Official Chengdu J-20 Discussion Thread

[weasel1962]

Re:

The first flight certainly took the US govt and its intel community by surprise. Gates has more than acknowledged that they were surprised by the "speed", not necessarily by the plane, at which the aircraft is being deployed. Of course he could be merely lying to congress if he really knew otherwise when he justified the F-22 cancellation.

If Gates had known before 2009 that there would be a first flight of a J-XX in Jan 2011, I really wonder if he would have cancelled the F-22 or worse be able to justify the cancellation then...'

As it is, the knives are already out in response to that decision. For myself, I think there has been an over-estimation on the capabilities of the intel community. Remember the nukes that were supposed to be in Iraq?

 

[localhost127]

The first flight certainly took the US govt and its intel community by surprise. Gates has more than acknowledged that they were surprised by the "speed", not necessarily by the plane, at which the aircraft is being deployed. Of course he could be merely lying to congress if he really knew otherwise when he justified the F-22 cancellation.

If Gates had known before 2009 that there would be a first flight of a J-XX in Jan 2011, I really wonder if he would have cancelled the F-22 or worse be able to justify the cancellation then...'

As it is, the knives are already out in response to that decision. For myself, I think there has been an over-estimation on the capabilities of the intel community. Remember the nukes that were supposed to be in Iraq?

The first flight certainly took the US govt and its intel community by surprise.

can you provide citation regarding US intel being blindsided?

Of course he could be merely lying to congress if he really knew otherwise when he justified the F-22 cancellation.

do you see the j20 development with attention being paid towards LO (which should be a nod to the US --- obviously stating that the US and their LO efforts is indeed the correct path to be taken - albeit some 40 years late to the party) as a direct (read: direct) to US forces --- or is it the assumed evolutionary tale of a force looking to secure regional defenses with a country such as India - who is very verbal about acquiring pak-fa variants? (im completely novice to this - so please feel free to cement my questions with real world knowledge & corrections)

----------------------

from the news, we here scare nonsense regarding anti-ship ballistic missiles. if china is on a path to develop a LO fighter/strike/bomber/whatever - should we expect further developments regarding a "loud" weapons system (ballistic missile which is glowing in the IR spectrum --- and a ballistic launch which would be noticed by the early warning sats) - or would the trend start to fall in line with a LO strike package.

any expert commentary on that question would be appreciated...

clarified and repeated..
why would china develop 'loud' anti-naval weapons, and yet at the same time clearly demonstrate an interest in 'quiet' air platforms..

 

[latenlazy]

clarified and repeated..
why would china develop 'loud' anti-naval weapons, and yet at the same time clearly demonstrate an interest in 'quiet' air platforms..

I would think that such considerations are irrelevant because once the missile is launched far more attention would be put into intercepting the missile to prevent it from hitting its target than shooting down the platform from which it was launched. As soon as such a platform releases its missile it will be "quiet"
again, and will probably change course to secure a difficult lock.

 

[Todjaeger]

I would think that such considerations are irrelevant because once the missile is launched far more attention would be put into intercepting the missile to prevent it from hitting its target than shooting down the platform from which it was launched. As soon as such a platform releases its missile it will be "quiet"
again, and will probably change course to secure a difficult lock.

Anti-ship ballistic missiles are launched from land-based ground units, not aircraft. In the future (if the the proof of concept is valid...) then there is the potential for some sea or submarine launched variants as well. Air-launched Anti-ship missiles are another category of weapon all together.

