If isis moves in and attacks Russian positions, this could be an embarrassment.

https://www.rt.com/news/203879-china-fighter-russian-engines/

The main issue with the WS-15 is not just the performance, but the durability.
You can always run an engine hotter, to get performance, but you kill the engine life.

Notice in this article reliability is the main issue.

And im sorry its not trolling to state the odvious. Lets change the thread to “The F-35 is the least maneuverable” and see if Im trolling.

@Jessmo23:

RCS simulation show that the J-20 is already comparable to both the F-35 and F-22 in terms of RCS at certain angles; the
problem is broadband stealth and the ability of the J-20 to evade detection by E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes functioning in UHF. I don’t think that anyone except for certain fanboys believes strongly in the ability of China to defeat the United States in war at this stage; the best they believe in is deterrence; i.e, the war will be either bloody enough, risky enough, or both, that the United States cannot trivially push China around through the use of military superiority.

The corollary is that China needs abilities that are viable against the United States; with the J-20 and the BASM / ASBM China does have these abilities. You are also ignoring what I’m saying about AEW&C drones and observation drones; the United States is moving in that direction, as is China, but the distance between China and the United States in the drone warfare field is probably between 1-3 years; China is pretty close to state of the art. If the point is to maintain a kill-chain, the challenge is being able to keep communications active and prevent hacking; drones are cheap, highly stealthy, and difficult to shoot down.

As an aside, UHF E-2D Hawkeyes with powerful PESA can be defeated by interceptor missiles; i.e, the interceptor missile needs to be agile enough and long-ranged enough that the moment the J-20 reaches detection range, it can launch interceptor missiles, maneuver away from the E-2D, then go home. Interception is part of its mission and AEW&C hunting will be one of its specialties.

As far as Cuda missiles and other technologies goes; these aren’t radically superior or difficult technologies. China has a long-standing laser research tradition; they blinded US EW satellites as part of weapons testing. Cuda missiles are advanced, true, but they seem to work off rocket motor technologies, which most countries have mastered; the innovation is guidance, maneuverability, and the intent to kill the opponent via a kinetic kill instead of a detonation.

===

About the WS-15 project, I think Latenlazy makes a good case for why the WS-15 project MAY, and I repeat, only MAY, be able to match latest-generation US engines in terms of thrust. On the other hand, from all available information it will not reach maturity before 2019 based on Western engine technology progression, and it is still possible that the WS-15 will fail to meet target thrusts.

If we’re talking about what’s probable:

-Availability and IOC before 2019 is extremely unlikely
-Range will be between 150kn and 180kn, depending on how well the project goes.

This isn’t to say that it won’t be 150kn, or that it won’t be 180kn, but both are equally likely given the information available; as news of delays or mishaps trickles out, we may expect 150kn instead of 180kn, but the present information suggests that there’s a range of possibilities.

===

@Latenlazy; I’m glad you’ve finally come around to understanding why the J-20 needs TVC. It’s not because the J-20 really needs the additional maneuverability (it will help, definitely; if the J-20 is inferior to the F-22 the TVC will either allow it to partially bridge or meet the gap), it’s because the J-20’s aerodynamic formula is enough for a trivial conversion to a X-36 / Boeing 6th-gen style configuration, with canards in front, a delta-wing in the back, and no tailfins at all. If the J-20 reaches that level of maturity, I would say, excepting its lack of DIRCM jammer, it would possibly be the best 5th gen fighter due to reduced drag, increased stealth, and improved maneuverability.

===

Lastly, most stealth aircraft have RCS spikes, but these are engineered so it’s towards the 90 degree angle; i.e, you’re never going to be able to keep a fighter on the 90 degree aspect angle. Most RCS spikes are also relatively mild, the 2001 J-20 according to Kopp is the only stealth aircraft that has a -10 to -0 dBsm zone in the frontal sector; the F-22 and PAK-FA seems capable of having -40 dBsm in the frontal sector, while the F-35 only has -20 dBsm in the frontal sector. You’ve just as well seen the polar chart as I have; it’s a huge area where you have frontal returns.

Perhaps Kopp will redo the RCS chart once the J-20 hits IOC, and with the adjustments to the LERXes and the refinements the J-20 might be comparable to the F-35 in the frontal sector.

How can you make the argument that the Chinese are right behind the U.S. in unmanned tech when they haven’t even had a stealthy UAV achieve FOC?

1. Have the fielded an equivalent of the beast of Kandahar? Is it flying over guam ATM?

2. Is there space plane equivalent= to the X-37 has it stayed in space as long?

3. Have they launched and trapped a Ucas on a carrier?

4 Have any designs been battle tested?

5. Have the mastered LPI AESA and signal secure comms?

Again I’m not being racist like SOME are trying to paint me. Im just stating the facts.
The facts are that the Chinese are having difficulties with engines, which just so happens to be the single biggest point of failure on the J-20. So now when you say the F-35 can’t run cant climb ect ect, some humbling perspective comes into play.
The J- 20 with That engine cant run cant turn cant climb, double inferior.
No amount of fancy math, and charts trying to judge RCS matter if the engine are not up to par.

If you just want to do panda-baiting, or perhaps I’m spelling the b8 phoneme wrong, why don’t you make fun of
Chinese members’ genital endowments instead? It saves time and mental effort.

That said, if you seriously want to study the J-20, look up arguments from both sides; for instance, I usually think that Chinese posters are overly sanguine about the J-20’s capabilities, while Western and pro-Russian posters can be often too sanguine… in the sense of being negative about capability. As usual, the truth is often in between, even if sometimes it can be skewed heavily to one side.

