Chinese 5th Gen Fighter Photo - Aviation Week

[Phoenix10]

I wouldn't dismiss everything he has said though. There is a point in what he is trying to convey, albeit perhaps he uses exergerated language. Last year this time most of us were dismissing China deploying a prototype any time soon. Just a few months ago we were arguing about the feasiblities of a carrier killer, apparantly the missile has entered IOC.

The J-20 is no doubt going to be a long range fighter. If it is successful, built in enough quantities would be a handful for the Ausies if Australia found itself in a dispute with the Chinese.

Guys, where is Highsea. Can someone send him summons!

Yes, it is obvious that this is a long range fighter and was intended for stealth. However, neither he nor anyone else can dream of making a claim such as his 2nd to last sentence. The absurdity is not in the potential for this bird to be a threat (I am sure that it will be- someday). The absurdity is in the fact that he thinks he can make such a claim based on a few photos and a ton of speculation. All he (and we) know is that this aircraft is HUGE and obviously intended to be stealthy. That is not enough for him to claim what he claims.

[Zinja]

Yes, it is obvious that this is a long range fighter and was intended for stealth. However, neither he nor anyone else can dream of making a claim such as his 2nd to last sentence. The absurdity is not in the potential for this bird to be a threat (I am sure that it will be- someday). The absurdity is in the fact that he thinks he can make such a claim based on a few photos and a ton of speculation. All he (and we) know is that this aircraft is HUGE and obviously intended to be stealthy. That is not enough for him to claim what he claims.

Your said "This entire Kopp article is absurd..", if you only meant the last sentence, ok, i stand corrected.

[Phoenix10]

Your said "This entire Kopp article is absurd..", if you only meant the last sentence, ok, i stand corrected.

Yes, that is my mistake. I think we're on the same page.

[Chogy]

Given the size, I wonder if China is trying to fit it into a bas****ized niche between the B-2 and the F-22. With size and mass comes decreased agility, but increased payload. Possibly the idea is to combine a postulated supercruise air-air capability with an airspace penetration capacity as well for precision first-strike.

[n21]

I have this weird question in my head.

AWACS are able to detect a fighter taking off from a airfield.

How about these new stealth fighters. Will they be visible to a AWACS if they are on ground/about to take off? I wonder about those large landing gear doors in J-20. Will they be "seen" by a AWACS?

[citanon]

Given the size, I wonder if China is trying to fit it into a bas****ized niche between the B-2 and the F-22. With size and mass comes decreased agility, but increased payload. Possibly the idea is to combine a postulated supercruise air-air capability with an airspace penetration capacity as well for precision first-strike.

So, if a squadron of these load up on two internally carried supersonic AShMs each, and set out to get within 50 nm from a CVBG from multiple directions before releasing their weapons, how much damage could they do?

What would it take to stop them? IF the Chinese is uses these aircraft for constant harassment of a CVBG, would it force the carrier to go from an offensive posture to a defensive one?

If the fighters are based in-land behind successive layers of air defenses, would it be able to draw US aircraft into fights deeper over the hostile territory, into situations where the Chinese aircraft are better supported by ground radars and AWACs?

[Zinja]

So, if a squadron of these load up on two internally carried supersonic AShMs each, and set out to get within 50 nm from a CVBG from multiple directions before releasing their weapons, how much damage could they do?

This is what im thinking as well. China deliberately made this bird huge perhaps so that it can carry heavier anti-carrier/warship missiles

If the fighters are based in-land behind successive layers of air defenses, would it be able to draw US aircraft into fights deeper over the hostile territory, into situations where the Chinese aircraft are better supported by ground radars and AWACs?

I think with this plane China's strategy is to take the fight to the enemy rather than bringing the enemy home.

[gunnut]

So, if a squadron of these load up on two internally carried supersonic AShMs each, and set out to get within 50 nm from a CVBG from multiple directions before releasing their weapons, how much damage could they do?

What type of missiles? Are there any supersonic AShMs small enough to be carried internally on a large fighter? Look at the officially leaked pictures. There doesn't seem to be a lot of room for large missiles internally.

To approach from multiple directions would need the fighters to have long range. If they're stealth, then they can't carry external fuel. They will need to carry fuel internally or have tankers waiting for them.

What would it take to stop them? IF the Chinese is uses these aircraft for constant harassment of a CVBG, would it force the carrier to go from an offensive posture to a defensive one?

What would the attrition rate be if they're on "harassment" missions? That's a lot of assets to throw away.

If the fighters are based in-land behind successive layers of air defenses, would it be able to draw US aircraft into fights deeper over the hostile territory, into situations where the Chinese aircraft are better supported by ground radars and AWACs?

