J20 Stealth Fighter

[scatterStorm]

Bullshit. The Indian military has had many confrontations with Pakistan since both nations became nuclear capable, yet neither of them has launched nukes in response.

You're hiding behind nukes to avoid the obvious fact that the IAF has no equivalent to the PLAAFs growing stealth fighter fleet.

I second your argument, we have it was always with us, its called an MKI with PESA. Now your argument will push into stealth territory,

but Rafael wasn't stealth fighter until it had shot F22 9 times in WVR fight.

You should understand that writing articles and actual engagement is not comparable, not even close.

Your argument to why both nations haven't used nukes is agreeable but the reasoning you offered is has no firm base, India isn't hiding behind any nuclear curtain, China haven't faced a war in modern history so your arguments are literally baseless.

Here's the real reason to why both nations didn't went for nuclear exchange:

1. Both countries have already faced sanctions and know very well what sanction could do to your economy. That's the very reason why were are getting a 40 year old plane now. If we didn't had the sanctions, we would've made our very own 5th gen plane by now.
2. Nuclear doctrines shifted from defensive to offensive since the day Pak decided that they can't go into a full scale nuclear exchange, they decided to lower the yield. However varying the yield is still considered a nuclear exchange. At least in our dictionary.
3. As a corollary, we went with Agni 4 and 5 and now the Pralay and Shaurya Missile series these are SRBM and MRBMs respectively.

Here's the reason (my own personal opinion) to why we aren't hiding behind nuclear curtain:

1. We faced four wars, and didn't required nuclear exchange for the last two wars being fought with Pak.
2. We didn't knee jerked reacted, when we saw our neighbors going on WMD spree that includes China, we had to seek deterrence.
3. Fighting 4 wars in succession allowed us to know our own capabilities, which China can't even match in terms of experience. Wars can be fought without nukes.

So your point of us being hiding behind a nuclear curtain is baseless.

J20 will be dealt with, IAF isn't some VAF or PAF that you go hunkering around. We have not just options, we are goodness darn combat proven against BVR.

Can't say the same for those J20 newbies. Go figure.

 

[scatterStorm]

*sigh* If aerial combat between the IAF and the PLAAF were to break out over Pangong Tso and J20's got involved; are you claiming that India would launch a nuclear attack ON china's cities?

1. That wouldn't happen because India has a no first use policy on its nuclear arsenal.

2. It won't happen because any nuclear launches on China would precipitate a nuclear retaliation FROM China.

3. The PLARF has more nuclear weapons in its inventory and more nuclear delivery platforms. DF21, DF17, DF 26, DF31, DF41, DF5 vs just Agni III and V.

4. PLAAF has more long range delivery platforms than the IAF H6K + CJ10 vs M2000

5. The Chinese navy has more delivery platforms than the IN. Type 094 + JL2 vs Arihant + K15/K4

A nuclear attack from India would be subject to retaliation from the PLA's nuclear triad; which has greater capability than Indians inventory of AGNI 3 and 5, Arihant and M2000.

So why are you bringing up nukes in a discussion about stealth fighters?

Corrections to my former post: Shaurya is a CRBM

Counter to Point 3:

I hope you do know the difference b/w ICBMS, LRBMs (IRBMs), MRBMs, SRBMs and CRBMs?

ICBMS --> Agni 5 (operational), Agni 6 (in development)
LRBM ---> Agni 3, 4 (operational)
MRBMs ---> Agni 1, 2 (operational)
CRBMs ---> Pralay, Shorya (hypersonic) (operational) in fact, they are placed somewhere near W.Bengal.

Counter to point 4:

I hope you do know that HK6 is a derivative (copy) of Tupolov-16.
We have Tupolov-16 and you forgot Mig-31s.

Not a biggie, sometimes people forget but Mig-31 are being used a hypersonic delivery platform for Russia. We can do the same with MKIs currently. Brahmos ER is in works already, Air-launched Shorya is in pipeline.

