J20 Stealth Fighter

[Assassin 2.0]

but in june 15 2020 you saw theya re willing to kills even with fists and rocks, imagine if you did not have AGNI V?

If india didn't had maintained strategic and conventional edge against Chinese we would have lost tons of land to them.
India nuclear tests were aimed at China not at Pakistan.
When india did nuclear tests atal bihari vajpaye ( indian pm wrote this too US president)
Vajpayee explained to Clinton that India was concerned about the deteriorating security environment, especially the nuclear scenario in the region. Without naming China, he said, "we have an overt nuclear weapon state on our borders, a state which committed armed aggression against India in 1962" and that this country had helped "another neighbour of ours" to become a covert nuclear state.

Redirect Notice

 

[MiG-29SMT]

But bro we can't just depend on Nukes for example Chinese and india are having conflict over a inhabited strategic land where this whole thing is going on our main goal is to be deterrent to Chinese advances if we don't build up conventional capabilities and Chinese out power us on ground and capture the area it will be sufficient to establish Chinese dominance in the region. And amid all this we decided not to nuke Beijing because of 10-20KM of land loss will be ours.

Chinese threat wad undermine in india for decades but now looks like their is some awakening on that front with procuring new light tanks and new aircrafts.



In 2019 india caught Pakistani bluff second time after kargil. Pakistani said we will nuke if india if they do something funny but we striked them and when they came we used whatever aircraft which was on petrol sending mig-21 was not intentional and desired. Anyway india clearly gave threat to Pakistan to rapidly release our pilot or we will take some actions. ( and technically saying we didn't had any desired goal after the strike we did what we wanted to do on 26 feb by striking Pakistan mainland) india removed article 370 Pakistan cried alot on internet and in international community but still didn't declared a war.

Those are skirmishes, India needs a token force and to be honest India is not that far from China in technology, i agree but the J-20 sometimes is portraited as a game changing weapon and it is not.


Will it be useful, yes in skirmishes versus Su-30MKI or Rafale yes, will it mean India is weak? not at all, India militarily speaking is superpower, and is on par to China on big war level.

At this moment J-20 is underpowered, overhyped, and sincerely up to some level obsolete.

The problem it is a spear for the Chinese to bother nations like Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan or the Philipines.


Without India or the USA and some degree Russia, China will do what Germany did in 1939, they are using J-20 as Germany used Me-109 or Japan the Zero, but is a nation that is a threat to world peace and a dictatorship.

 

[J20!]

you are too hypocrite to admit in real life a bully will always oppress, what about the urguir? or Tibet? or Taiwan? whay China needs J-20 to attack countries without nukes, tell me how long is going to last the Philipines without American Aid? or Vietnam without western aid?


Or Mongolia?


Tell me what can the Mongolain air force do versus the J-20 or J-10C without Russian nuclear umbrella? You are a hypocrite since J-20 is and is intended to fight nations that have small air forces and no nuclear option.

an Imperialistic weapon that is J-20`s real purpose

versus the Mongolain air force MiG-29 yes J-20 is a very good advantge

View attachment 53282


what about MiG-31 with kinzhal or Su-30 with brahmos?

The difference between Mongolia and India is simple, India will really mould China, Mongolia will not, got it !

View attachment 53283

I propose that we end this off topic discussion about nukes here. They are not relevant to the thread.

There is no evidence of a trend towards nuclear exchanges between China and India. Even an escalation to aerial confrontations over the LAC is very unlikely for the foreseeable future. Why argue over it here?

 

[ARVION]

I propose that we end this off topic discussion about nukes here. They are not relevant to the thread.

There is no evidence of a trend towards nuclear exchanges between China and India. Even an escalation to aerial confrontations over the LAC is very unlikely for the foreseeable future. Why argue over it here?

Well said's.

 

[ARVION]

Rafale's Vs J 20's

As I mentioned in an earlier post any outcome is likely be shaped by the appropriate employment of tactics that are internalized through an extensive realistic training regime. It will be wise to leverage your strength, exploit your opponents weakness and adapt to the environment of operation. In Sun Tzu's terminology "If you know your enemy and know yourself, you will succeed in a hundred battles". The Ladakh region is unique in that it is at high elevation with mountainous terrain. As an example, the J-20 no doubt will have first look because of its RCS advantage. In order to close the distance for engagement, avoiding detection by adopting relative altitudes in flight profile might be beneficial. This may mean using terrain following features. The J-20 is primarily an air to air platform as there are no known evidence that it is currently air to ground capable. That means its radar is configured and optimized for air to air detection. Look down mode against a mountainous terrain will present it with detection issues due to land clutter. Additionally, the J-20 by design to my knowledge does not come with IR suppression features and in particular its engines. The Rafale operating at a lower altitude in a look up mode through its IRST will be in a better vintage point to locate and track the J-20 against a cooler background sky at higher altitude. The MICA IR carried by the Rafale and Mirage 2000 with its dual band IR seeker would be ideal for such an engagement as it is jam resistant. Whether using such tactics will be sufficient is obviously an unknown.

