• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

China’s Homegrown Stealth Fighter Jet Is Now in Service

Lord Tammerlain

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
30,788
Reaction score
15,088
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
China Puts Chengdu J-20 Stealth Fighter Jet Into Service | Fortune.com


China's new Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter is now in service, state media reported Thursday.The jet is China's somewhat secretive answer to rivals such as Lockheed Martin's F-22 Raptor, which was developed for the U.S. Air Force. The country held a maiden test flight for the prototype of the J-20, its first stealth fighter, in 2011, surprising experts with the progress it had already made.

Like the F-22, the J-20 is a so-called fifth-generation fighter that boasts stealth technology and can cruise at supersonic speeds.
Earlier this month, China's air force started training a new generation of pilots for the J-20. Now, according to a brief article from the state media organization Xinhua, the jet has been "officially commissioned into military service."
When China showed off the production model of the J-20 in public for the first time in late 2016, some were surprised that it was doing so before putting the jet into service. This, observers suggested, showed a lot of confidence in the fighter. It is likely also symptomatic of China's current assertiveness in the region.
Click to expand...

An interesting design, I believe it can carry quite a bit more missiles internally than the F35. It does not look like it is designed as an air superiority fighter like the F22
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
China Puts Chengdu J-20 Stealth Fighter Jet Into Service | Fortune.com




An interesting design, I believe it can carry quite a bit more missiles internally than the F35. It does not look like it is designed as an air superiority fighter like the F22
Click to expand...

They don’t have the engine technology, and stealth designs have moved beyond it and designers internet security has become part of their bid contract. IOW - if China gets you plans you may be facing charges.
 
chuckiechan said:
They don’t have the engine technology, and stealth designs have moved beyond it and designers internet security has become part of their bid contract. IOW - if China gets you plans you may be facing charges.
Click to expand...

The engines will likely be bought or licensed from Russia for the immediate future
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
China Puts Chengdu J-20 Stealth Fighter Jet Into Service | Fortune.com




An interesting design, I believe it can carry quite a bit more missiles internally than the F35. It does not look like it is designed as an air superiority fighter like the F22
Click to expand...


The J-20 is presented and accepted as an all-purpose fighter to include the still urgent need of PLA Air Force for air superiority. F22 Raptor has numerous advantages to include several years of combat experience, its pilots, training time and quality.

Official ceiling of the F22 is 50K feet but everyone agrees it is much above that and that the Raptor flies above all other fighters. This bird screaming down at you when you don't know it is there should make PLA AF pilots leaving their bases start remembering ancestor's names and dates.

Chengdu Corp. J-20

chengdu-j20-wallpaper-1.jpg

China's Big Bird is more heavily armed and it flies farther. It has a helmet to see through its own fuselage...to see what?


The J-20 is no F-22, and nowhere does it fall shorter than with its most critical trait: dodging detection. “At best, it’s probably stealthy only from the front,” says aviation analyst Richard Aboulafia, of the Teal Group. “Whereas all-aspect stealth like that in the F-22 and F-35 minimizes the radar signature from all directions.”

True stealth relies on the shape of the aircraft, its exhaust, material composition, cockpit shielding, and even flight characteristics. Aboulafia doubts the J-20’s designers have the science down. Just note that screaming exhaust: “It sounds great, but you really don’t want that in a stealth fighter,” he says.

The J-20 lacks the maneuverability and electronics, communications, and sensing capabilities of its US counterparts. “In head-to-head combat, the J-20 would lose in seconds,” Aboulafia says.

https://www.wired.com/2016/11/china-j-20-fighter-jet/


I have found wired.com to be a highly reliable source about China's purloined military technology since 2000. That's a good record to say the least.
 
She's a whale of a plane and sounds like a tornado too....





The J-20, China's fifth-generation stealth fighter, debuted at the Zhuhai Airshow in November. Two J-20 jets swept over hundreds of spectators at the show's opening ceremony in a 60-second flyby, generating a deafening roar that set off car alarms in a parking lot at the site.

It is said the proliferation of smoke and heat emanating from the J20 was from two ducks roasting as cuisine for the pilots later on.
 
Last edited:
U.S continues to make diamond shaped planes.

China is set on flying whales while Russia still loves those boxcar designs....



10 dangerous Fighter Aircraft in the World | Present 2017

 
Lord Tammerlain said:
China Puts Chengdu J-20 Stealth Fighter Jet Into Service | Fortune.com




An interesting design, I believe it can carry quite a bit more missiles internally than the F35. It does not look like it is designed as an air superiority fighter like the F22
Click to expand...

So what??? Stealth fighters are meaningless in a world of high altitude stealth bombers equipped with smart bombs. So China builds 10,000 of these - big deal. We take out 7 Gorges dam with conventional weapons, along with 4-5 other critical infrastructure centers and China is crippled. With high altitude stealth bombers, there is NOTHING that China can do to stop that from happening.
 
faithful_servant said:
So what??? Stealth fighters are meaningless in a world of high altitude stealth bombers equipped with smart bombs. So China builds 10,000 of these - big deal. We take out 7 Gorges dam with conventional weapons, along with 4-5 other critical infrastructure centers and China is crippled. With high altitude stealth bombers, there is NOTHING that China can do to stop that from happening.
Click to expand...

That's a laughably naive view of the situation.

Stealth bombers are incredibly expensive and valuable strategic assets that can't just be trotted out willy nilly. They especially can't be just flown over enemy airspace, over a concentrated air defense network, and assume their stealth will render them invulnerable. Stealth is not an off or on switch, it's measured in degrees, and a holding pattern above a hostile nation with modern air defense systems and radar and combat air patrols is a great way to increase the likelihood of detection.

