There are several LRIP air-frames currently in service at PLAAF Dingxin Flight Test & Training Base with identified serial numbers running from 78271-78276Has J20 entered the squadron service.
The only help I could offer is point out that there have been no public announcement regarding the production rates of J10c's and J16's let alone projections announcements for the J20's production rate.I tried to go through last few pages looking for info on production rate (planned and current) for the J 20, then I gave up. Can anyone help me out here plz.
An overhead shot of the same J20-J16 line-up. Confirmation that the J20 is shorter than a flanker in length.Henry K put this up on his Twitter page; wish this pic was of a higher resolution:
3 J20's and 3 J16's on a photo-op.
Your logic is skewed. Every advanced MIC is producing anti-stealth airborne and ground-based radars. If your argument is that the PRC should stop producing stealth fighters for that reason, then it should apply to everyone else.Unfortunately for China this J20 is already obsolete in the Pacific even before it was inducted into service. The USN already has the Advanced Hawkeye years ago designed to target F-22 & F-35 wannabees. By 2018 Japan will have it too.
First of all, both Russia and China have claimed their similar anti-stealth radars years ago, did Americans think that their F-22 & F-35 is obsolete?Unfortunately for China this J20 is already obsolete in the Pacific even before it was inducted into service. The USN already has the Advanced Hawkeye years ago designed to target F-22 & F-35 wannabees. By 2018 Japan will have it too.
Your logic is skewed. Every advanced MIC is producing anti-stealth airborne and ground-based radars. If your argument is that the PRC should stop producing stealth fighters for that reason, then it should apply to everyone else.
If the J20 is obsolete , then so is the F22,F35 and SU57.
Unfortunately, neither Russia, nor China, is thinking of getting deep into Pacific to fight US. Instead, currently, all 3 are planning the war theater closing to Russia and China. In other words, mobility is not a problem for Russia and China while E-2D is lot more vulnerable when it is flying in enemy's air defense area.First, Russian and Chinese VHF and UHF radars are stationary and ground based, meaning their utility in the Pacific theater is very limited, whereas the E-2D is airborne and mobile thus the latter's reach is substantially significant and flexible.
No, opposing to what you believe. There is no much leading that Americans enjoy against Russian and Chinese. As long as you have the related facility, you can test whatever stealth design you wants. In fact, both Russia and China have produced their own "F-22" demonstrator for testing once American F-22 came out. The problem is both of them lack the necessary technologies to put these demonstrator into massive scale production. But these demonstrators are good enough for anti-stealth purpose.Second, Lockheed Martin, the maker of AN/APY-9 radar, is also the manufacturer of F-111, F-22 and F-35. Lockheed no doubt has mastered the science of stealth and thus is in the best position to lead in counter-stealth. Just imagine the data available to Lockheed on the "actual" (not theoretical) vulnerabilities of stealth aircrafts based on their experience with their own stealth aircrafts.
Russian and China on the other hand have no actual experience or at least are still in the learning process of manufacturing much more testing their radars against actual stealth aircrafts (still the F-22 is significantly better in stealth than any upcoming Russian and Chinese stealth fighters).
I thought you guys were getting off the Russian vodka engines.High res pics of two yellow birds from CAC:
The photos are clear enough to note that the EOTS apature seems to have functional equipment now.
Ten LRIP air-frames by year-end would be a great start.
And the troll surfaces. Thought you claimed to have expert knowledge on all things "Chini".I thought you guys were getting off the Russian vodka engines.
You might be right, which debunks your earlier claims that the WS-10 was ready to replace Russian engines.And the troll surfaces. Thought you claimed to have expert knowledge on all things "Chini".
Only one prototype has been integrated with WS10's; an airframe that had it's first flight barely more than a month ago. These aren't prototypes my Indian friend. These are LRIP birds being being inducted into PLAAF service, Chini Expert Sir!
Your constant attempts to troll and derail the J20 thread and others on the China sub-forum are growing more and more juvenile my Indian friend. So are your strawman arguments. Please provide the post where I made that "claim".You might be right, which debunks your earlier claims that the WS-10 was ready to replace Russian engines.
There have been no official announcmenets from the PLAAF or Chengdu Corp as to when the J20 will reach FOC soooo... *shrugs IDKAlright jokes aside.
When do you @no smoking @J20! Guys expect j-20 to achieve FOC and mature totally???
I guess 2022 for j-20 and 2025-27 for j-31.
see from 40:30High res pics of two yellow birds from CAC:
The photos are clear enough to note that the EOTS apature seems to have functional equipment now.
Ten LRIP air-frames by year-end would be a great start.
I haven't watched your video, but if those "spies" managed to steal critical information and tech from F35 contractors then GOOD!!!see from 40:30
How chinya cyberspies stole f35 technology
"china denies"
people also claimed that J20 originated from Russian MiG1.44, you guys should figure out the exact source before making a mockery of yourselves.see from 40:30
How chinya cyberspies stole f35 technology
"china denies"
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
S | Recent Analysis on J20 from Aviation Week-"Chinese J-20 Stealth Fighter Advances" | China | 10 | |
CAN THE S400 SHOOT DOWN A F22, F35, J20... ? | Indian Air Force | 2 | ||
J20 Shock to PLAAF | China | 311 | ||
B | china to start limited production of j20 and to induct them in 2017-18 | China | 2 |