China Military Watch - August 9, 2014

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 14 Feb 2016 22:54

Surprisingly accurate article, just a little bit off here and there. For example, the 2nd LRIP aircraft, 2102 has NOT made its appearance yet, earlier photos were quickly shown to be simply PS'd photos of 2101.

member_28700 · Post by **member_28700** » 15 Feb 2016 14:48

The pace at which China is creating newer generation and even making variants of existing aircraft is frightening. At a time when our DPSUs are struggling to produce even 1-2 4th generation aircraft in a year even after 2-3 years of promising, the chinese would start producing 5th generation planes.
This reduces the time we have to develop our AMCA and pushes India further to buy PAKFA as it seems the only short term alternative

Jayram · Post by **Jayram** » 16 Feb 2016 22:16

On Quora recently
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-t ... -their-job
Answer (from someone who seems to know with pics)
In China, it is a privilege (with benefits) to be in the Military. Therefore it is not uncommon to find people paying bribes to join the Military, let alone paying bribes for promotion.
The rumored price tags are as follow:
Recruit: 10,000 yuan
Lieutenant: 200,000 yuan
Captain: 300,000 yuan
Major: 1,000,000 yuan
Senior Colonel: 5,000,000 yuan
Major General and above: 10,000,000 yuan and above

. Lieutenant General Gu Junshan

He was the Deputy Director of the General Logistics Department. He is said to have amassed a great fortune because of his control over procurement.
When he was arrested, tonnes of cash, jewelry and Maotai wine were found in his home and they were said to have filled 4 trucks.
This is how his home looks like in his hometown in Henan Province:
Read it all..

Apologies if this is the wrong thread.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 16 Feb 2016 23:14

Corruption is a fact of nature. Accept it, promote it, benefit from it.

On a side note, progress happens despite of it.

Jayram · Post by **Jayram** » 17 Feb 2016 00:05

No this is not so blase as you make it.. This is a deep level corruption endemic to the Chinese military that will reflect in their will and ability to fight. Not that we dont any but certainly nothing like the institutional level being talked about here.. We hold our military at high esteem etc and they seem to certainly not do that. All in all a weakness that is not particularly talked about by outsiders

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Feb 2016 08:51

model of reaper type drone by CATIC in singapore air show

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Feb 2016 13:22

Chinese fighter jet cleared for exports

Read more at: http://www.sify.com/news/chinese-fighter-jet-cleared-for-exports-news-national-qcslEgagdhfif.html

Sify.comNewsNationalChinese fighter jet cleared for exports Chinese fighter jet cleared for exports Source : Last Updated: Thu, Feb 18, 2016 12:05 hrs Share Beijing: China have given the green signal for exporting its domestically-developed J-10 fighter as the country looks to attract buyers at the Singapore Airshow, the media reported on Thursday. A large-scale model of the FC-20, the export version of the J-10, is on display at the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corp booth at the six-day Singapore Airshow 2016 that started on Tuesday. It is an unspoken rule in China's defence sector that weapons solely designed for the People's Liberation Army are never displayed at foreign exhibitions, so the model's appearance in Singapore carries a clear indication: that China now wants to promote the warplane in the international market. The J-10 is a third-generation, multi-role combat aircraft designed and produced by Aviation Industry Corp of China. It features a canard delta wing design, a fly-by-wire flight control system and is regarded by military experts as one of the best fighter jets in the world. First entering service as the J-10A with the PLA Air Force in 2004, the plane was de-classified in 2009 and by February 2014, the PLA Air Force and PLA Navy's aviation units had at least 260 of the jets in operation. The country has also developed at least two upgraded versions of the aircraft-the J-10B, which has started to be delivered to the PLA Air Force, and the J-10C that is still in the testing stage.
e

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Feb 2016 13:47

I am requesting folks to point me to some really good aerobatic video displays by the J-10. Thanks

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Feb 2016 14:08

i have not seen in airshows outside china. not in singapore now either as its just a model.

here it is from zhuhai in 2014 though

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Feb 2016 14:13

China deploys HQ-9 surface-to-air missiles to Woody Island
Richard D Fisher Jr, Washington, DC - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

http://www.janes.com/article/58071/chin ... ody-island

For the first time China has deployed up to 32 fourth-generation HQ-9 surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) to Woody Island in the Paracels, marking a significant military escalation by the People's Liberation Army (PLA) in the South China Sea.

The deployment occurred at the same time as US president Barack Obama's attempt to promote solidarity among the leaders of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) by hosting a 15-16 February summit in Sunnylands, California.

