SlowManSo what is JH-7 and the rumored stealth version for?
A rumor.
Plus how do you suppose J-20 carry ASMs?
Why not?
It is simply unbelievable that you think PLA would want a stealth fighter and yet wreck the stealth by carrying the armaments underwing.
YJ-83 is small enough to be carried internally for a jet of J-20’s size, with proper fin clipping.
Right…vietnam, malaysia, phillippines all have large fleets of subs.
Japan, Korea, and Australia do.
Yes China did not invest in Africa and have no need to protect its investments…
China can only deploy limited force in that scenario and there would be an international pressure against Chinese taking military actions.
charles de gaulle class is useless for the french as well.
CDG is part of a NATO navy.
Th PLA Navy operates alone.
Yes with all the ICBMs the soviets owned there really was no need to develop the Blackjack…
In those days, the accuracy of ICBM was low and a large number of precision guided weapons weren’t available.
You are a funny guy. Taiwan is lost. That ship has sailed years ago along with economic integration.
As long as Taiwan is not under China’s direct control, the US and Japan can easily seal off the passage around Taiwan.
Only when China directly controls Taiwan and deploys anti-ship weapons and fighter jets on Taiwan then the seal is broken.
SlowManRate the likelyhood of the CN pressing the Liaoning into service if China has to evacuate its citizens from some distant country.
1. Citizen evacuation in some distant country usually involves airlift, not aircraft carriers that take weeks to get there and may not have the fuel to make the voyage back to China.
I am thinking of a Libya type scenario where Chinese nationals were told to immediately leave the country when the Libyan government fell and China was hard pressed to quickly pull its people out.
The Varyag is useless for humanitarian missions in some far away countries.
The Varyag is also useless for an actual combat situation because it would be taken out within hours by a wave of supersonic missiles and torpedoes.
SlowMan— the role of J-20
This is China’s F-111, used primarily as a naval strike platform against the US CBGs. Secondary role might include the support missileer for other Chinese fighter jets.
— the extent of Chinese carrier ambitions
China’s carrier program is mostly for a show-off patrol, having little strategic values in wartime. All of China’s enemies are near by, and many of them are armed with supersonic antiship missiles and a large fleet of subs, making them an easy target in war time.
China builds carriers not because it needs them, but because the Chinese leaders think that carriers are an essential element of being a superpower.
— the nature of eventual H-6 replacement
I don’t see a need for H-6 replacement, with all the cruise and ballistic missile availability.
— opportunities and challenges in projecting power throughout the first and second island chains
China is essentially trapped within the first island chain, and one of following things must happen in order for China to gain a safe passage to the Pacific Ocean.
1. Conquest of Taiwan.
2. Taking of Diaoyu Islands.
SlowManAs for J-11B crashes, there have been none in recent years that the community has been aware of, so what this supposed US source is referring to may be crashes of other aircraft like J-7s and the like.
The last J-11 crash I am aware of is in 2008. The last J-10B crash I heard was in 2011.
The fact that there have been bumps is no different to the development of any other aircraft in history.
J-10 and J-11 aren’t new fighters.
Btw, that article mentions nothing about WS-10 or WS-15 so I’m not sure where you are garnering your conclusion from.
My conclusion is that J-20 cannot use China’s domestic WS-10 and WS-15 engines due to unreliability and must use Russian AL-31F and 117S engines, which gives Russia a control on the J-20’s production volume.
And Even more what conclusions can be drawn from These mishaps in regard to WS, especially when all J-15s so far involved in the carrier- tests are powered by the AL-31 ?
Plain BS !
You can draw two conclusions from this report.
1. Chinese engines are unreliable, and this is the reason why J-15, J-20, and J-31 are all powered by Russian engines. The situation isn’t likely to change soon, and this gives Russia the power to control the production of these new Chinese fighter jets, or China must equip them with unreliable domestic engines.
2. Chinese fighter jet components are unreliable, and this is the reason why you hear so many crashes and technical troubles with China’s new jet development efforts like the J-10B, the J-11B, and the J-15. The J-20 sharing same components too is likely to be unreliable.
Unreliability of components can have a major effect on the readiness of the PLAAF’s combat jets.
SlowManThe Japan’s 42 F-35’s are to cost 7-8 Billion dollars
No, $10 billion for 42 jets + $2 billion FACO program, for a total of $12 billion.
Likewise Lockheed quoted $14.2 billion for 60 F-35s in the Korean F-X contest(A direct importation deal), and was virtually eliminated because the quoted price exceeded the legal ceiling by 50%.
Denmark Pursues Alternatives to F-35
AIN DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE » MARCH 22, 2013
by DAVID DONALDMarch 22, 2013, 1:40 PM
Faced with growing costs in the Lockheed Martin F-35 program, Denmark is reviewing its options for a new fighter and has invited Boeing (F/A-18 Super Hornet), Eurofighter (Typhoon) and Saab (Gripen E) to submit information for alternatives. A decision is due in 2015. Dassault (Rafale) may have been approached, but at the time of writing appeared unlikely to respond. The company has a history of not bidding on programs that it calculates have little chance of success.
SlowManThe J-15 development story, but the J-20’s development should be similar.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/03/developing-warplanes-is-hard/
China’s Testing Woes Remind That Developing Carrier Planes Is Hard
BY DAVID AXE03.21.1312:00 PMThere have been at least three close calls involving the small force of experimental J-15s since the Chinese navy established its initial carrier aviation task force in late 2006. The accidents and near-accidents are detailed in a remarkable story published this week on the Chinese website Sina — remarkable because Sina gets its information directly from state-run media outlets, which rarely cop to mistakes on the part of the mighty Chinese military.