Another tactic to mitigate the J-20 first look and consequently first shot advantage is to try to draw it down to a lower altitude because among all the conditions affecting AAM range, air density is the most significant. The difference between high and low altitude air density is as much as 7 times resulting in missile range degradation by as much as 65 %. In other words, a PL-15 with a range of 200 kms at high attitude might only have an effective range of 70 kms at sea level. Another important consideration that will impact tactics on both sides are pop up threats from MANPADS. In view of the high elevation, air crafts operating up to 20,000 feet might be at risk from such threats.

Airforces can spend years developing and refining tactics based on experiences especially those gained from interacting with other countries. In this respect, the IAF has an advantage having gone up against F-15, F-16, F-18, Euro Typhoons and Rafales plus the different tactics that are employed. China being more isolated has fewer of such interactions.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Rafale's Vs J 20's



In other words, a PL-15 with a range of 200 kms at high attitude might only have an effective range of 70 kms at sea level.

It won't be more than 40kms in the head on engagement at sea level.

 

[ARVION]

Sightinge's the Bad's Dragon's.

 

[ARVION]

The way I see it there are three main interpretations of it.

1: these 6 J-20s w/ TVC WS-10s are a limited production run but are produced as part of the current batch of J-20s (which presumably will include J-20s w/ non TVC WS-10s).
2: these 6 J-20s w/ TVC WS-10s reflect beginning of parallel production run alongside J-20s w/ non TVC WS-10s.
3: these 6 J-20s w/ TVC WS-10s reflect the beginning of production whereby all J-20s going forwards will have TVC WS-10s.

Regardless of which of these interpretations are true, chances are the first 6 (or the "only 6") of these J-20s w/ TVC WS-10s will be going to one of the training/test/tactics units like Dingxin or Cangzhou.

 

[Synergy]

guys, please educate me on some points...

a mainstream actress and her look alike doing b grade film, are they similar in capability?

will someone who has great intelligence and capability and is successful, go for a plastic surgery to look like any other successful person?

do you think, any look alike clone will have same quality of original one? suppose an iPhone clone?

we have experience of using different Chinese products. are those anything but cheap alternatives?

now coming to J20...
is it stealthy? have we tracked it ever? from how far?
can it supercruise?
is it highly maneuverable?
does it have next gen avoinics?
what about it's sensor fusion?
what about it's radar?

we have pulled out of SU 57 as we think it's not upto the mark. when even Russia is having great difficulty in designing a true 5th gen, do you think China has achieved that when it only used to build some look alike clones?

5th gen is good if it's pure. else it's inferior than 4.5th or even 4th gen.

 

[ARVION]

guys, please educate me on some points...

a mainstream actress and her look alike doing b grade film, are they similar in capability?

will someone who has great intelligence and capability and is successful, go for a plastic surgery to look like any other successful person?

do you think, any look alike clone will have same quality of original one? suppose an iPhone clone?

we have experience of using different Chinese products. are those anything but cheap alternatives?

now coming to J20...
is it stealthy? have we tracked it ever? from how far?
can it supercruise?
is it highly maneuverable?
does it have next gen avoinics?
what about it's sensor fusion?
what about it's radar?

we have pulled out of SU 57 as we think it's not upto the mark. when even Russia is having great difficulty in designing a true 5th gen, do you think China has achieved that when it only used to build some look alike clones?

5th gen is good if it's pure. else it's inferior than 4.5th or even 4th gen.

We have the capability to detech the stealth aircraft's regardless of it's LO aignature's . The only difference's is I.E. if we detect a J 20's at 200 KM's far, then we could detect F 35's just more than 100 KM's far .