Not to mention your assumption that PGMs will automatically equal destruction of enemy infrastructure, when their historical reliability has always been overestimated. Furthermore, flying strategic bombers over hostile airspace (which is almost certainly going to be defended by air patrols, likely from J-20 stealth fighters), is a recipe for disaster.

The J-20's stealth attributes are almost certainly inferior to Western standards, but it's ludicrous to assume that it's somehow a useless weapon. It can prove incredibly effective against off shore carrier groups, which is precisely the kind of force projection the US is likely to use in the event of a war with China.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
That's a laughably naive view of the situation.

Stealth bombers are incredibly expensive and valuable strategic assets that can't just be trotted out willy nilly. They especially can't be just flown over enemy airspace, over a concentrated air defense network, and assume their stealth will render them invulnerable. Stealth is not an off or on switch, it's measured in degrees, and a holding pattern above a hostile nation with modern air defense systems and radar and combat air patrols is a great way to increase the likelihood of detection.

Not to mention your assumption that PGMs will automatically equal destruction of enemy infrastructure, when their historical reliability has always been overestimated. Furthermore, flying strategic bombers over hostile airspace (which is almost certainly going to be defended by air patrols, likely from J-20 stealth fighters), is a recipe for disaster.

The J-20's stealth attributes are almost certainly inferior to Western standards, but it's ludicrous to assume that it's somehow a useless weapon. It can prove incredibly effective against off shore carrier groups, which is precisely the kind of force projection the US is likely to use in the event of a war with China.
Click to expand...


As I understand it

The J20 is meant more as a strike fighter rather than air superiority. To take out air refueling and airborne radar, rather than dog fight the F22. Or to strike specific land targets. In such situations it does not need to be stealthy from behind. IRST sensors can pick up jets from 90 km away from the rear depending on environmental conditions.
 
Last edited:
faithful_servant said:
So what??? Stealth fighters are meaningless in a world of high altitude stealth bombers equipped with smart bombs. So China builds 10,000 of these - big deal. We take out 7 Gorges dam with conventional weapons, along with 4-5 other critical infrastructure centers and China is crippled. With high altitude stealth bombers, there is NOTHING that China can do to stop that from happening.
Click to expand...

The dumbest thing in the world is to under estimate your adversary. That is how you lose battles and wars.
 
Old Sarge said:
The dumbest thing in the world is to under estimate your adversary. That is how you lose battles and wars.
Click to expand...

It is also dangerous to over estimate them.

It was not all that long ago that we were told by a great many "experts" that we would loose thousands in liberating Kuwait. And a decade later we would loose thousands in taking out the Saddam regime. Both claims by experts were horribly wrong.

One thing I have learned from watching China for decades, is that their military claims ultimately rarely match the reality.
 
Oozlefinch said:
It is also dangerous to over estimate them.

It was not all that long ago that we were told by a great many "experts" that we would loose thousands in liberating Kuwait. And a decade later we would loose thousands in taking out the Saddam regime. Both claims by experts were horribly wrong.

One thing I have learned from watching China for decades, is that their military claims ultimately rarely match the reality.
Click to expand...

While that may be true the wise man doesn't under estimate the enemy. China made it pretty rough on us in Korea, and Nam. Do you think they haven't increased their capacity to fight in all these years?
 
Old Sarge said:
While that may be true the wise man doesn't under estimate the enemy. China made it pretty rough on us in Korea, and Nam. Do you think they haven't increased their capacity to fight in all these years?
Click to expand...

That had nothing to do with quality of equipment, especially in Korea. That was all about numbers, pure and simple. And do not forget, when the cease fire was agreed to, we were once again pushing North Korea back to the North. The current border and cease-fire line is still North of the original border when the war started.

China did change that conflict, yes. But it was relatively short-term, and the UN forces were again well on the march forward at the end, the NO-Chinese forces on the retreat.

Vietnam, I would say ROE was more of a factor than anything else. And ultimately it did not matter because at the end the South Vietnamese won the war.
 
Oozlefinch said:
That had nothing to do with quality of equipment, especially in Korea. That was all about numbers, pure and simple. And do not forget, when the cease fire was agreed to, we were once again pushing North Korea back to the North. The current border and cease-fire line is still North of the original border when the war started.

China did change that conflict, yes. But it was relatively short-term, and the UN forces were again well on the march forward at the end, the NO-Chinese forces on the retreat.

Vietnam, I would say ROE was more of a factor than anything else. And ultimately it did not matter because at the end the South Vietnamese won the war.
Click to expand...

So in your mind if we got into a shooting war with China they would be a piece of cake and we would easily beat them, is that what you are telling us?
 
Old Sarge said:
So in your mind if we got into a shooting war with China they would be a piece of cake and we would easily beat them, is that what you are telling us?
Click to expand...

Not at all, please do not inject things that I did not say, or even imply.

I will quote a famous military strategist, who said quite simply "Quantity has a Quality all it's own".

Now China only recently finally passed the number of T-59 tanks in their inventory with the T-96. So half of their tanks are indeed almost 60 years old in design.

But they have over 2,400 of them. And almost 3,000 Type 96. And 1,000 Type 99. And an ever increasing number of MBT 3000 (estimated to be around 100, with some estimate 25 a month leaving the factories).

That outnumbers the number of US tanks, but has it's own problems. Especially logistically, trying to keep at least 4+ models of tanks operational in battlefield conditions.

Now how well China would do in a "shooting War", all depends on where this war is.

If it is over China, it will be a long nightmare and probably stalemate until one government collapsed or the other.

Now say this shooting war is in Taiwan, or the Philippines, or even Pakistan, then the results will likely be much different. At that point the US will be playing into it's strength of logistics and airlift-sealift capabilities, and the quality over quantity factors will become more important.

Sorry, but you are not going to bait me into a 1 sentence response to your 1 sentence challenge without at least some context in place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom