J20 Stealth Fighter

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[johnq]

The use of canards in the J-20 shows a fundamental lack of understanding about stealth. The J-20 is more of a copy and paste job from one of the US' earlier designs which it abandoned due to stealth considerations. The J-20 has a certain degree of reduced RCS in x-band from the front, but it will not save it from being shot down by Indian fighter jets using tracking data from the Phalcon AWACS, ground based radars, IRSTs, and even their longer ranged fighter x-band radars such as in the SU-30MKI for their missile shots. India has both long range and multistatic radar capabilities which can be used to track and shoot down fighters far more stealthy than the J-20.

 

[scatterStorm]

Firstly, Agni-5 is still in development, not operational;
Secondly, it is not ICBM with 5000+km range. I know some fanboys will jump up saying:" You Chinese expert acknowledge that already". I know, I know, a good propaganda effort in 2012, wasn't it.



Yes, they are operational, but a very small number.



Pralay - already operational? Source please.
Shaurya - if you mean the hypersonic cruise missile, so far haven't seen any testing news. On the other hand, India is still waiting for Russian's Brahmos-2 (hypersonic). So, source please.




No, India has no Tupolev-16.
H-6+CJ10 is combination providing Chinese long range strike, 3000km (H-6) + 2000km (CJ-10) means Chinese bomb can take off from inland China, shooting the cruise missile safely deep within the Chinese sky to cover major India cities. On the other hand, Mig-31 and M-2000 need to fly very close or even into Chinese sky to strike, and the missile on board is only short range. Also, one H-6 can carry 6 CJ-10 all together while Indian plane can carry 1.

I usually avoid this kind of discussion, as nuclear exchange is a very far fetched thought, however since you asked for it,

1. Pre-induction trials are done, all passed. The Final test was to be done before China virus, but then it was halted. Its already in ready state of deployment if need arises. Besides you won't be requiring them in large numbers, just 10 to 15 alone would be enough.

FYI, talking about numbers, DRDO tests using not 1 missile prototype but somewhere in the range of 5 to 10 each. So Final induction ready state is of already 10 to 15 I presume.

Range is never disclosed. 5500Km is the P5 limited UN range but you can safely assume that if war demands, than that P5 limit will be ignored, so somewhere b/w 7500Km to 8000 Km. Besides payload can be varied to suite our needs, unlike Chinese needs. Greater the range, payload decrease.

2. Parlay test units were already 10-12 units, its based on PDV platform, so only the warhead size is varied, nothing much. Hence as some confidential sources, its deployed somewhere in *redacted*.

3. Shaurya is operational already. @Karthi could shed some more light on it. Go ask him.

4. Yes, I agree, however I was going by the notion to when we were considering Russian Tu-16. Besides, our strategic interest doesn't require us to target bases far off from our land. Hence bombers aren't suitable. We could simply launch ICBMs for that matter.

A buddy of mine in IAF has already discounted Chinese bombers about the IAF strategy against them. Which however is discussion of another day.

Bombers are slow targets, besides the moment they go off Hotan, which we already do with PAF F16s, you can't conceal them. Consider the Hotan airbase or any nearby base, to have salvo of our cruise missile strikes and CRMBS in the first wave already and then later IAF would be up in the sky for there mission roles.

China has long way to go in terms of airpower pal, just plain numbers don't matter alone, whoever take air dominance first, consider any new jet arrival a discounted air asset already.

 

[scatterStorm]

new target of Chinese hackers.

RRs are a JV for India's AMCA already.

 

[scatterStorm]

The use of canards in the J-20 shows a fundamental lack of understanding about stealth. The J-20 is more of a copy and paste job from one of the US' earlier designs which it abandoned due to stealth considerations. The J-20 has a certain degree of reduced RCS in x-band from the front, but it will not save it from being shot down by Indian fighter jets using tracking data from the Phalcon AWACS, ground based radars, IRSTs, and even their longer ranged fighter x-band radars such as in the SU-30MKI for their missile shots. India has both long range and multistatic radar capabilities which can be used to track and shoot down fighters far more stealthy than the J-20.