-Cheers

 

[Feanor]

What wonders me on its' launch is how it supposedly took us by surprise. Like aforementioned, compared to how fast the US & China advance their respective technologies. It's more like how long it seems to take each country. Sure, you can say (as some articles do in fact) that the F-22 is already twelve years on. But that's not how long the US has fielded the planes combat ready. It takes waaay too long to develop aircraft nowadays. I long for the 50s when aircraft seemed to churn out from the design table to the front line in a year. And that's the point - it takes too damn long to RDT&E aircraft now. But apparently not for China. Or maybe even Russia. Unless we haven't heard the whole story (which knowing governments we haven't). China seems to have spewed this thing out of nowhere. Do they have development like the US does? If so, this thing has been in the system for at least a few years already. The Russian version has well, but it was better documented. Obviously the US plane was, the competition back in '90 was well documented. But how are the Chinese getting this thing to the air so quick? Or was it even that quick? And that's a scarier thought - they've had the idea so long that only the Americans beat them to the punch. Cause if they're taking off now there hasn't been much time between fielding the F-22 and testing the J-20.

The history of the Russian 5th gen programs goes back to 1983, when experiments with the forward swept wing design started at Sukhoi (which eventually yielded the Su-47 tech-demo). The MFI program which actually yielded the MiG 1.44 started in 1986. It was cancelled and replaced by the non-competitive PAK-FA program which instead of looking for multiple design entries from major manufacturers, delegated 70% of the project to Sukhoi, 15% to RSK MiG and 15% to Yakovlev.

So almost 25 years between the beginning of a 5th gen program and first flight of the T-50, an actual prototype intended for production.

 

[Haavarla]

No doubt KnAAPO got their hands on material regarding the earlier programs.
But T-50 program started in about 2002 right?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The same sort of rubbish was written when the F-15 was being developed. It wasn't agile enough, didn't carry enough weapons, radar was too complicated, can't buy enough of them and so on. Same with the Chinese/Soviet SAM systems. Our aircraft can't survive, we're outmatched blah blah blah.

101 to nil air combat victories later for the F-15 and IADS after IADS completely flattened by forces largely comprised of so-called "second tier" fighters within days has rather put paid to most of those ideas in reality and yet now that a new round of air combat aircraft and SAM systems are being built the same sort of rubbish analysis is being conducted.

Funny how the West are accused of never learning anything from history, but our "enemies" aren't ever accused of the same sort of malaise and yet THEY are the ones who are always playing catch-up...

Very true and I could not have said it better myself. Speaking of critics saying the F-35 can't turn or run just read this.

LM defends F-35 JSF agility against critics: AINonline

Funny how people said the same thing about the F-15 like you said and today are saying the same thing about the F-35.

 

[Feanor]

No doubt KnAAPO got their hands on material regarding the earlier programs.
But T-50 program started in about 2002 right?

Yes. KnAAPO isn't the one that developed the PAK-FA. The central Sukhoi bureau did it, with input from iirc MiG and Yakovlev.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

can you provide citation regarding US intel being blindsided?

Citation here:
Defense.gov News Transcript: Media Availability with Secretary Gates en route to Beijing, China from Andrews Air Force Base

"SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think, first of all, we’ve been watching these developments all along. I’ve been concerned about the development of the anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles ever since I took this job. I would – we knew they were working on a stealth aircraft. I think that what we’ve seen is that they may be somewhat further ahead in the development of that aircraft than our intelligence had earlier predicted. "

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I think that what we’ve seen is that they may be somewhat further ahead in the development of that aircraft than our intelligence had earlier predicted. "

That is a long way from being "blindsided" as in "the side away from which one is directing one's attention". So the J-20 flew a few years earlier than predicted. The overwhelming air power advantage of the US and friends vs PRC is such that this not a significant upsetting of the balance of power.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Citation here:
Defense.gov News Transcript: Media Availability with Secretary Gates en route to Beijing, China from Andrews Air Force Base

"SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think, first of all, we’ve been watching these developments all along. I’ve been concerned about the development of the anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles ever since I took this job. I would – we knew they were working on a stealth aircraft. I think that what we’ve seen is that they may be somewhat further ahead in the development of that aircraft than our intelligence had earlier predicted. "

Earlier than expected?

My first email traffic on the J20 started mid 2004, in those very first emails and posts the discussions with tacplanner colleagues in the USAF was a first flight cycle of 5 years. we were 6 months too optimistic.

some of the rubbish being written about the US being caught short sheeted is absolute rubbish - certainly not within the community.

don't mistake public media or blog commentary with official commentary.

the first shots I saw of the J20 was 4 months ago, with earlier facsimiles appearing some 12 months earlier.

people need to get a grip. the internet, blogs etc... is not the sum knowledge about this article - and "nobody" was caught asleep at the wheel. I'd suggest that Gates wasn't listening to his own people (due to his F-22 issues) - and thats certainly the case when I look at my 2004 traffic.

 

[IronsightSniper]

As I recall it, our Intel originally plotted J-20 to be deployed in 2025 but now that's been revised to 2020, although we weren't actually blindsided (if J-20 was deployed parallel to T-50 that's blindsided.)

In fact, according to this video, we predicted the J-XX to be operational as the J-20 in 2020 (go to 8:52):

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWgwPXVFFws"]YouTube - USAF scared of Russian Air Force[/nomedia]

 

[Todjaeger]

As I recall it, our Intel originally plotted J-20 to be deployed in 2025 but now that's been revised to 2020, although we weren't actually blindsided (if J-20 was deployed parallel to T-50 that's blindsided.)

In fact, according to this video, we predicted the J-XX to be operational as the J-20 in 2020 (go to 8:52):

YouTube - USAF scared of Russian Air Force

There is what the intel and defence community knows, what they think, and what they tell others they know and think. The three are most often not the same.

Just because SecDef Gates makes a comment that the appearance of the XYZ widget surprised him, does not automatically mean that others within the US intel and defence communities were not already aware of it. The same applies to other countries with international intel-gathering efforts.

-Cheers

 

[tphuang]

China has yet to show that she can produce a modern military turbofan or turbojet engine. It is struggling to develop the J-10, yet because it rolls out something that looks like a MiG1.44 crossed with an F-22 and adopting a few features off other aircraft, all of a sudden the most extensively developed and most expensive Western aircraft ever produced (and unlike any Chinese or Russian 5th Gen it actually IS in production) is "outclassed".

have to correct you on this one. WS-10 are fielded with two regiments of J-11BS as we speak. And this first flight of J-20 was taken with some particular variant of WS-10.

There are over 200 J-10s in service. I wouldn't call it "struggling to develop the J-10".

Ahh something that enhances PRC mil power and dreceases US power IS an upset of the balance of power. This plane may be a lot better than the J-8-IIs it will replace but if their new adversary aircraft is far, far better then they have made no headway in the balance of power stakes. Compared to J-8 vs F-15/F-16/F-18 the J-10/J-20 vs F-22/F-35 line up will see China going backwards.

Calling it at J-8II replacement is like calling F-22 a F-4 replacement. Its length is just slightly less than that of Su-27s and its other parameters are probably comparable. And from all indications, it is designed to replace flankers. I could be completely wrong, but it appears from my reading that this is not just a technology demonstrator. After all, if we take PLAAF's assessment that it's 4th generation fighter jet will go in service around 2017-2019, then it would make more sense for this plane to be a prototype.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

There are over 200 J-10s in service. I wouldn't call it "struggling to develop the J-10".

Ahh its some 40+ years since the program started. You’d kind of want to have reached 200 in service by now… And in the current form its been 20+ years work on J-10.

Calling it at J-8II replacement is like calling F-22 a F-4 replacement. Its length is just slightly less than that of Su-27s and its other parameters are probably comparable. And from all indications, it is designed to replace flankers.

The PLAAF/PLAN still have large numbers of J-8s in service. When the first F-22As flew the F-4 was long gone. As to being a J-8 rather than FLANKER replacement apart from the need to replace the J-8s first and the FLANKER still being in production I made this call because the J-20 seems more optimised for A2A. Of course aircraft these days are built for multi-role but the A2A mission will be most pressing for the PLA in the face of 5th generation aircraft.