I think this is a concept plane for study in advanced aerodynamics and stealth. They must get their engines up to speed in order for these to be real warplanes. Then they will need to have the electronics working correctly in order to be a 5th gen fighter. Until then, this is an X-35 with crappy engine.

[citanon]

What type of missiles? Are there any supersonic AShMs small enough to be carried internally on a large fighter? Look at the officially leaked pictures. There doesn't seem to be a lot of room for large missiles internally.

To approach from multiple directions would need the fighters to have long range. If they're stealth, then they can't carry external fuel. They will need to carry fuel internally or have tankers waiting for them.

I wouldn't have raised the point except that the plane looks very large to me (I'm comparing it to the people standing next to it) and apparently some other posters too. The implication that comes to mind is it might be able to carry a lot of internal fuel in addition to a large weapons load, hence, I'm guessing, Chogy's comments about a bastard-child of F-22 and B-2.

The SS-N-22 might still be too large for internal stowage, but what if it's launched from a stealth aircraft at supersonic speed from high altitude at relatively close range? Would it still need to be as large or could a reduced diameter missile achieve speeds and terminal kinematics while carrying the same sized warhead?

What would the attrition rate be if they're on "harassment" missions? That's a lot of assets to throw away.

But it's a stealth aircraft. To make people nervous the things just have to take off in the direction of the sea, and not appear on radar for a few hours.

The fact of its existence in squadron sized numbers alone would significantly complicate US planning.

I think this is a concept plane for study in advanced aerodynamics and stealth. They must get their engines up to speed in order for these to be real warplanes. Then they will need to have the electronics working correctly in order to be a 5th gen fighter. Until then, this is an X-35 with crappy engine.

That's reasonable thinking, but, what do we know about the state of Chinese avionics development? What do we know about the engines? And how does its mission and its other characteristics factor in? If this plane ends up with very good signature management, how much engine performance does it need to perform its mission?

[Phoenix10]

I have to admit that the A2/AD aspect crossed my mind. I could see this as another layer of protection from a US Carrier Battle Group in addition to subs and the DF-21D. However, optimizing this aircraft for A2/AD and deep strike alone doesn't seem quite right to me. China knows that both India and Russia will get the PAK-FA and has to think that some of their other neighbors will get the F-35. That means J-XX could face very maneuverable aircraft with great acceleration, very low signatures, and highly advanced sensors. I would think that China's next gen aircraft would need to be optimized to handle this threat as well. A high wing loading and underpowered engine (yes, I'm speculating) wouldn't bode well for J-XX against F-35, F-22, PAK-FA.

Personally, I doubt it is just a research aircraft since US intel seems to think they will field a 5th gen by 2018. If this isn't a prototype of what's to come then they have a ton of work to do in 8 years.

I do agree that, whatever the CONOPS become for this aircraft, a few squadrons would cause the US and everyone else to take a second look at their planning.

Here's another pic, this time with drag chute:

[Phoenix10]

Another front view. Large canards are clearly shown. Not the most attractive bird to me. Aesthetically, I liked the PAK-FA much more.

[kyli]

I like the front view of this bird more than any other 4Gs.

[gunnut]

I wouldn't have raised the point except that the plane looks very large to me (I'm comparing it to the people standing next to it) and apparently some other posters too. The implication that comes to mind is it might be able to carry a lot of internal fuel in addition to a large weapons load, hence, I'm guessing, Chogy's comments about a bastard-child of F-22 and B-2.

Looking at those pictures, I think this plane is too big to be small and too small to be big. It looks like the F-111 all over again. Is that a good thing? I don't know.

That's reasonable thinking, but, what do we know about the state of Chinese avionics development? What do we know about the engines? And how does its mission and its other characteristics factor in? If this plane ends up with very good signature management, how much engine performance does it need to perform its mission?

We know China still depends on Russia for J-10's engine. That alone should tell you something.

I don't know where J-10 gets its avionics from. I think France?

[Officer of Engineers]

Something is not right. The Russians revealled the PAK-FA through a flight demo. The Chinese released pictures.

[zraver]

I

The SS-N-22 might still be too large for internal stowage, but what if it's launched from a stealth aircraft at supersonic speed from high altitude at relatively close range? Would it still need to be as large or could a reduced diameter missile achieve speeds and terminal kinematics while carrying the same sized warhead?

The plane would never get close enough at high altitude. The missile smounted underneath it would be radar beacons. If its designed to penetrate close to a carrier with external stores it will do it low using height to defeat ship board radars and the planes stealthed mass over the center line mounted weapons to mask the missiles from AWACS.

Also using the picture of the taxi cart as a frame of reference the plane is not that big, definitely not a hybrid craft between the eagle and Lancer. It is simply fighter sized which limits internal fuel and stores. Speculation back to square 1.