That's what the Chinese enthusiast aren't understanding, It wasn't design to be VLO fighter jet (Stealth). It was designed to be a long range interceptor with maneuverability (questionable considering powerplant and its huge size).

I've said countless times on this thread alone that it will be modified into a Fighter Bomber Role. It happened, with the Type-B variant in production already.

This jet prime role is even not properly understood by there manufacturers and operators alone.

 

[scatterStorm]

The J-20 is a joke; it doesn't even have a cannon, which shows how out of touch the Chinese are when it comes to actual air combat. Its rcs is an order of magnitude worse than F-35 in the front in x band and much worse from the side and rear. It can readily be tracked and shot at by using long wave radar such as the one on E2D:

The U.S. Navy’s Secret Counter-Stealth Weapon Could Be Hiding in Plain Sight

Its heat signature is massive from the front due to the canards heating up, and from the rear because of those massive engines. A Mica or R-73 heatseeking missile will easily take it down. It can even be shot down by a long range missile being guided by the long wave radar on E2D.

Hate to break this to you, but it ain't joke. Its still has weapons onboard. Yes it can be understood that its effectiveness is questionable, and that would be the right way to put this. Never underestimate the enemy.

 

[scatterStorm]

View attachment 55168View attachment 55167View attachment 55166
one of CN nextgen fighters in research，canard+TVC is good choice for 6+ stealthy

Oh lord, Tailless is all fine, but the engine isn't IR's corrected. This isn't 6th gen. You wan't to see 6th gen go see BAE Tempest.

6th gen fighters would be tactical deep airspace penetrators.

They wont be needing extreme maneuverability as they would carry DEWs. Either in some form of adhoc flexible IWB or Pylon based. Example, RR engien on BAE tempest (proposed) would generate enough electricity to power few thousand home alone.

They will carry stealth characteristics form 5th gen jets.

Etc.

 

[scatterStorm]

Judging by the number of sharp angles in canards and other control surfaces, I wouldn't be surprised if India's L band Awacs could track it. No wonder even the Su-30MKI radar was able to track it.

Although true, questionable, because they were carrying possible Luneburg lenses. So RCS data isn't true.

 

[johnq]

Although true, questionable, because they were carrying possible Luneburg lenses. So RCS data isn't true.

The Luneburg lens excuse is Chinese psy ops. Sharp angles and other smaller features in canards, etc. can be picked up due to resonance effect. That combined with the canards being in the front, constantly moving, and a limitation on the amount of RAM that can be applied on the canards means an order to two orders of magnitude higher RCS than the F-35, even from the front and even in x-band. That is why the US stealth fighters did not adapt canards. The whole Luneburg lens thing is an excuse that the Chinese came up with later. That is why the SU-30MKI radar could track it in x-band in spite of its low RCS; also because its Bars radar has a massive 400 km range against nonstealthy targets, so it can track the J-20, albeit at less range. Also, the Indian L-band Phalcon will have no problem tracking the J-20 and sending missile track quality data to the IAF fighters. Then there are also all these IAF fighters with IRST (even podded) that can shoot missiles at the J-20 without even turning their radars on, by tracking its heat signature.

 

[no smoking]

1. Pre-induction trials are done, all passed. The Final test was to be done before China virus, but then it was halted. Its already in ready state of deployment if need arises.

So, it is NOT deployed, period.

Besides you won't be requiring them in large numbers, just 10 to 15 alone would be enough.

10 to 15?
It takes over a year to produce that number. That is ICBM, not your rocket toy.

FYI, talking about numbers, DRDO tests using not 1 missile prototype but somewhere in the range of 5 to 10 each. So Final induction ready state is of already 10 to 15 I presume.

Where did you learn that? Nobody produce 5 to 10 missiles for one prototype. The reason why we call it PROTOTYPE is there are potential problems in the design, people try to discover these faults, modified the design, produce the new missile based on new blueprint, then test it again. This will go on until the design is finalized. If you just produce 5 test missiles based on design, what if you find bug in your design after 1 test? Throw the rest of missiles away?

Range is never disclosed. 5500Km is the P5 limited UN range but you can safely assume that if war demands, than that P5 limit will be ignored, so somewhere b/w 7500Km to 8000 Km. Besides payload can be varied to suite our needs, unlike Chinese needs. Greater the range, payload decrease.