In a 16 February report US sources confirmed to Fox News that China had deployed HQ-9 SAMs to Woody Island, which Imagesat International satellite imagery obtained by Fox News indicated were on the island on 14 February.

The missile deployment was also confirmed on 17 February by Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense.

The Fox report noted that satellite imagery suggested that up to eight launchers plus associated radar systems had been deployed. As each launcher carries four HQ-9 missiles, this could amount to an initial deployment of 32 such missiles.

The HQ-9s were seen on a recently expanded area at the north end of Woody Island, where there has been 'reclaiming' of an area next to the island's runway that increases the space available to station aircraft, missiles, and troops.

After protracted development, the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC) HQ-9 emerged in People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) units in 2003-04. The system's FD2000 export model is understood to have a range of 125 km, but versions used by the PLAAF may have a range of 150-200 km. There are reports that a 230 km-range version may be in development.

Early HQ-9s may use a phased-array radar plus track-via-missile (TVM) technology, long reported to have been obtained from a US Patriot SAM obtained via Israel or Germany.

However, in the later 1990s China obtained more advanced S-300 SAM technology from Russia's Almaz-Antey concern following China's purchase of 1,000 or more of several S-300 variants.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Feb 2016 23:58

is this nonsense or what do you think?

http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/chi ... 56895.html

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Feb 2016 00:16

SaiK wrote:is this nonsense or what do you think?

China military says US F-22 stealth fighters detected

Possible. I would expect the US to have expected this day. But, I also expect the US to have overcome this day too.

It is a cat and mouse game. And, now China will have to build the next cat. Apki chal.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 19 Feb 2016 00:45

SaiK wrote:is this nonsense or what do you think?

http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/chi ... 56895.html

Aside from the fact that the news is inconclusive ('unidentified tracking occurred near the ADIZ'), keep in mind that F-22s within international airspace fly with luneburg lenses installed (drastically increasing its RCS).

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 19 Feb 2016 05:47

F-22 also has pre configured EMCON levels which define its stealth level. When flying in complete readio silence (EMCON lvl1 I guess), chinkies cannot it even if it poops mid air.

They are just over their head as they are feeling empowered by Russian hardware.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Feb 2016 05:55

Singha wrote:i have not seen in airshows outside china. not in singapore now either as its just a model.

here it is from zhuhai in 2014 though

Thanks. But I had seen this. A few years ago (2013?) I had downloaded a poor quality but exciting video of the J-10. Since then I have seen mostly sedate sleepy displays with the occasional spectacular turn. Almost no complete turn, no complete loop and no complete fighter like display. That apart the videography is fair to middling at best and Zhuhai is always cloudy and hazy.

So, as usual, Chinese aircraft cannot be seen performing things that are claimed in performance specs, In airshows pilots take pride in demonstrating heart-in-mouth aerobatics. But not the J-10 - at least as yet

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Feb 2016 06:02

NRao wrote:
SaiK wrote:is this nonsense or what do you think?

China military says US F-22 stealth fighters detected

Possible. I would expect the US to have expected this day. But, I also expect the US to have overcome this day too.

It is a cat and mouse game. And, now China will have to build the next cat. Apki chal.

I am seeing more and more articles that claim that stealth is over rated. As usual, in the absence of credible information, I will put my own spin on this and pass my own judgement on the matter.

I do agree that stealth is probably over-rated but not sure over-rated by how much, I mean that stealth is undoubtedly useful for some stages of a conflict but probably becomes redundant or less useful in other phases. Stealth designs are, I believe, very counter-intuitive when it comes to being aerodynamically efficient and FBW is the norm to keep stealth shapes flying. This brings all sort of drag, weight and cost overheads.

So I am basically on the lookout for news items that point towards stealth being defeated or being less of a huge advantage than claimed. It may be that more conventional designs with stealth features may be more cost effective and ultimately "successful" than the standard "stealthy shapes" that have become the fashion.

Just my guass..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Feb 2016 06:46

the J-10 has a visible upward crank in its wing, while typhoon does not. in WW2 also certain like FW109 and Corsair had it while Me109 & hellcat did not...

does anyone know what its used for?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Feb 2016 06:49

I am seeing more and more articles that claim that stealth is over rated. As usual, in the absence of credible information, I will put my own spin on this and pass my own judgement on the matter.