CJ10 is a MRBM?
How's that even comparable to fighter bombers? Compare it with the likes of Agni-2 or Agni-1 which covers a range of 2k to 3k Km already. Which is logical.

 

[scatterStorm]

Probably updating the library for F35 and F22 and other platforms in there threat database. Or could be studying the radar reflection properties etc.

 

[no smoking]

ICBMS --> Agni 5 (operational), Agni 6 (in development)

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.

LRBM ---> Agni 3, 4 (operational)
MRBMs ---> Agni 1, 2 (operational)

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

CRBMs ---> Pralay, Shorya (hypersonic) (operational) in fact, they are placed somewhere near W.Bengal.

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.

Counter to point 4:

I hope you do know that HK6 is a derivative (copy) of Tupolov-16.
We have Tupolov-16 and you forgot Mig-31s.

Not a biggie, sometimes people forget but Mig-31 are being used a hypersonic delivery platform for Russia. We can do the same with MKIs currently. Brahmos ER is in works already, Air-launched Shorya is in pipeline.

CJ10 is a MRBM?
How's that even comparable to fighter bombers? Compare it with the likes of Agni-2 or Agni-1 which covers a range of 2k to 3k Km already. Which is logical.

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.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[johnq]

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

 

[MiG-29SMT]

you’re so funny...
you calculate rcs with your eyes and head?
even dpends on size？
so how compare B2 bomber with lca.

The current study attempts to tackle the issue from a physical optics perspective. Adopting radar cross section (RCS) as the measure of ACRs’ detectability, we examined the relationships between the ACRs’ RCS under vertical polarity with various parameters including the radar incident angles, width and heights of the ACRs and the azimuthal angles.

Analysis of artificial corner reflector’s radar cross section: a physical optics perspective - Arabian Journal of Geosciences

Among many of the differential interferometric synthetic-aperture radar technologies, artificial corner reflectors (ACR) are widely used in monitoring earthquake deformation and urban subsidence due to their relative stability on synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) acquisition. Apparently, the...

link.springer.com

Radar Fundamentals (Part I)

Introduction The word “RADAR” is an acronym for RAdio Detection And Ranging. As it was originally conceived, radio waves were used to detect the presence of a target and to determine its distance …

basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com

• Projected cross section:
  The geometric cross section refers to the area the target presents to the radar, or its projected area. This area will vary depending on the angle, or aspect, the target presents to the radar. In other words, the target will probably present the smallest projected area to a radar if it is flying directly toward the radar and is viewed head-on. A view from the side, top, or underneath will present a much larger projected area.
• Reflectivity:

SIGNATURE ADVANTAGE

Whatever the challenges, the benefits of a tailless configuration are worth striving for, according to Harvey Schellenger, chief engineer for the Rockwell/Daimler-Benz Aerospace (DASA) X-31 Enhanced Fighter Manoeuvrability technology-demonstrator. "Lower radar-cross-sectional area is one advantage of being tailless," he says. "A tailed aircraft can achieve very good levels of low observability, but it gets harder and harder to squeeze any more out of the shape once you're down to a certain level. Tailless aircraft take you to a much lower threshold."

By far the biggest benefits are in reduced weight and drag. Aerodynamically, the tailless aircraft is extremely efficient because the profile drag of a tail is eliminated. Drag (excluding lift-induced drag) can be as much as 60% less than that of a conventional aircraft. Structurally, aircraft weight can be distributed along the wing span, as in some of the higher-aspect-ratio tailless-fighter designs under study; wing-bending loads can be minimised and weight reduced.

Lower drag and lower weight combine to produce an aircraft with longer range for a given size or, alternatively, a smaller and stealthier aircraft for a given range. "It can save a lot of money because aircraft are bought by the pound," says Schellenger. "Most importantly, where you are designing for a specific mission, the aircraft can be smaller because it weighs less, the drag is less and therefore you need less fuel. We call it the multiplier effect. In general, for every 1lb [0.45kg] of tail eliminated, you take out the equivalent of 2lb from the rest of the airframe." Tails can typically account for 6% to 7% of the maximum take-off weight of an aircraft, he says. A tailless aircraft also has fewer control surfaces. Fewer actuators and fewer of their related hydraulic systems result in reduced maintenance and lower life-cycle costs.