 

[Feanor]

gf0012-aust considered it to be a striker rather then air superiority optimized. I was actually surprised at his assessment, since my guess (albeit not a very educated one) would have been along the same lines as yours. Air to air is the more pressing need.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

gf0012-aust considered it to be a striker rather then air superiority optimized. I was actually surprised at his assessment, since my guess (albeit not a very educated one) would have been along the same lines as yours. Air to air is the more pressing need.

Well I thought it was a strike aircraft as well from the earlier photos of lower resolution and exaggerated size. But from the multiple control surfaces including all moving canards and tails and the full length slats and TVC it would appear to be customised for high agility. But I think most telling about the A2A mission is the apparent lack of room on the underside for an optical sight unit (FLIR/LD). Also I am sceptical of the depth of the weapons bay. The location of the ducts seems to indicate they displace above the bay which appears to be a full width bay limiting the depth of the bay because of the close distance between the head of the bay and the inlets. Then of course as you say there is mission need.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Well I thought it was a strike aircraft as well from the earlier photos of lower resolution and exaggerated size. But from the multiple control surfaces including all moving canards and tails and the full length slats and TVC it would appear to be customised for high agility. But I think most telling about the A2A mission is the apparent lack of room on the underside for an optical sight unit (FLIR/LD). Also I am sceptical of the depth of the weapons bay. The location of the ducts seems to indicate they displace above the bay which appears to be a full width bay limiting the depth of the bay because of the close distance between the head of the bay and the inlets. Then of course as you say there is mission need.

it does seem a bit of a puzzle, so big, yet all this focus on agility.

Could be this be some sort of long range multirole? Seems to be F-111 over again and theres not enough power in china(?) to make it a fighter?

Maybe the Canards are just FUD and a prototype will appear without them.

 

[Feanor]

Well I thought it was a strike aircraft as well from the earlier photos of lower resolution and exaggerated size. But from the multiple control surfaces including all moving canards and tails and the full length slats and TVC it would appear to be customised for high agility. But I think most telling about the A2A mission is the apparent lack of room on the underside for an optical sight unit (FLIR/LD). Also I am sceptical of the depth of the weapons bay. The location of the ducts seems to indicate they displace above the bay which appears to be a full width bay limiting the depth of the bay because of the close distance between the head of the bay and the inlets. Then of course as you say there is mission need.

If it's a 5th gen. air superiority bird, why the focus on agility? Shouldn't the focus be on sensors, and signals management?

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

As I recall it, our Intel originally plotted J-20 to be deployed in 2025 but now that's been revised to 2020, although we weren't actually blindsided (if J-20 was deployed parallel to T-50 that's blindsided.)

In fact, according to this video, we predicted the J-XX to be operational as the J-20 in 2020 (go to 8:52):

YouTube - USAF scared of Russian Air Force

Since when will the intel community claim they were wrong? Not even after an invasion where nothing showed up.

Despite all the claims in the above, not one addressed the issue on the reasons for the F-22 termination.

Gates said what he said. What some tacplanners privately think and what they actually tell the boss in an official report could have been different in this case. That's probably with a conservative plus and best estimate basis. There's a lot of estimates out there and someone will always claim to have predicted the next big crisis. When the photos came out, some responses came out = fake.

Gates is not the first to make such claims about official under-estimation. Its not the first incident either. It happened with the ASAT space test, its going to happen with something else in the future. That is consistent with the calls for PLA transparency. Its consistent with decisions undertaken.

The chinese appear to be targeting an operational date for the J-20 before 2020. Dorsett may have openly claimed a 2020 operational date and has defended it. But my guess is the official reports are going to be updated.

The PLAAF had problems with the J-10 engine. Ultimately they went Russki in order to operationalise it. That delayed the deployment. If they didn't learn from that for the J-20, I'd be surprised. I don't think it will take 10 years from the first flight to operationalise the new jet.