I quit looking at any number long back. What I have found is that (stated this plenty of times, so sorry), each AF defines what their "stealth" needs are. So, typical (from what I have read): all aspect, front, front + sides, front + rear. That is "dimension 1".

"Dimension 2" is how are these things achieved. The earliest was via geometry and RAM - some combo of these two. However, what was clear at that time was every time the object took on a new shape they HAD to put the new design through the math formula ringer. Advancements in computing really helped narrow this need (BTW, reflection is one aspect of stealth, the other is a wrap-around reflection, where the wave *could* go around the object and return to the transmitter).

Then came heavy reliance on materials + a robust library to counter (EW). Now they have added networks to the equation, where other assets *could* make you disappear.

So, today, it is some combination of these that can supposedly make a 20 ton plane vanish into thin air.

Again, from what I have followed, this is not rocket science. It is a matter of funds and how much "stealth" one wants to achieve. My observation has been the US operating FAR from their mainland has had to opt to invest early and heavily into this field. The rest having to defend closer to their home bases have had a lesser need to deploy as much "stealth" and therefore have invested far less.

Can other catch up? I think it will depend on their national needs and therefore funds. IF China were to decide to place assets in Africa I can see China investing very heavily into such techs. But defending around the islands they can rely more on other techs and numbers, no need for THAT much stealth.

However, each of them can be countered - for sure, there is nothing secretive about that. Evolving tech + permutation combo of already embedded techs makes it difficult (like frequency hoping).

IF the Chinese took that long to ID (if they actually did) a single F-22 how would China fare in an all out war? Based on what they today I would venture to guess not very well. Then the F-35 is designed well enough to make the Marines claim to have the ability to operate even deeper (as compared to a F-18) in an enemy territory - some 250 miles from the coast - this in view of the famous "Pivot". No brownie points for which coast.

Plenty of data points to ponder about.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Feb 2016 12:30

A Chinese defense company has unveiled two new missiles for export during the Singapore Airshow this week.

Held annually, the Singapore Airshow is one of the largest defense exhibitions in the world. This year, the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC) revealed two new missiles at the event.

The TL-7 – short for "Thunder Lightning" – is an anti-ship missile available in three models, each capable of launching from different units. The TL-7A can be used by aircraft, the TL-7B by ground forces, and the TL-7C can be launched by ships.

With a range of roughly 110 miles, the missile is the export model of the KD-88.

"The KD-88 was the first medium-range optically-guided ground attack missile to arm the JH-7 [fighter bomber]," Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center told Defense News.

Another Chinese export missile unveiled during the airshow is the slightly smaller TL-2. Fired from a ground-based launcher or drone, the missile features a circular error-probable range of 2-10 meters, and is available in three modes, including lock-on before launch, mid-course navigation, and lock-on after launch.

CATIC is a state-owned company that manages military export sales for the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation.

While there is no word on who these new weapons are intended to be marketed to, the TL-2 was previously promoted alongside the Chinese-made Loong/Pterodactyl drone. The Pterodactyls have been purchased in the past by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/asia/20160217/10 ... z40bCIBFsq

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Feb 2016 23:39

plaaf plans to take on amirkhaans have begun from the raptor news.. here is another challenge

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/loo ... jets-15220
they just heard JSFs are going prod line and will churn out in 1000s if not 100s. JSF is unstoppable given all problems. it has a mission for completion. sorry, jmt. there may be big naysayers on JSF, but it is one of the best programs the khaans have done - all aspects: political, strategic, tactical, and learning how to fix certain critical aspects to better the raptor minds.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 25 Feb 2016 00:27

PLAN commissions 25th Type-056 corvette

China's People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) commissioned its 25th Type 056 Jiangdao-class corvette on 20 February. Tongren (pennant number 507) entered service with the South Sea Fleet, and will join the 24th Light Frigate Squadron based in Shantou, Guangdong province, about 275 km north-east of Hong Kong.

Although production only commenced in 2012, the Type 056 is already one of the most numerous PLAN ships, with more in build. The 31st hull was launched on 25 December 2015 and there are indications of more in the construction pipeline. In its 2015 assessment of the PLAN's capabilities, the US Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) forecast that between 30 and 60 of these ships will be built.

The ONI also assessed that the Type 056 will replace a number of coastal patrol boats and some of the ageing Type 053H Jianghu I-class frigates. Equipped with four 65 n mile-range YJ-83 anti-ship missiles, a 76 mm gun, HQ-10 short-range air-defence missiles, and two triple launchers for lightweight torpedoes, the Type 056 is potentially a more effective, modern platform that will enhance the PLAN's capabilities in littoral waters.

