Author: ttt222

J-20 fighter designed for South China Sea conflict: Global Times   [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 4

Post time 2012-6-17 21:14:49 |Display all floors
No, it was designed to increase the Defence establishment's E-peen, what do you think? Of course its for some sort of conflict....
Serve the Emperor!

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-6-18 02:18:35 |Display all floors
exportedkiwi Post time: 2012-6-16 14:55
You're assuming that the PLA-Ns ASW is up to speed. I don't think so!

FYI, the J-20 reaching and  ...

With aerial refueling, J-8 (later upgrades), it is suggested, can now enjoy the luxuries of those leisurely, laid back, getaway super luxury cruise excursion from points inside Guangdong and Hainan all the way to the northern coast of Indonesia and back and J-8's are known as gas guzzlers. So, go figure the potential reaches of the J-20 which is speculated to have greater fuel capacity and weapon's load than that of the F-22.

Argument: The General Dynamic F-111's combat radius, which I believe is what the J-20 had taken cue, strategic wise, are given as [1,100 plus nautical miles]. Also, given the deemed and dedicated purpose of the F-111, hence also the J-20 because that, IMHO, is what the J-20 is all about; the US base in Guam, in Okinawa, in Japan, in the Philippines, inarguably have to be what it's all about...  

Hypothetically: Based on the mere configurations (the extreme sleekness) of the J-20, we have to agree that the aerodynamics of it suggests that it would not make for a very agile or air superiority close proximity dog fighter as that of the F-16, of the F-18, of the Su-27, of the J-10/J-11, or even as agile as the F-22 which I see is an F-15 incorporating stealth features, althought flight tests of the J-20 had proven otherwise. The focus of the J-20, based on my analysis, is deep penetration via advantages as follow:

(a) exploitation of speed (Word in the street; J-20 maxes @Mach 3 dash; supercruise @ Mach 2.4 - 2.45)
(b) evasion of enemy detection via stealth (Stealth trechnology uniguely Chinese; not linked to Western/Russian concepts)

I would speculate that the J-20 is a cross between a B-58 and a F-111 and that its designate purpose is strategical strike, decapitate, and destroy if necessary, which is why the greater fuel capacity and weapon's load as claimed by the Chinese. Additionally, with the J-8D series, the J-10, J-11, and the 11B, China is good for air superiority fighters as is. What she lacks, IMO, is a long haul first rate strike bomber and this, again IMO, is where the J-20 comes into play.

The J-20 is definitely not an air superiority fighter as that of the F-22 or the T-50. For something that's truly Chinese which would be of the F-22 and T-50 class, I would suggest that we keep our eyes open for what was deem as the J-14 and what was suggested in the net as the semi-steathy version of what was speculated as the J-11C, programs where I would put my money that it will soon also makes its first debutes just as did the J-10 and 20.

The logic here is this: If we (China) is to copy Western/Russian stealth technology down to the very t and to the very dotting of the i, it would defeat the very purposes as to why we would need to invest so heavily in a system as costly as the J-20 in the first place (J-20 is speculated to cost a hefty $80-100M USD a pop) wouldn't it?

I mean if I were the thinktanks inside China's war strategy room, the very first question I would ask before adapting western technologies and concepts to those of my own is this: Why would I want to replicate/incorporate Western/Russian stealth concepts into those of my own knowingly [technologies to defeat these very technologies] had to have, have to have, and must have been produced before hand before they would introduce such concepts to actual military applications?  I mean how are their own pilots going to distinguish their own buddies are from those of their enemies if they can't see and identify each other?

As for China's version of an F-35 counterpart (or the Snow Owl as was rumored throughout the www), yes, such a program may indeed exist. But, given the drawbacks of such a system, i.e., the extra weigh of the mechanisms needed to divert engine thrust for vertical take off landing, the equation plays into the possibility that China will actually adopt such a system or concept for its fighters.

Similarily to that of the geometrical swept wing concept, the extra weight required by the mechanism to operate the wings makes for a handicap I doubt the Chinese would want. For this very reason, it is said that that was why the Chinese had settled for the fixed wing (JH-7) concept over [a geometrical swept wing design], a specimen the Chinese had actually produced and designated as the "B-12" at the time (60's/70's) for feasibility evaluations.

Bottom line: With a given and strategically defined and secured air space secured by Chinese air superiorit fighters with no concern of interference/interuptions from enemy fire or penetration over a given period of operational time in space, Chinese H-6U/DU's definitely won't be no clay pigeons that you have visualized, nor will they need to settle for Kamakazi tactics -- if they are required, strategically to take out targets which prove a security anomamly to China or to Chinese forces in the region, even if these targets are NZ, Australia, Guam, Japan, Okinawa, Mubie, wherever, as need is the mother of all creations, NZ and Australia is breachable!



