, and how often the pilots eyes have to move off axis to access information.

    Seems like the "helmet of the future" project that is way behind schedule for the F-35 needs to get another kick in the pants.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who is better trained in dogfight. I don't know if yanks still believe in gun dogfight or again forget about it and concentrate on shooting missiles.

      Second thing, if you want to go tango on point blank range you will need to use guns. Only F-35A posses internal gun with... this is ridiculous... 182 rounds. J-20 gun armament is unknown, probably classic GSh-301 and if they put the same ammo drum on it as J-11 then they will have only 150 rounds. Bloody sniper shots.

      Delete
    2. What do you mean by unable to detect each other?
      The SH/Growler will wax them combining IRST, Atflir, Long Wave, X and Aesa Radar as it did with the Raptor with the Amraam or using the Aim-9X with extended range.

      http://www.boeing.com/Features/2013/04/bds_irst_04_09_13.html

      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-O7HWX0KIyCA/UcY5n2W3nHI/AAAAAAAADPY/w-2xNVqJkQM/s1600/IRSTsup.png

      Delete
    3. If Boeing's 4.5 gen solution for engaging 5th is good enough, why it hasn't win a single contest for Advanced SH or Silent Eagle?

      Delete
    4. perhaps the Navy is being a bit smarter than the JSF office. the JSF has been leaking info like its cool. perhaps if you're serious about fighting future wars you don't do that.

      Delete
  6. Take a look at the original requirements of the ATF competition (that resulted in the YF-22 and YF-23) and then look at this thing again.
    There are artistic representations in the mid 1980s of what should the ATF look like that are very similar to the J-20...just look at this 30 year old images....http://www.yf-23.net/Lockheed.html
    This thing and the russian T-50 will be monsters...
    P.S-Its the proposed FB-22 or the USAF will suffer...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Last summer I traveled to China on a company sponsored trip. I bought a knockoff Gucci handbag for my wife, you wouldn't able to tell that thing from a genuine one at all. The merchant even handed me faked receipt looking exactly like the one you would receive from a real Gucci boutique. I got myself a Beats by Dr Dre headphone. It cost me about one sixth of the retailing price I would expect paying at US retailer. Later I had the opportunity to compare it with my buddy's real thing and they happened to be the same model. You know what? I can tell the quality difference, but barely. Am I willing to play 5 times amount of $ on the real one for marginal performance boost? Hell no. This is what I am talking about, the Chinese copycat version if it turns out to be decent and acceptable, then we will be in deep trouble. Because we will never able to out produce them, maintaining quality edge is all we have left.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I used to know a manager in the "counterfeiting" industry. They made hand bags, belts,etc..they specialized in all things leather. It's all MAJOR BULLSHIT from the clothing industry, they would get orders from Gucci, Prada, Louis Vuitton,etc and they were so squeezed by them on prices that they were told by those SAME COMPANIES that bitch about counterfeiting to use the same machines, crappy leather, different stitches, etc and just make counterfeit items to make a PROFIT! That's how they made money, by counterfeiting! The original was made for a few dollars that the manufacturer would sell almost at cost, maybe even a LOSS that THEN Gucci would sell to some dumb bitch for $5000 but the manufacturer never saw that money.....The big names have all kinds of ways of going around laws and regulations, most of the items are made in Eastern Europe or Asia, shipped back to France or Italy where they will put in ONE FREAKING STITCH and then say it was made in France or Italy.....that's perfectly legal.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Adaptus primus, the reason is simple, you don't even need them to detect Stealth airplanes.
    Australian Super Hornets and growlers, Brazilian Gripens, Saudis F-15, Eurofighters, Indian Rafales, all of them use Aesa radars, IRST and EWR. Even Taiwan and Singapore will update their F-16 to have Aesa, advanced Sniper pods EWR countermesures etc. Not everybody in the workd is that Crazy about the F-35 or the Chinese Fake-35

    http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140114/DEFREG03/301140037/US-Singapore-Buy-Upgrade-Its-F-16-Fighter-Jets

    ReplyDelete
  10. IRST is an infrared sensor, it's more like a backup system to fighter's primary radar. On the other hand 5th fighter employs IR signature reducing technology. Stealth technology is multi-faced, it covers not just radar but thermal and IR domains as well. In realistic combat scenario even if a 4.5 gen fighter equipped with multiple radar/sensor package can spot 5 gen target. It's mostly likely the opposing pilot sitting inside 5 gen fighter cockpit already locked on its target and fired his BLOS missile. It's not really about whether or not 4 gen fighter can detect 5 gen fighter, it's about who can find whom first and takes the initiative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. and that my friend is where everything gets fuzzy. the US Navy is talking about sending out UAVs into contested airspace along with the F-18s and then you're networking all that those AEGIS and airborne AWACS to get a picture. one stealth fighter lights a missile and the whole wolf pack is about to fire on him. he might get a shot off but its going to be assured destruction and then we have to talk about the missile. with jamming, electronic spoofing and all the other jazz, a launch of a missile by a stealth jet doesn't guarantee a kill.

      we're talking about the F-35 probably having to fire off at least half its internal missile load at one jet to guarantee a kill. in essence assuming they're carrying 6 AIM120Ds, he can kill 3 planes if he's lucky. if he's carry external ordnance then he's no better than a super hornet.

      and thats the rub. in order to be effective he has to carry externally. in order to stay in the fight he has to carry externally. which is why the Navy is talking about using UAVs as missile trucks....which brings us back to detection....which means bigger AESA on bigger planes to get the job done....

      which all brings us back to the UAV and F-18 being more than good enough.

      Delete
    2. Makes sense...no argument here...

      Delete
  11. ┼╣zzzzzz........http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2013/10/13/japan-to-develop-new-radar-to-detect-and-track-stealth-fighter-jets/

    ReplyDelete
  12. http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-10/01/radar-detects-stealth-aircraft

    ReplyDelete
  13. Superrhinoceront, yes RADAR can track stealth. The question is at what range. Once inside line of sight it doesn't do you much good.

    Networking radars to create an array is a good way to paint yourself as a target in the sky. You cannot both emit and hide at the same time. RADAR seeking missiles (air to air or ground to air or air to ground) are all cheaper than planes (or drones). Doing the math here, it looks like any stealth good enough to be called stealth will require a plane to not emit, that 4.5 gen fighters emitting like crazy to find stealth will be easy targets BLOS (those drones as missile trucks will work for the enemy too).

    It is much like the Red Queen theory of evolution, sometimes you have to work as hard as you can simply to keep your place.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I wouldn't bet on a J-20 against an F-35, J-20 is like a F-22 on crack rock lmao. less stealth inferior situational awareness..the list goes on and on. The Sukhoi T-50 on the other hand will be a beast. We'll need to approach the PAK-FA with superior numbers of F-35s. It would be nice to get a FB-22 to deal with them, but we have to deal with whats real, not whats ideal. We dont have a FB-22 or a X-44 MANTA available for purchase and it would cost tons of money. So we just need to buy the full lot of F-35s

    ReplyDelete
  15. There is something strange in this plane, look at its outlines its too smooth like it was drawed to make an impression and not to integrate best available technology in a smallest stealthy size...

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.