What P5 limited UN range? First hear it, mind sharing your source?

2. Parlay test units were already 10-12 units, its based on PDV platform, so only the warhead size is varied, nothing much. Hence as some confidential sources, its deployed somewhere in *redacted*.

Oh, yes, some "confidential sources".

3. Shaurya is operational already. @Karthi could shed some more light on it. Go ask him.

Oh, yes, based on another military fan's words. Great answer.

4. Yes, I agree, however I was going by the notion to when we were considering Russian Tu-16. Besides, our strategic interest doesn't require us to target bases far off from our land. Hence bombers aren't suitable. We could simply launch ICBMs for that matter.

Who tell you that? ICBM couldn't replace the survivability, flexibility and tactical role of bomber. Why do you think US and Russia always keep a large bomber fleets, got too much money?

Bombers are slow targets, besides the moment they go off Hotan, which we already do with PAF F16s, you can't conceal them. Consider the Hotan airbase or any nearby base, to have salvo of our cruise missile strikes and CRMBS in the first wave already and then later IAF would be up in the sky for there mission roles.

Why we need to conceal them? If IAF is stupid enough to send their fighters deep into China to hunt these bombers, nothing could be better to PLAF.

And why these bombers need to take off from Hotan or whatever airport closing to border? With 3000km battle range and over 1500km missile range, they can even take off from Beijing and got Mumbai within its strike coverage.

When you think about how to wipe out Chinese bases, don't you think Chinese will do the same thing to your bases?

China has long way to go in terms of airpower pal, just plain numbers don't matter alone, whoever take air dominance first, consider any new jet arrival a discounted air asset already.

The same could be said about India.

 

[johnq]

All authoritarian governments overstate their weapons capabilities as a part of their psy ops warfare and propaganda to keep their people and adversaries in check: In reality such actions betray their fear. All democracies understate their weapons capabilities in order to hide them from their adversaries. All this boasting about cruise missile attacks using bombers is nice propaganda and psy ops, but completely disregards India's true defensive capabilities. In fact, India has hidden its true capabilities from the world precisely because it doesn't want to rattle other countries.
If Chinese bombers could destroy Indian cities by launching cruise missiles from well within China, then why put them near the border in the first place? Because it's a part of Chinese psy ops, or because China doubts its abilities? And what about Indian radars, ECM capabilties of IAF fighters, India's supersonic cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, etc? China's facade of invincibility sounds great when recited by Chinese fanboys, until it will come crashing down, because real war is not so nice and neat. Vietnam beat the US back in spite of the US having a technological edge. In real war, all shiny brochures and fancy weapons technology goes out the window. What happens when China's Uyghurs slaves rise up in armed rebellion from within? What will China do if the same thing happens in Hong Kong, Tibet, or other areas where the people are getting sick of China's brutal authoritarian government? China has been arming rebels in Kashmir, India's Northeast and elsewhere. What happens when India returns the favor? Shiny bombers are worthless when China implodes from within, and it's only a matter of time, because of how the Chinese government has enslaved and mistreated people in Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong and elsewhere.

 

[Waanar]

Very very informative.... Especially the point at 02:10

 

[scatterStorm]

So, it is NOT deployed, period.



10 to 15?
It takes over a year to produce that number. That is ICBM, not your rocket toy.



Where did you learn that? Nobody produce 5 to 10 missiles for one prototype. The reason why we call it PROTOTYPE is there are potential problems in the design, people try to discover these faults, modified the design, produce the new missile based on new blueprint, then test it again. This will go on until the design is finalized. If you just produce 5 test missiles based on design, what if you find bug in your design after 1 test? Throw the rest of missiles away?



What P5 limited UN range? First hear it, mind sharing your source?



Oh, yes, some "confidential sources".



Oh, yes, based on another military fan's words. Great answer.



Who tell you that? ICBM couldn't replace the survivability, flexibility and tactical role of bomber. Why do you think US and Russia always keep a large bomber fleets, got too much money?



Why we need to conceal them? If IAF is stupid enough to send their fighters deep into China to hunt these bombers, nothing could be better to PLAF.