 

[fire starter]

 

[ARVION]

At the early time, WS15 was in the stage of demonstrator development. Therefore, the corresponding data is the test point of the WS15 demonstrator in the development stage on the high-altitude platform. The verification machine stage is developed in accordance with 96% of the prototype machine's indicators in China, which means that only 96% of the prototype machine's performance indicators need to be achieved in the verification machine stage, so that the thrust of the prototype machine is generally higher than the thrust of the verification machine. Big 5%. According to the 130Kg/S flow data available in the foreign domains, the flow rate of the WS15 prototype is about 137Kg/S flow level. According to the fourth-generation machine unit flow rate of 1.25 to 1.3Kgf/KgS level, then the thrust range of WS15 is calculated to be 17. Tons to 18 tons, slightly larger than the product 30, the thrust difference between the two is about 1 to 2 tons, the military thrust is between 11 tons and 12 tons.

 

[ARVION]

There's an intrinsic problem with TVC, which is the TVC reliability. One of the major reasons the F-22s did 2D TVC instead of 3D TVC was simple; their 2D TVC broke down way less often than American 3D TVC designs. Likewise, if you ask about Indian Su-30MKIs, one of the first things that comes up is how often the TVC or the engines has to be overhauled due to lock-ups. The problem is, when it comes to reliability, you can't prove reliability without testing it; i.e, the TVC systems have to be tested to failure, preferably in real situations, and both the pilots and maintenance crews need to know what to do when the TVC fails.

And So 6 TVC J-20s makes sense (and we'll see pictures before we know whether Minnie Chan is full of it again) to test and improve the reliability of the TVC system. And likewise, if Chinese TVC nozzles are detachable, it might make sense to have J-20s operate both with and without TVC because of the difference in maintenance requirements. I'd argue that TVC is an important step forward for J-20s. Canard stealth fighters, as I've stated before, really benefit from TVC as TVC allows them to lock the canard control surface to reduce RCS. And as mentioned before, this is one step forward to a finless mod of the J-20 that can beat current American 5th gens in terms of pure RCS stealth.

 

[BangaliBabu]

There's an intrinsic problem with TVC, which is the TVC reliability. One of the major reasons the F-22s did 2D TVC instead of 3D TVC was simple; their 2D TVC broke down way less often than American 3D TVC designs. Likewise, if you ask about Indian Su-30MKIs, one of the first things that comes up is how often the TVC or the engines has to be overhauled due to lock-ups. The problem is, when it comes to reliability, you can't prove reliability without testing it; i.e, the TVC systems have to be tested to failure, preferably in real situations, and both the pilots and maintenance crews need to know what to do when the TVC fails.

And So 6 TVC J-20s makes sense (and we'll see pictures before we know whether Minnie Chan is full of it again) to test and improve the reliability of the TVC system. And likewise, if Chinese TVC nozzles are detachable, it might make sense to have J-20s operate both with and without TVC because of the difference in maintenance requirements. I'd argue that TVC is an important step forward for J-20s. Canard stealth fighters, as I've stated before, really benefit from TVC as TVC allows them to lock the canard control surface to reduce RCS. And as mentioned before, this is one step forward to a finless mod of the J-20 that can beat current American 5th gens in terms of pure RCS stealth.

If that elephant goes super-maneuverable, I'd rather sleep with the fishes than see those pilots coming in for a kamikaze against us from nowhere.

I REALLY don't wanna get crushed by an elephant with wings.

 

[ARVION]

If that elephant goes super-maneuverable, I'd rather sleep with the fishes than see those pilots coming in for a kamikaze against us from nowhere.

I REALLY don't wanna get crushed by an elephant with wings.

Dont worry for another five year's .

 

[no smoking]

We have the capability to detech the stealth aircraft's regardless of it's LO aignature's . The only difference's is I.E. if we detect a J 20's at 200 KM's far, then we could detect F 35's just more than 100 KM's far .

Which equipment can enable you to detect the stealth aircraft? So far, we can find is Indian's words.
There is no point to argue the stealth of J-20 since this is an India forum.
But you can detect F35 over 100KM away? How and where?

 

[ARVION]

Which equipment can enable you to detect the stealth aircraft? So far, we can find is Indian's words.
There is no point to argue the stealth of J-20 since this is an India forum.
But you can detect F35 over 100KM away? How and where?

It was just a figure of speech for the range and about equipment the MKI's incident I think was a genuine . Remembering an 2017 incident of an F 35's incursion in our's western coast's abd there are no official reporter's just some report's but no official statment's ir any data is available in the public domaine's

 

[MiG-29SMT]

now coming to J20...
is it stealthy? have we tracked it ever? from how far?
can it supercruise?
is it highly maneuverable?
does it have next gen avoinics?
what about it's sensor fusion?
what about it's radar?

we have pulled out of SU 57 as we think it's not upto the mark. when even Russia is having great difficulty in designing a true 5th gen, do you think China has achieved that when it only used to build some look alike clones?