Putin's a killer. This was the claim made by Fox News journalist; Bill O'Reilly during his recent interview with Donald Trump. Trump's reply came in the form of a simple question. What, you think our country's so innocent?

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-6-18 06:14:13 |Display all floors
ktbond Post time: 2012-6-17 07:19
Both are systems subject to breakdowns. Get comprehension lessons!

China’s program of developing a new generation of strategic nuclear missiles has evidently hit some serious problems. Meanwhile, the existing arsenal, due to the limitations of its underlying technology, has insufficient potential and low combat-readiness. It is also highly vulnerable to a nuclear strike by the United States or Russia. That means that the Chinese nuclear arsenal is not fit for the purpose of either effective first strike or retaliation (since it would hardly survive the first strike against itself). And if the United States deploys even a limited ABM system, the utility of the Chinese nuclear deterrent will diminish even further.

The Chinese leadership (including the defense industry captains) as well as the ordinary Chinese seem to be unreasonably euphoric about their country’s touted advances in military strength. Mesmerized by the brightly painted ranks of their new tanks and missiles, the Chinese flag-wavers tend to ignore the fact that their country’s military technology achievements are fragile, tentative and scant. And most importantly, these achievements are primarily based on Soviet and Russian imports rather than indigenous technology. China has succeeded in importing a wide range of military know-how from Russia - but it is far from certain that the Chinese defense industry will actually manage to absorb all that know-how. There are questions even about China’s ability simply to replicate the technology is has already bought. The current strategy of scaling down defense industry cooperation with Russia could yet come back to haunt China, revealing the decrepitude behind its army’s high-tech veneer. And then Beijing will have to turn to its northern neighbor for help once again.

Look up the above and get an education!
No, I live above Sunset Plaza, it's a little house I rent and it's a little rundown but has a beautiful view, what about you?

Use magic tools Report

Post time 2012-6-18 08:20:51 |Display all floors
Reminder: Author is prohibited or removed, and content is automatically blocked

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-6-18 09:27:43 |Display all floors
This post was edited by tradervic at 2012-6-17 19:28
edisonone Post time: 2012-6-17 12:18
With aerial refueling, J-8 (later upgrades), it is suggested, can now enjoy the luxuries of those  ...


Aerial refueling, now that is a very interesting topic unto itself - which usually gets little attention.  The PLA is fielding...

ht tp://w ww.ausairpower.n et/APA-PLA-Tanker-Programs.ht ml

Basically an oldier Soviet Bomber modified with Tanker Pods - to perform UK/USN style drogue/probe refueling - with the power to be in Beijing trying to get a hold of more recent Russian tech...

AAFtankerchart.png


... which makes for the question of how much range is truly gainned.
China's Eccentric 'Uncle Laowai' from Chicago, IL

http://blog.chinadaily.com.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=135031&do=blog&view=me&from=space

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-6-18 10:18:09 |Display all floors
exportedkiwi Post time: 2012-6-16 22:44
Yep, a very true adage!
China, until very recently, talked only of quality until the toys started  ...
...costing real money in Forex.


'The real costs' have yet to really show themselves, given that the PLA has yet to engage in any 'low level' engagements in the world (though Africa is looking more and more like a possibility).
China's Eccentric 'Uncle Laowai' from Chicago, IL

http://blog.chinadaily.com.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=135031&do=blog&view=me&from=space

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-6-18 12:05:54 |Display all floors
LaughsatYou Post time: 2012-6-16 19:15
Haha someone obviously can't face music. So that over 1 terabyte on the F-35 that was stolen, detai ...

Re: So that over 1 terabyte on the F-35 that was stolen



So be it, Laughing. Let it be
stolen then for all I care, and if it help you to maintain
your pride and your sanity.

And, thanks for giving us the 007
Jame's Bond credit cos indeed stealing and espionage
is a tough if not an impossible job.

BTW, had we Chinese ever told you guys that those
Bond girls who are just dying to jump into bed with our secret agents in America
while conducting their thiefings of US military secrets are simply smashing and
outta sight? Especially those of the Hugh Hefner type?

Damn! Everyone wanted the credit for the J-20. I.e.,
the Koreans says it's their KFX. The Japanese says it's the ATD-X. While
the Americans are adamant that it is the F-22/35...  

What do you do in such a case scenario? You don't do
anything. You laugh. You simply laugh. You giggle when they are not lookin'. You
then says "as you wish!" to them and you tell yourself this: Forgive them God (Or was it
Lord? Hell! I've forgotten.) for the character assasination!

Hehe!  You guys are killing me with the humor
Putin's a killer. This was the claim made by Fox News journalist; Bill O'Reilly during his recent interview with Donald Trump. Trump's reply came in the form of a simple question. What, you think our country's so innocent?

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.