Tongren is the seventh of the class equipped with towed and variable depth sonars, indicating a primary role of anti-submarine warfare (ASW). Three of these are allocated to the South Sea Fleet, the previous commissioning having taken place on 25 January.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Mar 2016 14:58

China increases defence budget by 7.6% to $146 billion

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... aign=cppst

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Mar 2016 15:22

AG600 flying boat under final assembly

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 07 Mar 2016 15:31

NRao wrote:
SaiK wrote:is this nonsense or what do you think?

China military says US F-22 stealth fighters detected

Possible. I would expect the US to have expected this day. But, I also expect the US to have overcome this day too.

It is a cat and mouse game. And, now China will have to build the next cat. Apki chal.

Also in some of the Public pics, F-22's are flying with their drop tanks, so RCS would also be much higher

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Mar 2016 15:29

There are three ways for the F-22's to not show off their stealth features:

- Luneburg lens for ALL international deployments - I am yet to see pictures of Raptors deployed w/o them
- RCS restoration delays
- Drop Tanks...

All in, it would be naive to expect the F-22's operating over international territory, with tanks during peacetime to fly in a profile that would project stealth. If they wanted to fly around Chinese radars stealthily, they wouldnt announce deployments nor would be carrying all the stuff they usually do. Plus, you would fly something like the RQ-170/180, and not the F-22 if you wanted to swoop in on emissions.

member_28756 · Post by **member_28756** » 04 Apr 2016 19:26

http://www.eurasianet.org/node/78081

Turkmenistan Shows Off New Chinese Rockets
Screenshot of Turkmenistan state television showing what appears to be a Chinese HQ-9 air defense system during military exercises.

Turkmenistan showed off its newly acquired Chinese air defense systems during military exercises, confirming for the first time that the country has gotten some significant weaponry from Beijing.

Last year, sketchy media reports suggested that Turkmenistan (and Uzbekistan) had acquired Chinese HQ-9 air defense systems, potentially marking the entrance of China into the Central Asia military market hitherto dominated by Russia.

Now Turkmnenistan has aired footage of what appears to be an HQ-9 in action during its large-scale, ongoing military exercises. The HQ-9 was spotted by the Russian military blog BPMD amid the state TV coverage, visible at about 4:10 in the video below (which is also worth watching for its footage of President Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov at the controls of a number of military vehicles, including a helicopter).

"The Russian government may not be entirely happy, but probably cannot do anything about it," Russian military expert Vasiliy Kashin told The Bug Pit after last year's reports of China's HQ-9 exports to Central Asia. "Central Asian countries started to diversify their military-technical cooperation long ago, and China is one of natural choices."

But air defense is a particularly high priority for Russian arms exporters. And lately, China's military relationship with Central Asia has become a more sensitive issue for Russia. The news that China was proposing a new military alliance with Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Tajikistan, caused some consternation in Moscow that China was "displacing" Russia in Central Asia. China has sought to dispel those concerns, but this news will likely raise additional concerns.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 04 Apr 2016 20:11

F22 is stealthy in specific rf bands, specifically shorter wavelength radars that are typically used for fire control. Its not stealth if radars with longer wavelengths are used. However, these radars are not good for 'fire control' and can only be used for early warning. You will know there is an F22 in the air, you will know its azimuth and may be able to develop a velocity track over time, but you cant guide a missile to the plane using that radar.

The B2 bomber on the other hand is much larger, and is stealthy even against the longer wavelength radars.

Some useless factoids and opinions to enrich your life with here..

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-Low-Band-Radars.html

Its possible the PLAAF detected the F22 but in a way that is practically useless.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 Apr 2016 22:28

Without going into the discussion of radar bands and tracking (where there is a boat load of misinformation, half truths, and opinions masquerading as analysis), suffice to say that there is absolute no reason for any raptor to ever deploy on an announced, peacetime mission without its Luneburg lens. And it has deployed to the pacific with the kit multiple times. With a few decades of experience operating LO aircraft in most of its AOR's around the world the USAF is quite good at protecting its operational capabilities and has strict protocols when it comes to taking LO on international exercises and deployments. They had to struggle and jump a lot of hoops to get the F-35 to be based out of Farnborough instead of flying in to do a display this June. As mentioned earlier, a Luneburg lens isn't the only thing LO aircraft can do to mask their 'wartime' RF signature.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOK-9QV4pKg

Its possible the PLAAF detected the F22 but in a way that is practically useless.