5th gen is good if it's pure. else it's inferior than 4.5th or even 4th gen.

To understand what kind of aircraft it is you have to see History, China bots will tell a bunch of lies that the aircraft came from a failed project J-9 and so so.


In reality the aircraft is a new design, not related to any old project.


Is a 5th generation fighter? the answer is not at this moment.

If you look before the 1990s most aircraft carried their air to air missiles on external hard point, why? the external weapons bay reduce the size of the aircraft and reduce the cross section

If you compare a Mirage III and a F-106 you will see the american aircraft is much bigger and heavier due to weapons bay

So while they say it is a 5th generation fighter it is a big aircraft thus it is much heavier than even Su-27/30 at empty weight.

So the use of internal weapons bays are only useful if you increase engine thrust in order to take the advantage of a cleaner aircraft aerodynamically

The Chinese thus need a very powerful engine and since they did not have it they opted for canards, these by themselves do not equal better agility, a F-16 or SU-27 can beat aircraft like Viggen or Kfir.

What makes an aircraft agile is a high Thrust to weight ratio and a low wing loading a feature that eurofighters typhoon, rafale or Gripen do have.

Canards increase wing loading at different AoA thus they chose them because they have a delta wing.
Thrust vectoring does not increase instantaneous turn rate, it only increases sustained turn rate.

Therefore the increase only is in the range of 10% at the most because let is remember by vectoring the nozzle thrust you reduce the thrust used to move forward aircraft in a straight direction and potentially it can create spin on its own axis as in post stall maneouvring.

Thus while the J-20 follows basic aerodynamic features already seen on F-22, MiG-1.44 or F-35 the jet by using canards or thrust vectoring does not make it superior.


There is no way you can make an aircraft invisible to radar simply because aircraft are made with many materials and some are highly reflective.

Stealth is only reduction in the radar range and this is limited by radar power density and wave length.

 

[Emperor Kalki]

To understand what kind of aircraft it is you have to see History, China bots will tell a bunch of lies that the aircraft came from a failed project J-9 and so so.


In reality the aircraft is a new design, not related to any old project.


Is a 5th generation fighter? the answer is not at this moment.

If you look before the 1990s most aircraft carried their air to air missiles on external hard point, why? the external weapons bay reduce the size of the aircraft and reduce the cross section
View attachment 53529
If you compare a Mirage III and a F-106 you will see the american aircraft is much bigger and heavier due to weapons bay
View attachment 53530

View attachment 53532
So while they say it is a 5th generation fighter it is a big aircraft thus it is much heavier than even Su-27/30 at empty weight.

So the use of internal weapons bays are only useful if you increase engine thrust in order to take the advantage of a cleaner aircraft aerodynamically

The Chinese thus need a very powerful engine and since they did not have it they opted for canards, these by themselves do not equal better agility, a F-16 or SU-27 can beat aircraft like Viggen or Kfir.

What makes an aircraft agile is a high Thrust to weight ratio and a low wing loading a feature that eurofighters typhoon, rafale or Gripen do have.

Canards increase wing loading at different AoA thus they chose them because they have a delta wing.
Thrust vectoring does not increase instantaneous turn rate, it only increases sustained turn rate.

Therefore the increase only is in the range of 10% at the most because let is remember by vectoring the nozzle thrust you reduce the thrust used to move forward aircraft in a straight direction and potentially it can create spin on its own axis as in post stall maneouvring.

View attachment 53533

View attachment 53534


Thus while the J-20 follows basic aerodynamic features already seen on F-22, MiG-1.44 or F-35 the jet by using canards or thrust vectoring does not make it superior.


There is no way you can make an aircraft invisible to radar simply because aircraft are made with many materials and some are highly reflective.

Stealth is only reduction in the radar range and this is limited by radar power density and wave length.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

To claim the J-20 came from J-9 is just for people do not know about aerodynamics.


Most aircraft do not freeze a single configuration, in fact most aircraft will spends thousends or reserach hours just to get to an idela wing type or wing form.


On the mind of Chinese bots this aircraft is the dady of J-20, for starters the canard is above wing level, to get to that conclusion it will spend some many months and years of research that J-9 was only a aircraft configuraton for a Aj-37 viggen type aircraft