Tailless tactics

The 1980s tailless-fighter concept could be a reality after 2000 Mastery of thrust vectoring is paving the way for tailless-fighter research. Guy Norris/LOS ANGELES HIGH OVER THE dry lakebed at Edwards AFB, California, on 24 April, 1996, the pilot of a NASA McDonnell ...

www.flightglobal.com

So see this

Tailess fourth generation

tailess fifth generation

tailess sixth generation

Why? simple less reflecting surfaces mean less area exposed to the area and less area for drag.

It also means radar waves have no surface to direct the radar waves in another direction so it is basically yes LCA is not stealth but compared to J-10 has less reflecting surfaces and smaller size, so it needs lower thrust.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

you’re so funny...
you calculate rcs with your eyes and head?
even dpends on size？
so how compare B2 bomber with lca.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION [0002] Aircraft purposefully built to avoid radar detection are characterized by shapes with as few different angles as possible. This results in edges which are parallel to each other even if on opposite sides of the aircraft. It is also desirable to have a fuselage that is blended into the wing where any shapes of small radius can be placed on the upper side, unseen by ground radar. Because of this smooth integration, these aircraft are sometimes referred as "flying wings" and are typically characterized by a swept back wing configuration. An example of such an aircraft is the B-2 bomber. [0003] An aircraft of low radar cross section is devoid of any unnecessary protuberances such as a vertical stabilizer, having its function replaced by control surfaces that increase the drag on one wing or the other only when needed and otherwise lie against the wing to become part of the wing. The advantages of all- wing, tailless aircraft are known. For example, tailless aircraft provide enhanced stealthy operating characteristics due to their inherent low-observable configuration. Moreover, all-wing aircraft provide other benefits such as improved efficiency due to reduced weight and drag and, accordingly, are well suited for use in a wide variety of applications such as in autonomous (unmanned) aircraft where the bulge for a pilot to look out doesn't have to be accommodated. [0004] A disadvantage of the tailless aircraft configuration lies in the absence of an aircraft rudder normally incorporated within the vertical tail section. The rudder is provided in conventional aircraft to create a side to side or yaw moment to the aircraft in flight. Therefore, without a rudder, other means must be provided to impart yaw moment to the tailless aircraft. In addition, it is well known in conventional aircraft to provide ailerons to control roll movement of the aircraft in flight. Typically the rudder works in association with the ailerons on conventional aircraft to counter any adverse yaw during roll. Thus, in the absence of a rudder for the tailless aircraft configuration there is an absence of a means for countering the described adverse yaw. [0005] As such, based upon the foregoing, there exists a need for an improved method and device, which improves aircraft roll control characteristics while countering any adverse yaw characteristics without substantially interfering with the aircraft aerodynamic and radar observability characteristics.

WO2005023643A2 - Aircraft with topside only spoilers - Google Patents

An aircraft (10) with swept back wings (16, 18) and spoilers (30,32) inlaid into the top surface (36) near the tips of the wings. The aircraft also includes an elevator (34) formed in the center back portion of the aircraft, which is also aft of the spoilers. It is aft to allow an auxiliary...

patents.google.com

Now see which aircraft has more control surfaces

now see the same in fifth generation

obviously YF-23 was going to be the better fighter

and X-32 is far more stealthier than J-20 too much propaganda by the Chinese

so relax the LCA was designed with some stealth in mind despite it is a 1990s concept

 

[MiG-29SMT]

cant get the point，China has never invaded western countries just like Japan invaded China，it’s exactly opposite，what China needs to do is to avoid the recurrence of history，so u can say China has no way to defeat the west，but also the history won’t happen again.

