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

China unveils advanced J-20 stealth fighter in fly over at air show

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Not much less than the F-35. A lot less than its adversary the F-22. Is ir a true 5th gen? Does it have even half the tech the F-22 has? I'm guessing no. The last video I saw of a PAK-FA it was rusted out testing its machine gun.




posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles



Apparently there are some major design flaws.

Are those engines rusty? Or are my eyes seeing things
edit on 7-11-2016 by Crumbles because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles

It's more like 4.5++ as near as anyone can tell.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Crumbles
Cheap workforce and reduced engineering costs, not much private industry, basically free resources (it´s china, dictatorship) and probably way less safety measures in the whole production line and endproduct is the answer. Not to say it´s a bad plane, but those are be the primary reasons for the low costs. Especially safety is costly, all the way down to the first screw.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: verschickter

With a failing economy of course.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 05:26 AM
link   
Didn't realize open bay pics were up.








posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: E92M3
well they are just going to suffer horrible fuel efficiency and mileage flying with those doors open!



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   
The 5th gen haters have decided they hate the J-20, too.

warisboring.com...

They do have a valid point. However, in this case, it is probably just a bit of wisdom on Beijing's part. They have seen the problems the F-35 has had and are concerned they will have the same thing with the J-20. So, buy new and up-to-date (sorta) 4th gens from the Russians (ie they are hedging).



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

The J-20, while having some of the same technologies, isn't as complex as the F-35. It's not using super advanced software or some of the other things the F-35 is.

But at the same time, they're not going to build thousands of them either, so will need more than just J-20s.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

No doubt that its not as complicated as the F-35, but its Beijing's first production stealth aircraft and much can go wrong.



posted on Nov, 8 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Oh I'm sure it has, and there are indications that there are still issues ongoing, but the risk is lower than with the F-35 because of the lower complexity.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: E92M3
Didn't realize open bay pics were up.



Curious, it looks like to me they've messed up their integrated hard points worse than the F-35. I would've thought that'd be hard to do. I'll have a good laugh when they try to sell this on the market as "multi-roll".

I've also heard, as well as surmised, that what we assumed was an EOTS on the nose, is actually just an IR seeker for it's WVR missiles. Basically a pass through, so it doesn't need to have the door open to cue. At least it will serve that function more than a ground attack, HMD type apparatus.

Opinion: I, again, don't see this as a viable weapon system. If the US were building this, we'd be crying one trick pony...not variable enough... blah blah. Maybe I'm just dumb, but do the PLA have this kind of cash just laying around to not capitalize on this program? Or are they willing to risk this much just to iron out, from what I'm seeing, many many flaws.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: aholic


Opinion: I, again, don't see this as a viable weapon system. If the US were building this, we'd be crying one trick pony...not variable enough... blah blah. Maybe I'm just dumb, but do the PLA have this kind of cash just laying around to not capitalize on this program? Or are they willing to risk this much just to iron out, from what I'm seeing, many many flaws.


Their needs and intended uses are limited and probably fine for this, which is mid-long-range interception, fling missiles at AWACS and tankers and ships. And against all but US, it would get air superiority against 4g aircraft.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

I realize a lot of folks think this is an Achilles heel in our air combat strategy, firing at AWACS and such, but they're better defended than most might think. Especially if a war were to tick off with these guys. I don't trust the cost analysis on this LRIP one bit and from my guess, maybe they get a squadron, plus training, depot and reserve...maybe. And we identify that airfield and solve for it. Our commanders don't just put tankers and sensors within range of enemy missiles willy nilly.

Also I think a Meteor armed Gripen could handle it pretty well.

Meanwhile we've got AIM120 armed 5th gen fighters leapfrogging from deck to deck all over the Pacific. I see why they're freaking out.

edit on 22-11-2016 by aholic because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Dont forget the R-37 and the R-37M; the latter has a jettisonable rocket booster that increases the range to "300-400km"



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 05:54 AM
link   
I love the over estimation of our capabilities that goes on everywhere I read. It matches perfectly with the under estimation of any potential opponent we night face.

Yeah, sure, the J-20 is just a cheap farce, and could never get near an AWACS or anything else, and even if it did, we'd smash it silly.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: aholic

I wouldn't underestimate the Chinese (or overestimate the Russians). They make cheap toys because it is profitable to make cheap crap. When the government is buying and ripping them off gets a bullet in the head, they can make quality.

Look at the directional change and long-term economics & industrial capability.

I certainly know from reading academic papers that once (e.g. 15 years ago) it was imitative low-quality copies, but now PRC scientists & engineers regularly publish and accomplish at high levels nearly equivalent to US and EU research, and the funding and institutional discipline of the government is like the US in the 1950's and 1960's (run by the people who won WW2).

It's a huge change---India isn't remotely there.
edit on 22-11-2016 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I think it's more of show me thing with me. They talk a big game and show all the right pieces but when the chips are down they always prove to be 2nd shelf. Look at even the mighty armed forces of the Soviet Union. They looked powerful until after the cold war and we got our hands on their tech and saw how far behind they had fallen. Most of the missiles you credit our foes with procuring are never fielded, at least never publicly. The Russians can't even equip their shiny new aircraft with appropriate weaponry, let alone it's older 3rd and 4th gen assets.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

It's far from just me. The plans, Intel, exploitation and other divisions all agree that underestimating them will bite us in the ass.

When WWII started, a lot of weapons weren't fielded. It's a fairly easy matter to go to production on most of them if they need to.



posted on Nov, 23 2016 @ 02:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I don't underestimate the Chinese as a whole, no certainly not. But their air warfighting capability? It's less of an underestimate and more of an observation. It's still pretty one sided in my opinion, however, yes you're right the gap is closing. But if push ever came to shove, we'd widen that gap up pretty quick and even you know that Zap.

We have to remember, also, this is a military that hasn't seen combat since 1979 and there was no air component to that engagement whatsoever. The PLAAF is still predominantly administered by an Army leadership and order of battle. To say that the PLAAF is disorganized, would be an understatement. They've got a lot of rejiggering to do before, even on paper, even in the back office, are peer. Fancy missiles and planes are one thing, sure, but using them in war is another. And that's where I draw my opinion, this is a very paper-tiger-esque propagandic aircraft. It just screams overcompensation.

To me anyway....



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join