It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

J-20 spotted with new camo pattern

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

A penetrating warhead can do a lot of damage, even with a small warhead. A 140 pound warhead detonating inside the hull isn't going to be anything to sneeze at. Not as good as LRASM but still nothing too sneeze at. It's going to take several to kill a ship, but it'll ruin their day pretty quick.




posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Anything hitting a ship is bad..Historically speaking.




posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Now I'm deep into the grim actuarial science of naval combat, but given the vastly different design philosophies between the US Navy (which prior to the LCS and the Zumwalt favored very large crew complements and simple, manually operated power, electrical, flood management, etc systems in order to maximize damage control abilities and combat redundancy) and the Russian Navy (who favored smaller crew sizes and much higher levels of automation within their ships), might the huge difference in warhead size between the Granit/BrahMos and the Harpoon/Standard have to do with just how hard of a hit it might take to neutralize it's target?

I'd imagine that a more redundant US ship might take a much bigger hit to knock out of commission than a Russian (and, by extension, a Chinese) vessel, which relies more on potentially fragile/temperamental automated subsystems that might not hold up as well under the stresses of combat and battle damage.
edit on 20-10-2016 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

I am ready for my close up Mr Demille:

china-defense.blogspot.com...

Now we see some of what is being planned for the J-20 from the weapons inside the weapons' bay.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha


I saw this picture the other day and there is no way they are fitting too much of a long range anti-ship or air-to-air missile in those compartments. In my opinion. They look very shallow compared to 35/22 bays. looks like it has 6 hard points on the exterior.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

They don't have to fit many in there. It's not like AWACS or JSTARS is going to be doing a lot of maneuvering to dodge an incoming missile. All they have to do is get closer enough to launch and they're almost guaranteed a hit.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


"Guaranteed a hit" is a preposterous statement. If they're staying outside of defensible ranges then their weapon wouldn't necessarily have a high pK. Most of the Chinese media shows all their attacks as swarm attacks that overwhelm the superior electronic and kinetic defenses of NATO forces. The J-20 is still going to have to expose itself long enough to find and get an initial lock on the target. I just don't see how this would be a great strategy... What weapon system is it going to be? Which missile? I find it hard to believe that it wouldn't be a suicide mission to get within range of an asset that is certain to have a CAP somewhere in it's vicinity. The J-20 may have a reduced signature but I seriously think it would be closer in return to a Typhoon than it would be an F-35.. It would be intercepted. Just my opinion but if they plan to use it ala a stealth F-14 then they're going to need to hope a lot of things go right and it's as adaptable as the F-14 was.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

You're not talking about a target that can generate an overshoot, or turn and run out of range. You're talking about a converted commercial platform, with limited defenses, and a large radar signature. You almost have to try to miss.

As for CAP, yes they'll be there, but they'll have the same problem that all fighters will have in the area. The only way they can stay on station is with fairly heavy tanker support. One of the ways to attack AWACS is to either try to time it so that some of the CAP is off tanking, or send in aircraft to pull them off station, and sneak at least one aircraft armed with long range missiles to take the shot.

Without knowing anything about the RAM being used there's no way to even guess the RCS of the J-20. We can guess all we want, and make wild predictions, but without knowing anything that's all they are.



posted on Oct, 29 2016 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Jeez that j20 looks beautiful



posted on Oct, 29 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Nice plane I must admit. Although it's like as if an F-22 and a Euro Fighter had a baby



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Guesses to real:

MTOW
Max internal fuel
Max payload
radar
avionics
armament
ENGINES
?

I think it will be similar to the mig-29k in performance with a reduced RCS and smaller payload. Super cruise is something I would have to see to believe. Is it powered by an RD-33 or AL-31 derivative? They say the prototype is AL-31 but that the next engine will be in place any day now.. for the past decade. Don't buy it. I think it's a distraction and that the Chinese are really much more concerned with A2AD systems than they are spending millions on fighter jets. They're also supposedly building nuclear ballistic subs, attack subs, aircraft carriers, destroyers, support ships, a2a missile systems, s2s systems, so on and so forth. Where is this money coming from again?



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Or twenty will go after the tankers and another twenty go after the AWACS. We have a finite number of missiles and planes.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Flipper35

The problem with fighting a near peer war is that we're going to be fighting on their turf. That means they have every advantage when it comes to air power. It makes for very interesting study and planning.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Take me back! Take me back! Take me back to the USSR!




Anyways, this is a bit old, but it gives people a sense of scale at least.

She's a big bird.

The J-20 will be revealed publicly at an airshow shortly.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

The J-20 just did a fly by at the Zhuhai airshow:

www.yahoo.com...

No sign of the video on youtube yet.

Here's a practice fly by from couple weeks ago:




posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

There are hints China may be working on a larger version of the J-20.

www.janes.com...



posted on Nov, 2 2016 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Chiming in.

But yes, they're talking about a one trick pony here. A cold-war style interceptor? Really? I'm not buying it. It may, sure, get lucky against one KC/AWAC/E3/JSTAR etc but that'll be the last time it ever does. Then it becomes total missile fodder for us. But I doubt it ever does, personally. I'm guessing they've got a couple other plans for it.

With that said, it's got visible flaws that even F-35 levels of RAM couldn't hide. And we know their electronics are no where close to peer, not to mention radar/engines etc. Problem is they're not going to go broke over this, and I'm positive they've got another one in the works. And I don't mean the -31.

This, to me, is closer to F-117 generation of stealth, if barely. And their mission tactics won't be nearly as good. It's a endearing step in the right direction, however.



posted on Dec, 1 2016 @ 11:48 PM
link   
China is testing a VLRAAM on the J-16, that could reach hypersonic speeds, and ranges between 250 and 310 miles, with an AESA radar. The J-20 would be used as the seeker, while the J-16 would be the shooter. The VLRAAM would climb to extremely high altitudes for the midflight portion of the flight to the target, and then would dive down on the target aircraft. This would also allow it to stretch the range out, as the altitudes it would be flying at would be extremely low drag.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Definitely get all that. But it's the detection range of the J-20 I've got a problem with.

Time will tell.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

china-defense.blogspot.com...

Interesting new pic of two J-20s with crew around. I wish I could geo locate this one....because the caption is "operational" for the J-20s. erm. IOC? Surely not yet...




top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join