China will be defeated, you are too naive, the West made China strong via Russia and it will make it humble once they need it, everything was fixed, China has a role asigned by Western powers or do you Think Eurocopter and Airbus are so naive? or do you think the West was lure by Chinese economist to invest? perhaps you think China has done it alone, too naive the West is a true beast, far more powerful than it seems.

J-20 has a lot of western technology and it is not by coincidence

 

[MiG-29SMT]

u mean just like Japan was defeated in the trade wars of last century？u should know America does not represent the West and China is not Japan.China's rise is not the result of western benevolence but the return of history.China has been ahead for most of history and the rise of the West is only temporary.
It's really sad for two asians to talk like this.

You are too naive, do you think the west did all the investment in China to lose its hegemony? Do you think they did not know of all the technologies transfered to China when they invested in China?

Wow you are too naive, do you think in WWII Japan attacked pearl Harbour? Do you think the USA kept is aircraft carriers out of the Japanese reach on 1941 by shear luck?

You think J-20 will mean China has invecibility?

You are too naive, China is a pawn in Western plans of world domination, all has been choreagraphed to make you think your glorious age will come, remember the established Dog on top will always bit the Dog trying to be on top, and remember and you should understand Europe has a strength China has not, Europe is an international transnational state.


China wants to annoy Japan, India, Russia, the USA, Australia and many other nations, J-20 is supposed the spear to threat Japan or India, remember this the west has 500 years of world dominion, and has been the dominant power since the Roman Empire.

J-20 is just a futile attemp to prevent the unevitable, the West will rule over China, because China and Russia are the only powers to remain an obstacle, and the West will rule the world why? simple the west is a coalition of nations and that means the begining of a world Goverment.


So relax, the USA and Europe has more weapons than China.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

I’m not too naive but you definitely are easily provoked
How bad can it be？However China is strong enough to destroy the world ，never going to be an Americans dog like Japan.
So relax，u can keep pointing fingers on the Internet.

You will be a lap dog, you forget the lessons of WWII, Russia is the Soviet Union, China the new Nazi Germany, in fact the June 15 2020 is like when Germany was trying to get Chechkoslovakia, and the South China sea is very similar to 1938, remember your J-20 will be like the Zero, and you will learn the lessons

 

[aghamarshana]

I’m not too naive but you definitely are easily provoked
How bad can it be？However China is strong enough to destroy the world ，never going to be an Americans dog like Japan.
So relax，u can keep pointing fingers on the Internet.

U.S.S.R grinnin in it's grave. Lol
CCP China's time too will come.

 

[aghamarshana]

listen to yourself ，even PM.Modi said that China has never entered Indian soil...
ofcourse no need explained Anti-china.
so relax.

Not the apt thread dude.
Sure Modi didn't imply what u jus said.
Ask a kid in India which Indian politician in history is responsible for today's mess.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

All-party meet on border clash: Chinese troops did not enter our territory, no posts were taken over, says Modi
fake news？

y

Similarities of nazi Germany and Communist China

China is not communist not capitalist, has capiatlism like nazi Germany and state controlled industry of slave labour.

China thinks it is going to be next super power

J-20 for that reason was sent to the border

China`s silk road is equal Empire of Japan coprosperity Sphere

J-20`s long range is easy to get, it is a fighter of imperial ambissions

Zero had also long range why if japan was a small country?

 

[ARVION]

Interestingly, f-35 can carry GBU -31 which has depth of some 450 mm, but can't carry gbu-16 which has some 465 mm depth . The F-22 as it is today can carry gbu-32, with depth of some 352mm . F-22, as it was envisioned before the final prototype in mid 1990s, was designed to carry aim120a/b, so weapons bay was designed with at least partial depth of 447 mm and minimum of 375 mm . On another note, f-22's fuselage volume, from the nose to the engine nozzles (but excluding wings) is some 38 cubic meters. j20's fuselage volume from nose to engine nozzles, again excluding wings is some 10 cubic meters more, or roughly 25% more. figures gained through measurements of sectional widths of drawings of both planes on paralay's site . just wanted to add that total volume, with all aerodynamic surfaces is somewhere around 46 m3 for f-22 and 56 m3 for j-20. give or take some margin for error, of course.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

FEATURED
Chinese J-20 ‘Mighty Dragon’ Just A Poor Copy Of US F-35 Jets – US Experts

The stealth characteristics of the J-20 are also under suspicion, say experts. The J-20 was hyped to be a highly stealthy aircraft and that it could conceal itself in operations and not be easily detected.