The statement was probably meant as a response to sabre rattling or deploying assets in a region the Chinese consider theirs (this was common during the cold war). No big deal since it has little value outside rhetoric.

As far has lower frequency sensors are concerned, its the job of the F-22, and F-35 to make the opponent play in the lower frequency regions..that's the SA battle half won right there:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ6sNtatga8
* viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7088&start=320#p2000957

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 13 Apr 2016 08:21

this pichhar -- https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cf29TtZUAAAmd8r.jpg

why is it like this?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Apr 2016 08:50

They're probably recovering the fighters at a shore base.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Apr 2016 09:08

Shreeman wrote:this pichhar -- https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cf29TtZUAAAmd8r.jpg

why is it like this?

Look like 500 % Morphed onleeee

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 13 Apr 2016 09:17

50 cent photoshop.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 13 Apr 2016 09:34

Looks like a graphic to me, meant to illustrate the vision of a future PLAN battle group built around a CATOBAR carrier.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 13 Apr 2016 11:24

Viv S wrote: Looks like a graphic to me, meant to illustrate the vision of a future PLAN battle group built around a CATOBAR carrier.

Photu is not from any shop. Parking deck below was flooded. All fighters were moved on top and quickly slotted to be launched to reduce weight and stay afloat. You can see the SAR helicopter on the rear side of the carrier for a 'just in case' scenario.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 13 Apr 2016 11:44

Singha wrote:the J-10 has a visible upward crank in its wing, while typhoon does not. in WW2 also certain like FW109 and Corsair had it while Me109 & hellcat did not...

does anyone know what its used for?

I never really looked at Chinese jets properly, but prima facie it looks like the wing and fuselage design of J-10 follows the same principle that EF-2000 does in this particular design feature, albeit EF-2000 looks to be more sofisticated/refined design from Aerodynamic POV to my eyes. Its the 'Supersonic Cambering' which gives the wings and the fuselage that kind of look. EF-2000 has particularly prominent supersonic cambering on fuselage. J-10 has more prominent cambering on the inboard sections of the wing than EF-2000. Note than this is just the same thing that is incorporated in LCA giving it that characteristic look in front view where the inboard section seems to have sharp anhedral.

The upward crank you point out in FW109 and Corsair (outboard part not the inboard) is actually dihedral. It is to negate the effect of low wing (i.e. low wing reduces lateral stability, dihedral compensates for that effect). This is in the similar way why high wing aircrafts such as Harrier or all the transport aircarfts have anhedral - downward crank (high wing too much lateral stability, anhedral reduces it helping in manoeuvrability).

Fun fact: the unique shape of Corsair wing - inboard downward slant and then upwards on outboard - has nothing to do with aerodynamics - its only to keep LG size less.

***Edited to make it more clear, hopefully.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 13 Apr 2016 11:59

It is rumored that J-10 is based on the cancelled Israeli Lavi jet. Apparently, Israelis sold the design data of Lavi to China & J-10 is heavily influenced by Lavi. Nilesh, you may want to take a look at Lavi & compare it to J-10 and let us know of the similarities & differences.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Apr 2016 15:00

never really looked at Chinese jets properly, but prima facie it looks like the wing and fuselage design of J-10 follows the footsteps of EF-2000, albeit EF-2000 looks tobe far more sofisticated/refined design from Aerodynamic POV. Its the Supersonic Cambering which gives the wings and the fuselage that kind of look. EF-2000 is specifically designed for supersonic manoeuvres so it has it in so much prominence. J-10 looks cheap rip-off of it.

As mentioned, the Lavi from Israel, the US halted that effort. However, the earliest version of the F-16 was very similar, without canards. They probably stole all they could after Israel stopped helping.

To me Chinese designs are over engineered because of their lack of R&D. Exception are the copies of the Russian planes.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 14 Apr 2016 11:06

^^ I am aware of the Lavi (which itself has F-16 lineage) link to J-10. My remark was specifically for the apparent crank like feature on the wing that Singha was referring to. I should have been more clear. I am editing my comment above to make it more clear.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Apr 2016 20:47

My comment was only in context of the J-20 and not any VLO asset. The J-20 presents a very particular set of capabilities and limitations by way of its design and propulsion at hand

