Posted on 01/29/2011 10:10:39 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
J-20 looks more like the YF-23
Interestingly, the MiG-25 proved to be not very useful as a bomber interceptor, since it lacked the "look down" radar needed to track low-flying targets. It actually proved its worth as a reconnaissance plane, cruising at around Mach 2.5 at 65,000 feet with short dashes to circa Mach 3.0. It wasn't circa 1980 that the MiG-31 derivative of the MiG-25, which had a true "look down" phased-array radar and the Vympel R-33 (AA-9 Amos) missile, that the Russians finally had a decent means to intercept low-flying bombers from a fighter. It should also be noted that the R-33 missile had been in flight testing development since 1971, long before Grumman sold the F-14 to Iran; as such, rumors of the R-33 being a "reversed engineered" AIM-54 was nonsense. The R-33 didn't enter service until the MiG-31 became operational.
Totally correct ESB and BBM, and something that needs to be repeated often.
Stealth is not merely shaping, or RAM, or 'looking stealthy.' That is simply one aspect of a whole complicated series of aspects. For instance, take the radar. An aircraft may 'look' stealthy (e.g. what internet fanboys may characterize by something looking shaped and having a dark color), but say the radar is not an AESA LPI radar and all that happens is you have a 'stealthy looking dark-colored' plane that is being picked up by any modern RWR with ease. Add side-lobes to that non AESA LPIR, and what you have now is a 'stealthy' fighter that is not only being easily detected but even jammed as well. Other areas include just how stealthy it is in the infra-red spectrum (particularly with optronic IRST sensors that keep getting more advanced, multi-band, longer range and better angular resolution, and with laser rangefinders - like the Eurofighter's PIRATE that can pick up a non-afterburning target over 50km away).
Most people focus on RCS reduction measures, when that is only one of around 4-5 areas that leads to a VLO structure (e.g. you also have acoustic, thermal, visual, and so on ...the B-2 for instance even, allegedly, has a contrail reduction mechanism). Yet I am very surprised when someone will look at the Pakfa or the J-20 and immediately say it will be stealthier than the F-22. Seriously! The F-22, looking at the RCS component alone, has (again, allegedly ...the real number may be lower or higher, and even if higher it will still be low enough to be anathema to any opposing force ...at least making it too late for the enemy to do anything) ...anyways, the Raptor allegedly has an RCS of 0.0001m2. People put out things like metal BBs etc, but even if you throw all of that out (the darn thing is not invinsible nor invincible, and still requires proper tactics, some jamming, and a whole lot of maintenance), the fact still remains that by the time a foreign fighter is able to detect the Raptor, the Raptor will either have already detected and fired against the opponent, or be on its way out if the pilot decides not to engage.
Which is why I am confounded when some people say that the latest wunderkid (e.g. the J-20 and/or PakFa) is 'better' than the Raptor (for instance what a certain Chinese troll was saying about the J-20 being better than the Raptor, or at a more serious/intellectual level than 'base-Chinese-troll', what the folks at AirPowerAustralia say). Goodness ...the ability to look at a prototype (that, to use the J-20, had not even flown at the time) and claim it is better than the Raptor (with its -40 dBsm RCS) is just simply amazing. More than that, comparing a fighter from a country that hasn't even mastered proper engine technology (e.g. China that cannot make engines as reliable as early-90s Russian Al and Rds) or advanced LPIRs (according to Western analysts, Russia lags the West by a generation in advanced radars, and China is a generation behind Russia) ...yet a mere look informs these people that the J-20/PakFa is 'better' than the Raptor!?!?
To be better than the Raptor will require several things:
a) The ability to supercruise faster and (more importantly) with greater persistence than the Raptor
b) an AESA LPIR that is more advanced than what the Raptor has, and has greater functionality than what the Raptor's can do (e.g. electronic attack capability)
c) a radar cross section better than -40 dBsm (painting the J-20 black ...interesting color for a 'prototype' and putting 'magical RCS-neutral' canards, and adding a dollop of Chinese website fanboy mail, will not make a plane 0.0001m2)
d) IR, acoustic and visual reduction measures (I would particularly be interested in the IR regime ....although I guess chatroom posts in Beijing, Shanghai, Moscow, Islamabad, etc make up for proper IR reduction measures)
e) advanced avionics such as next-generation ESM/DAS, electro-optics, tactical avionics, smartskin, etc with advanced independent and networked sensor-fusion (kind of hard for a country like China that cannot make a proper replica of the SU-33 to do, or for a country only starting to make reliable T/R modules like Russia to do)
f) advanced MMI whereby the 'Raptor beater' has a better interface between the pilot and the machine than the Raptor (an interesting poster - a Chinese troll - had claimed that the Chinese J-10, the ChiCom copy of the Israeli Lavi, was better than the Rafale ...and was basing that on them looking 'alike' even though one was an advanced twin-engined European design with next-gen avionics and one of the best ESM/DAS suites in the world, and the other was a single-engined Chicom product that claimed to be gen4.5 when it didn't even have proper modern gen4.0 avionics, sensor fusion and MMI, plus had woefully incomparable T/W and wingloading).