If you’re going to argue about the J-20 as a strike instead of an interceptor craft, look up the description of why the F-22 is unsuitable for strike, then look up the dimensions of the J-20’s weapons bay. I strongly suggest you do the research before you come to a conclusion, even if the research is often strenuous as much useful information is only available on Chinese websites or as translations from Chinese websites.

In general, you’re too ill-informed on the subject to be able to credibly debate the point; it has nothing to do with your ability or intelligence, it’s just that you haven’t spent sufficient time reading up on things (if you’re talking about J-20 as part of an ASBM kill-chain, look up satellite tracking, which can be downed by American ASAT weapons, or for that matter, low-RCS surveillance drones, which can’t be downed by American ASAT weapons). If you follow the media long enough, and this has nothing to do with whether it’s pro-Chinese, anti-Chinese, pro-American, anti-American, liberal or conservative, you’ll notice that the media often gets facts wrong and you need a cohesive multi-source collation of source materials before you can get anything near the truth.

No ones baiting anyone, Im simply asking for perspective. And please dont use words with racially offensive over tones in this thread.

How do you know what I have or havent researched? Name me 1 Chinese system that will.make it past Barracuda? You send subs up to peak, you die. You send J-20s up they stay silent or the die. Satcoms? They die. Lumbering radar planes? THEY DIE. What about the ALR-94?
The problem with this picture is you would have the Chinese playing to.the U.S. strengths.
Your trying to out US the us. Its like never being in a Open, and going out to challenge Serena Williams. The problem is a em management issue.
If you cant see the 7th fleet. You can’t hit them.
To make matters worse the Chinese tacair are launching from fixed bases. While Us forces do the most damage from conus, diego Garcia, Ohio class boats, and the 5 + carrier strike groups that just arrived.

P.S. the level.of arrogance displayed on this board is legendary.

Actually, the US stole British industrial technology as well; the US’s primacy, aside from kicking
Amerindians off their land and committing imperial aggression against its neighbors (Mexico), is also based on industrial espionage of protected British technologies.

===

Jessmo23’s arguments seem like little more than trollbait; they consist of little more than waving a made-in-China American flag and going “America, **** yeah!”.

That said, I agree with Andraxxus regarding the status of WS-15; if we map a Western engine-development project onto the WS-15, it almost definitely will not be ready before 2019. I think the reason the DoD miscalculated on the J-20 project maturity was because being able to use AL-31 or WS-10s was built into the J-20 project design, and a J-20 with limited T/W can perform certain combat roles for China, even if it’s not as fully capable as a F-22, T-50, or even a F-35 (talking sensors and other subsystems, of course).

I would not be confident than the WS-15 would only be a 160+ kn range engine, however. It’s too soon to tell without better information; the WS-10 project was essentially the Chinese equivalent of the TF-30, which was the first-generation American turbofan. They had no experience at all with turbofan technology, and like the TF-30, the engine was, despite an arduous development route, never quite fixed, dooming the F-14 to semi-effectiveness until the F-100s were installed. It is possible that the WS-15 project, despite the late time schedule, will be able to achieve effectiveness, simply because it’s no longer the Chinese first-generation project, the WS-10 was their trial by blood and fire and through the arduousness of its failure the Chinese now have experience, not only with what works, as in the case of the Spey WS-9 turbofans that are license-produced, but also with what doesn’t work.

@ Latenlazy: reread Kopp’s article on the J-20 RCS. It’s a polar diagram in 3D; the different colors and intensities don’t represent RCS diffraction, what they represent are the level of RCS for a given angle. The J-20 does, like the F-35, have an RCS peak towards 0 degree frontal. It, at least with the P2001, has a significantly brutal RCS peak, at around -0 dBsm. Perhaps this problem has been fixed with the P2010 series, but the baseline is pretty nasty as they come.

Again I never said the plane wasn’t a threat.
In all actuality, its likely the only survivable asset that can get close enough to search and track the multiple carrier groups China will face. It will be wise to either stay quiet, and attempt to relay, the 7th fleets position.
Or shoot and hit the AB. But then we run into the issue of can the Chinese secure comms.
Have the mastered LPI Aesa? Can they relay the target data, and live? Im simply dispelling the notion of this thing being in a verticle rolling scissors while Fighting F-35s and Super hornets, while sitting on a cute doilie in the seat.

Bite what exactly?! Since you missed it first time I’ll repeat: fighter engine development is a ‘black art’.

A case in point, we (the Japanese) are the most technologically advanced nation on
Earth, yet have you seen the specs for IHI Corps. XF-5? Truly woeful.

As the rapprochement between Russia & China reaches new levels, though I don’t see a joint venture between them on a new fighter engine (since the Russkies simply will not share the secrets of this ‘black art’), I do think engines like Salyut’s AL-31F-M3 will get export clearances. This is a direct design counterpart to the F119-PW-100, with slightly less thrust.

TomcatVIP, how many of the 14 RD-180s on order by the US will end up being sold to the PRC?! :highly_amused:

1. Define black art for us.
2. The U.S. stole german tech 70 years ago so lets pirate DVDs to our hearts content lol.
Is that your argument?
3. Russia and China together couldn’t surpass the US tech wise. You cant always throw just money at a problem. Furthermore your implying in a round about way that the T-50 isnt funded.

Morals were never mentioned. Im simply pointing out that shortcuts can stifle innovation, and problem solving.
When Lockheed faced the F-35B being overweight, they offered cash incentives to innovate. The Chinese would offer cash incentives to cheat, and copy a design. One of those alternatives breeds multiple solutions. The other breeds solutions but youll always come running back to the well, because you didn’t father it, and are now dependant on it.
Do we have exceptions to the rules yes?
But ive been in organizations before where cheating was an easy out. Trust me if your organization is bad enough to cheat, then they will cheat on hiring, firing, promotion ect. Its called discipline, not morals.