Published
10 hours ago
on
July 30, 2020
By
EurAsian Times Desk
With China ramping up its defence capabilities, the newest addition in this feat is the J-20 ‘Mighty Dragon’ stealth fighter jet set which aims to outclass any competitors including India operated Rafale Jets and American F-35s.
A modified version of J-20 has formally entered mass production recently according to a report by SCMP. The chief designer of China’s first fifth-generation fighter jet said that it is expected to be developed by 2035.

“Amid great power competition and the commissioning of more and more fourth-generation fighter jets (or fifth generation under US classification, which includes China’s J-20, US’ F-22 and F-35), there have been extensive discussions on the changes in types of warfare, and the development of post-fourth generation fighter jets,” said Yang Wei of Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) and the Chief designer of J-20.

Yang added that in older generations of fighter jets, manoeuvrability used to be the deciding factor, but this concept is becoming outdated with the development of advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles with their beyond-visual-range attack capabilities. “a future fighter jet will generally require a longer combat range, longer endurance, stronger stealth capability, a larger load of air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons, and the functionality to provide its pilot with easy-to-understand battlefield situation images and predictions.”

With China ramping up its defence capabilities, the newest addition in this feat is the J-20 ‘Mighty Dragon’ stealth fighter jet set which aims to outclass any competitors including India operated Rafale Jets and American F-35s.



A modified version of J-20 has formally entered mass production recently according to a report by SCMP. The chief designer of China’s first fifth-generation fighter jet said that it is expected to be developed by 2035.

“Amid great power competition and the commissioning of more and more fourth-generation fighter jets (or fifth generation under US classification, which includes China’s J-20, US’ F-22 and F-35), there have been extensive discussions on the changes in types of warfare, and the development of post-fourth generation fighter jets,” said Yang Wei of Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) and the Chief designer of J-20.



Yang added that in older generations of fighter jets, manoeuvrability used to be the deciding factor, but this concept is becoming outdated with the development of advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles with their beyond-visual-range attack capabilities. “a future fighter jet will generally require a longer combat range, longer endurance, stronger stealth capability, a larger load of air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons, and the functionality to provide its pilot with easy-to-understand battlefield situation images and predictions.”

Experts believe that the specifications stated by Yang in the tabloid look similar to that of usually described for the F-35 including the autonomous computerized ability to gather, organize and present an array of otherwise disparate pools of information for pilots.

Yang’s vision defines China’s future of these fighter jets. According to him, a future fighter jet will generally require a longer combat range, longer endurance, stronger stealth capability, a larger load of air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons, and the functionality to provide its pilot with easy-to-understand battlefield situation images and predictions.
In an integrated system, the aircraft should be able to form a network, draw real-time integrated situational images, create multiple attack routes, and transmit target information across mission areas in real-time.

Kris Osborn, Defense Editor for the National Interest while citing a 2018 Pentagon news story about DoD’s annual China report, wrote that the apparent design similarities between the J-20 and the F-35 may be a result of espionage.
“A cursory look at the J-20 does appear to show some resemblance to the F-35, particularly the blended wing-body front end and internally built, conformal exhaust pipes. Meanwhile, the J-20 has a wider and longer lower-body. However, available photos show an even larger measure of similarity between the F-35 and Chinese J-31 multi-role fighter,” he added.

Indian experts state that the stealth characteristics of the J-20 are also under suspicion, citing an analysis by the Indian Air Force. The J-20 was hyped to be a highly stealthy aircraft and that it could conceal itself in operations and not be easily detected.

“Rafale is far superior to the J-20, the Chengdu fighter of China. Even though it’s marketed as a 5th generation jet, it is probably at best a 3.5 generation aircraft. It’s got a third-generation engine as we have in the Sukhoi,” said Air Marshal R Nambiar who tested the Rafale aircraft for India.

A distinct feature of the J-20 includes artificial intelligence which “is a key field to help pilots process vast information and make decisions in complicated battlefield environments”. Yang said artificial intelligence will help pilots process the information, and help them become mission objective-oriented.

Each step in the original observe-orient-decide-act (OODA) loop in the air combat decision-making process will feature artificial intelligence’s assistance, Yang said. “Intelligence becoming the deciding factor” will be the essence of what Yang calls an OODA 3.0.

Chinese J-20 'Mighty Dragon' Just A Poor Copy Of US F-35 Jets - US Experts

The stealth characteristics of the J-20 are also under suspicion, say experts. The J-20 was hyped to be a highly stealthy aircraft and that it could conceal itself in operations and not be easily detected.

eurasiantimes.com

 

[fire starter]

Usa: China stole our 5G technology.
China: But you don't have 5G yet.
Usa: That is because you have stolen it.
so relax，j20 is only a toy

well I have not heard even a single positive word on j20 from all experts whether they are American or Russian. All of them point out deficiencies.

 

[ARVION]

SCMP is citing a 1100 km combat radius on the J-20, but if we consider the rumor that it's designed for 5500 km ferry range with tanks (about 7500 kg of fuel) and of course without any Weapon's , the minimum combat radius estimate of the J-20 is 1300 km on air-to-air . From the Minnie Chen .

 

[ARVION]

The craziest Chinese sources I've heard and read insist aggressively there are now at least 100 J-20s. I got into a verbal argument last week over this where I was suggesting around 30 to 50 and he was saying he's got good sources telling him there are 100 to 150 already and been in LRIP since 2017 but switched to mass production some time ago already. Needless to say, I'm confident this isn't the case and he's just listening to fanboys who talk with authority . The issue with this method is not all are photographed with numbers and location settled, obviously.

The Chinese sources say the numbers double up quite often and some say there are sometimes up to four identical units with the same visible number and they're further distinguished elsewhere in less obvious and photograph traceable ways. Interesting conversations nevertheless. I have to say, some Chinese's are just a big fat liare's .

I.e. The contact's is not a Chinese's .

 

[ARVION]

The precise claim is that Su-30MKI radars have picked up J-20s . This is possible in two ways . The J-20 is using a Luneberg lens so that it can be tracked by civilian and allied military radars . The J-20 exposed a bad angle to the Su-30MKIs , which the J 20's rear angle has poor RCS stealth Zeroe's . Novel RCS signature; i.e, the RCS doesn't resemble that of any other known Chinese type for that detection range. Moreover, to exclude the possibility of drones, the aircraft had to be maneuvering or otherwise moving at a speed not possible with a subsonic drone . Main thing is, stealth aircraft aren't undetectable; even Chinese and Venezuelan claims over F-22 detection have to be evaluated for whether the aircraft was wearing a Luneberg lens . Most likely, given that stealth aircraft flicker (i.e, change orientation so that while they can be detected, they can't be tracked), it was a Luneberg lens . We have no idea what the RCS contribution of Luneburg lenses are, and more likely, Luneburgs vary within the category . The Bars radar is reputed to have a 175 km range vs 0 dBsm / 1 m^2. With 300 km, we can determine that the Luneburg lens on the J-20 boosted the RCS to at least 8.63 m^2, or at least 9.3 dBsm, from the angle it was detected from . And the way, quick question. Some people have pointed out that the canards on the J-20 aren't actually coplanar with the opposite wing, and brought up charts to prove it . From what you see, are the J-20 canards in fact aren't co-planar on the production versions .