Posted on 10/19/2016 5:51:29 AM PDT by Yo-Yo
China’s J-20 has been an internet star for half a decade. It first appeared in late 2010 in grainy photos taken from the fenceline at Chengdu Aircraft Industrial Group’s plant. It first flew just as Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who long shorted China’s ability to put into operation such an aircraft, was meeting with Chinese officials in Beijing. Since then the jet has made clear progress, with apparent design changes occurring as the aircraft progressed from prototype to pre-production stages. Now the J-20 will follow in the footsteps of its simpler and smaller cousin, the stealthy J-31, and be officially unveiled to the world at the biennial Zhuhai Air Show in Guangdong province.
The J-20’s splinter style scheme is similar to those that have become popular with leading-edge Russian fighter aircraft, but the style has existed for decades in one form or another. American adversary support units have also adopted similar schemes to reflect Russia’s use of it.
Although the J-20 is a remarkable accomplishment for China’s aerospace industry and military, looks can be deceiving. The aircraft clearly integrates a menagerie of design features stolen from the F-22 and F-35, likely a result of incessant hacking of US defense contractors and key human espionage operations. At the same time, it includes some fairly novel design elements of its own, such as the ability to deploy infrared homing missiles outside of its side weapons bays while still minimizing the aircraft’s overall radar signature. Still, its basic design is thought to have been obtained at least partially from the now defunct MiG1.42/1.44 program. Either way, these days a fighter aircraft is more about what lies beneath the surface, or what makes up their surfaces themselves, than just the jet’s shape and outward appearance.
China still lags behind the US in the areas of avionics, radar absorbent material science, and, especially, engine technology. China’s aerial weapons, most notably its air-to-air missiles, are regarded as inferior to its western counterparts in certain ways as well. This is not to say they have not made giant leaps to improve these deficiencies in recent years. Yet the reality is that the J-20 does not have to be as capable as, say, the F-22 in some or any respects to represent a serious threat. This is especially true if China builds these aircraft in significant numbers.
In any foreseeable conflict involving the US, China would be fighting as the home team, on or near their home turf, while American forces would be fighting in an expeditionary manner. One is much harder than the other, especially when fighting an enemy that occupies a large geographical area and has concentrated so heavily on building up its anti-access/area denial capabilities.
This means that even in a war over, say, the Taiwan Strait, China will be able to field massive amounts of air power in a persistent manner, while the US will struggle to keep a handful of combat fighters over the battlefield. Not just that, but these fighters can only carry a limited amount of air-to-air missiles, and are dependent on being within a few hundred miles of very unstealthy and vulnerable tanker aircraft.
America’s highly networked aerial forces also operate best when various support assets are present, including lumbering airborne early warning and control aircraft, flying battlefield connectivity nodes, and a whole menu of other information, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft. All of these are vulnerable to attack without a thick fighter counter-air screen in place. But even such a screen can fend off only so many incoming targets over a limited area, and China has the ability to overwhelm that force with a mix of very low-end aerial assets (drones converted from surplus fighter planes, cruise missiles, etc) and very high-end assets (Su-35, J-11, J-20 etc)—and everything in between.
Excerpt. Read more at The War Zone
Pump a slammer into one of these over the South China Sea and an hour later you’re ready to schwack another one.
they have come a long ways since the last clinton sell out administration.
Looks like a smaller version of the B70 Valkyerie.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=russian+thrust+vector+control&&view=detail&mid=63222056A6F8C2B7D94A63222056A6F8C2B7D94A&FORM=VRDGAR
Prove that statement. And don't use the cliche arguments "everybody knows" or "It's common knowledge".
China gate 4.2?
I worked at Lockheed Martin and on both of these programs when both aircraft were being developed. There was no incentive to keep costs under control, and virtually no effort was made to do so until they got so high that the number of aircraft being bought began to be cut.
I also worked for LM at Fort Worth. I worked quality assurance and interfaced with DCAS/DCAA frequently. They always kept our feet to the fire on contract end item deliverables and cost. I never saw any evidence of what you claim. Where did you work and what did you do?
Our Bid, R&D and Production costs are so ridiculously high thanks to the candy covered rules written by our legislators. We must keep our weapons companies executives fully satisfied, after all they will need to retire someday and we don’t want them living like paupers, do we?
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.