g) The 'Raptor beater's' pilots will also have to develop proper DIOT&E for their 'Raptor beater.' Problem is, all that is flying in China and Russia is in the prototype stage (in the Russian variant it is not even the stealthy variant but rather the avionics test bed, and in the Chinese case it did not even lift its landing gear). Yet, in the US, Raptor pilots already have mature DIOT&E ...to the extent they have developed very strong strategies on how to use their aircraft to its maximum advantage, and just as importantly, how they could use tactics against OTHER stealth fighters. Yet a country, like China, that is only now practicing carrier landings is supposed to get into a magical Raptor-beater and trounce the USAF? Right!
h) Almost as importantly as all the above put together is the fact that the US fighting machine is a system. Which is why the plane X vs plane Y comparisons do not make sense. The F-35, on paper, may seem like it will not be good enough against a future mature PakFa (which will, per development signalling, have a bigger radar, better range and better kinematics), or the J-20 which (in this case per forum yaps in China) will have longer range, maneuverability, and a larger weapons capacity. However, comparing unit A vs unit B is stupid. It is about systems. It will not be one F-35 suddenly facing off against one J-20, like some silly computer game. It will be a whole network of systems, advanced and dispersed, working together to make the future combat space absolutely sterile to the enemy. It would be a bloodbath, which is why even though I am not a fan of the JSF I fully realize that in the hands of the US (this may not apply to other JSF countries that may not have the fullness of the networked set of systems the US has) that plane, once the bugs are ironed out, will be devastatingly effective as employed within the confluence of systems the US military machine calls theirs. A bloodbath ...unless, ofcourse, it is a computer game where you have one F-35 flying against one SU-35 with each 10 miles from each other.
All in all, it is a fact that the Raptor will not be the best airplane forever. In the same way that the F-15 Eagle is no longer the best plane flying. However, the Raptor is currently the best plane, and will be so for the next 25 years at least (particularly as continued improvements, such as AESA cheeks and improved avionics trickle in ...and note that the tooling will be saved). Also, by the time the Chinese and others (e.g. Russians, South Koreans, Japanese, etc) come up with an analogue that can compete with the Raptor at exchange rates of 1:1 or better (such as the current situation between the modern F-15 variants and the modern SU-3X variants like the SU-35), the USAF will already have moved to the next generation (for instance the Boeing F-XX 6th Generation concept).
Oh, and what is the 6th gen fighter supposed to have. Per white sources: 'It would likely be far stealthier than even the fifth generation aircraft. It may be able to change its shape in flight, “morphing” to optimize for either speed or persistence, and its engines will likely be retunable in-flight for efficient supersonic cruise or subsonic loitering. The sixth generation fighter will likely have directed energy weapons—high-powered microwaves and lasers for defense against incoming missiles or as offensive weapons themselves. Munitions would likely be of the “dial an effect” type, able to cause anything from impairment to destruction of an air or ground target. Materials and microelectronics technologies would combine to make the aircraft a large integrated sensor, possibly eliminating the need for a nose radar as it is known today. It would be equipped for making cyber attacks as well as achieving kinetic effects, but would still have to be cost-effective to make, service, and modify. Moreover, the rapid advancement of unmanned aircraft technologies could, in 20 years or so, make feasible production of an autonomous robotic fighter. However, that is considered less likely than the emergence of an uninhabited but remotely piloted aircraft with an off-board “crew,” possibly comprising many operators.'
Even looking at the Raptor, an advanced Raptor with next generation avionics can be something ridiculous. For instance, simply putting more diverse and powerful AESA functionality can provide an advanced EA capability that would make a Growler crap itself. Simply putting the avionics suite from the F-35 into the F-22 (and nothing else) would make the Chinese wunderkid that is 'better' than the Raptor crap out dimsum.
Will the J-20 (or whatever JXX variant will come out) or the PakFa be deadly? Definitely ...far better than any current gen 4.5 aircraft out there (Rafale, Tiffy, SU-35, Gripen NG, F-18, etc). That is, if we are comparing airframe-to-airframe. Far better. They will be stealthier in their final forms (for the J-20 there is a likelihood the canards may not be there, and as for the PakFa the next flying variant will not be the avionics testbed but rather the stealthier version that was being used for static testing), will supercruise, and will have better avionics in their final forms.
However ...better than the Raptor ....not really. The Raptor was from inception created to be more than nominally better than advanced next generation Soviet fighters before the USSR went t!tt!es up.
Anyways, what you said about 'Stealth technology is not a single technology and being a combination of other technologies' is something that needs to be drilled into the heads of those who think a new prototype with a fresh dollop of paint (a prototype painted black ...nice pose for the cameras) or the next progression from the T-10 program is 'better' than the Raptor. The JXX (somehow I doubt it will be the J-20 but rather a more capable JXX variant ...there are a couple) and T-50 will be great aircraft, but it is very immature for someone to claim they are Raptor beaters. They will need at least another 6-10 years to start rolling out in final form, and even then they will still be undergoing evolutionary improvement. By that time the Raptor lines will have been re-opened (guaranteed, thanks to the antics of the Chinese mostly), and the Raptors will have gotten avionics improvements.
Although by that time, considering the Chinese government was showing clips from the Top Gun movie as examples of Chinese military manoeuvres (that was stupid! ...I guess they have moved from simply stealing designs to now stealing movie clips and claiming that's their military ....watch out for the Chicom Starwars Death Star, and Chinese special forces that look like Luke Skywalker and wield light sabers), we will be seeing JXXs moving at lightspeed through the Crab Nebula!
U.S.A. even manufactures the guts of components that are assembled in Communist China.
yitbos
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.