Could you elaborate on how the aircraft is hamstrung by way of design? Design follows function, and requirements dictate trade-offs. The J-20 is a player in their broader A2AD strategy and fits in quite nicely since they have done a lot of work, and made a lot of progress in developing other advances to support this strategy. As far as propulsion is concerned, you can always add something better over the 5+ decades the design is likely to be in service. Additionally, there are a lot of missions both in the air-air, and air-ground or maritime environment where the J-20 will be extremely lethal, with the right mix of sensors, right weapons even with an older generation engine. For now, they aren't being offered, or aren't interested in the PAKFA. They don't have access to a GE engine, or to buy a western fighter so they'll continue to use the progress they have made and enhance their indigenous designs in the best way possible. One thing they have going is that their defense budgets aren't short of cash so over time they should be able to develop quite a decent R&D pipeline. However there is always a possibility that they could reach out to acquire technology form the russians over the next years to acquire an interim AL-31/41+ if their domestic engine is taking longer. But as I said, there is still a question mark on how good their material technology is, how good are they are creating materials and coatings that offer RCS reduction in an operational context, how good are their mission systems, electronics, etc etc. Those are legitimate doubts as these things aren't easy to acheive and they do come up with a ton of misdirection, self-promotion trying to make their wares look like they are based on western technology. I remember last year they showed off an L-Band radar that looked like Lockheed's design and the tabloid-defense-media went on a frenzy on how they must have hacked lockheed's designs when the lockheed radar in question hadn't even been developed yet (it was a $6 million dollar prototype that eventually lost the contract for DEVELOPMENT).

My point was that the J-20 is not a PAKFA, F-22, or even an F-35. Its their response to a requirement that appears to have sought a highly survivable, super cruising, multi-role strike fighter to support their A2AD strategies in the Pacific and to act as a long range penetrating supersonic aircraft in an offensive capacity elsewhere. Additionally, they'll use it as a sensor-shooter that would act as a force multiplier to their Su-35's, J-11's and MKK's. What can a J-20Lite Do that an Su-35 cannot? Get close to the FEBA, launch long range ARM's at AEW aircraft, long range BVR missiles at fighter aircraft, pass on SA to fighters in the rear; Essentially disrupt, degrade and deny the ability to command and control from range. This is what they want to do to the USN, and USAF operating with a Japan, SoKo and others in the Pacific, and this is what they'll use in an offensive capability over a theater. They also have plenty of resources to buy enough of these since very little of their defense budget is consumed in FOREX.

India also could similarly adopt the somewhat not fully baked PAF-FA and arguably could use a slightly better asset as compared to the J-20 but India and Russia both have decided to wait till a mature product is at hand, primarily with matching 5th gen propulsion.

India has asked for an FGFA configuration that will be different. How much different, is unclear as there are conflicting reports over the years and the definitive contract has not yet been inked. however, it appears that the RuAF will go ahead with 50 or so aircraft with the existing engine. Fully developing, testing, and integrating a new engine is time-consuming and the russians are likely to acquire and bring those aircraft to the standard later.

Of course the IAF can acquire an interim PAKFA, if needed but that does not compare to what China is doing with the J-20 that minus the engine is a completely indigenous project with them dictating rate production and deliveries. It is their AMCA, not an expensive 5th generation import.

I was just wondering what type of threat the J-20 as it stands today and likely near future presents to us. You see there are a set of Indians, who are very scared of the Chinese threat and use that to justify getting into the arms of the US. I was wondering to what degree should I brown my pants

At the moment, it will be both a tough BVR platform given its sensor fit, and VLO design, and given its supersonic nature it would be a capable penetrating supersonic strike fighter particularly when you mix them up with other combat aircraft such as the Su-35, Su-30, Flanker clones (of all flavors) and the J series (-10 and possibly -31). If they go for longer range Air to Air ARM's and even longer ranged BVR weapons which looks likely, then it will be a very capable sensor shooter especially if it can supercruise with existing engines which should be doable. Over time they'll evolve the design, but its not just one thing they are working on, while they continue to advance their clones, and two 5th generation designs, they are acquiring the Super Flanker, and could add more..they are also highly invested in PGM's, UCAV's (which they export), and long range anti-access area denial strategies. I don't look at this from a J-20 vs PAKFA, or J-20 vs F-35 but from a large force deployment perspective which is a more relevant scenario and here even a J-20Lite in the mid 2020's, could add a ton of capability to the mix the Chinese employ in offensive or defensive scenarios.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 18 Apr 2016 00:23

Just read somewhere that the J10B nose is big enough to allow almost a meter wide AESA to fit in...if that is the case, it is one big nose...consider Bars is 1m. Of course, the j10 has an elliptical nose, so it would be narrower in height...