And why these bombers need to take off from Hotan or whatever airport closing to border? With 3000km battle range and over 1500km missile range, they can even take off from Beijing and got Mumbai within its strike coverage.

When you think about how to wipe out Chinese bases, don't you think Chinese will do the same thing to your bases?



The same could be said about India.

Consider this my last response here, as this is a J20 thread.

1. Do you know SFC? Its the Strategic Forces Command. I'd suggest you go to wiki page and read yourself the status of Agni 5.

Spoiler: Spoilah!

Rockets and ICBM have a long history of dependency. Most ICBMs are still rockets but your payload is different, instead of a sat equipment its a warhead. Rocket nosecone is sharply shaped because you care about aerodynamics and speed. MIRV capability can only be achieved if your kill vehicle is in orbit, and separation of smaller warhead from orbit to target locations in a calculated trajectory (ballistic). Nowadays you have hypersonic glide vehicles which can offset from ballistic trajectory into a flight-path.

Prototype are modular these days, aren't legacy missiles. If a bug arises in software of of the ring-laser gyro, you simply patch an update, and if there's a hardware issue, you simply remove that module, work on it to fix that and you reinstall the module. These are all ad-hoc systems.

2. P5 stands for Permanent member of UNSC 5 (US, Russia, China, UK, France). These 5 nations have power to veto if they think there nation have a potential nuclear threat from a particular ICBM, and thus won't allow a nation to extend the range of an ICBM to more than 5K km. Its MTCR but for ICBMs.

3. Deployment status for Pralay. Its deployed and its better that nobody know about it to where its deployed. I've emphasized on the platform used already, so its deployment is not questionable.


4. With the advent of hypersonic glide vehicles, and hypersonic cruise missiles. Bombers would be relic of the past. Bombers are there because sometimes they can take the path that's undetectable. However, if you read the news few time recently in years, that bombers getting intercepted by fighter jets alone. Than I don't think the point of bombers is that useful these days.

However, I don't want to go inside the rabbit hole discussion. Its could be done some another day. There are many cons than pros these days for bombers, especially if they aren't LO.

Chinese H6-J is one for them.

5. At what point I wrote that they are going to be hunted by IAF at first go. You don't assume that the first thing these bombers would see is a bloody S400 LR SAM up its ass.

Why would you assume it can even enter our airspace and reach Mumbai. Lol, are you nuts. It would simply fly from Hotan, and considering the missiles it carries would simply reach a higher altitude and fire and turn back A.S.A.P. This could be done in just 50Km or less.

That's why I said, that it needs to be hunt down before it reaches and altitude to fire its CJ-10 if the saturation attack on Hotan airbase fails (highly unlikely).

Its all about air theater dominance. The first one to dominate the airspace, the less likely chance to see a bomber, and pretty much a higher chance to see a bomber go down.

 

[johnq]

Cruise missiles can be detected by OTH long wavelength radars, Aerostats, Awacs and UAVs. Once you know they are coming, they can be jammed electronically as well as shot down by SAMs, OTH or otherwise via datalink from airborne radar (only if not in line of sight), or fighters firing their missiles.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[MiG-29SMT]

Nice aircraft I love this thread

 

[Karthi]

@scatterStorm yes bro Shaurya is in service, and is the most produced Missile in Indian inventory.

From the first page to this page on this thread everyone is saying the same thing , Canards reduces the Stealth of J20, it's completely untrue , yes Canards just add a little bit I think it's almost negligible . If J20 has stealth then it is only from the front. From the pictures posted above you can clearly see the Side view of J20s which is like a wall.

This one huge surface is enough for detecting the J20 from distances , applying RAM materials and Paints may reduce a bit . The surface is slightly angled but may not be good enough.

Another serious drawback is underpowered Engine it affects manuverablity to Radar Power , EW power and performance.

FC 31 is somewhat more stealthy. F22 also less Stealthy from sideways , but it is much better treated , clean and less surface are compared to J20 .

Still I won't think J20 is a bad Aircraft it can pose threats , but no way near what Chinese claims , they have the habit of gradually upgrading the systems , so in the next two or three iterations it will be more perfect and lethal .

F22 side looks much much better than J20