In the first of the incidents, all of which took place between June 2011 and last November, an unnamed aviator — referred to only as “Test Pilot C” — was preparing to land his J-15 at the main military flight test center in Xi’an in central China when a warning light flashed red, indicating a hydraulics leak.
The emergency was not exactly surprising. The J-15 is an unlicensed copy of a variant of the Russian Su-27. China’s other Su-27 knockoff, called the J-11B, has serious quality-control issues. “The J-11B program is in big trouble,” a U.S. source told Defense News. “The Chinese have lost a lot of aircraft in crashes.” It looked like Pilot C might become the next casualty.The aviator hurried to lower his plane’s landing gear before the hydraulics totally failed. “Test Pilot C firmly held the steering column, preoccupied with maintaining the aircraft’s balance,” Sina reported. He touched down, but no hydraulics meant no brakes. The airfield’s ground crew activated the crash barrier — most likely a pop-up cable that can be snagged by the jet’s tailhook — and the J-15 mercifully came to a stop on the runway.
Some time later, “Test Pilot B” was performing mock carrier landings when his J-15′s speed “suddenly reduced.” One of the jet’s two engines was failing — a fire and explosion could soon follow. Pilot B quickly calculated his speed, height and distance from the runway and “decisively switched the problem engine off.”
Only the air-traffic controllers had any idea how close Pilot B was to crashing. According to Sina, all that the other airfield personnel saw was a J-15 gently gliding to a landing.
A third incident was more dramatic. “Test Pilot A” was simulating arrested landings, using the J-15′s tailhook to catch steel cables stretched across the runway in the same configuration as Liaoning‘s own arresting gear, which allows an incoming plane to stop in only 100 feet. For this trial, the J-15 rocketed down the runway at 125 miles per hour without taking off, aiming to catch one of two wires at the opposite end of the airstrip.
Pilot A snagged the first wire, but it failed explosively, snapping and “pounding the [plane’s] tail into the air” with a “bang.” “The people who witnessed the scene were all scared into a cold sweat,” according to Sina. But the second wire held and the speeding J-15 lurched to a halt.
The WS series are lemons and you can forget about WS-15 being operational for at least 10 years. The J-20 is stuck with AL-31 and 117S, which restricts how many J-20s that China could build since they are dependent on Russia for the engines.
SlowManDutch orders for F-35 likely to be scaled back:
Dutch orders for the Pentagon’s F-35 warplane are likely to be cut back, sources close to the discussions told Reuters, citing cost overruns and delays in the program, uncertainty over the Netherlands’ defence strategy and budget cuts across Europe.
The Netherlands may cut 17 to 33 F-35s from its initial plans to buy 85 of the new warplanes, according to people close to the discussions who were not authorized to speak publicly since final decisions are not expected until later this year.
U.S. officials fear cuts in orders by the Dutch or other buyers could trigger a “death spiral” in the Pentagon’s biggest arms program by driving up the price of remaining orders, leading to more cancellations. Washington alone has already delayed 410 of its 2,443 orders beyond 2017.
With a budget of about €4.5-billion to replace the F-16s, the Netherlands can only afford 33 to 35 F-35s, the source said, citing estimates from the General Auditor’s office, which checks that the government spends public funds as intended.
The average price per fighter has almost doubled from $69-million to as much as $137-million since the F-35 program began in 2001, according to a U.S. congressional watchdog agency. The Pentagon’s F-35 program chief insists the plane’s price will have dropped to around $90-million by 2018.
“The Dutch have to make up their minds about what they want their military’s role to be. If they want to participate in coalitions in the future, they’ll stick with the F-35,” said one source familiar with the F-35 program.
SlowManUS Navy may add conformal fuel tanks to F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
By: DAVE MAJUMDAR WASHINGTON DC 4 hours ago Source:The US Navy is considering adding conformal fuel tanks (CFTs) onto its fleet of Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet strike fighters, sources say. The twin dorsally mounted tanks are expected to be tested this summer.
Boeing officials did not respond to queries prior to publication.
The USN’s efforts to add CFTs might be part of the service’s plan to hedge its bets in case of further delays to the Lockheed Martin F-35C, or if budgetary pressures force the navy to abandon that variant. “At this point, the F-35C is easily the most troubled variant,” says Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group. The USN has always been lukewarm toward the stealthy single-engined fighter even if senior service leaders always publicly profess that the service “needs” the F-35C.
SlowManYou at lease imply that after Japan purchases the current order of 42 F-35’s.
That’s the official plan. The transition to the F-3 by 2028.
Japan did want to replace some of F-15Js with additional F-35 buys, but gave up after the F-35 price hikes and a 4% offset rate.
Sorry, but the odds are Japan will purchase more than the current orders placed today.
I actually read Japanese newspapers daily unlike you.
Who says the South Korea won’t buy the F-35???
The DAPA. The F-35 purchase is illegal under the Korean law due to exceeding the legal price ceiling. Hence the probability of Korea buying F-35 is 0%.
Lockheed is well-aware of this legal situation and is actually urging the Korean government to delay the selection by 3 years, so they could quote a better price on the units delivering in 2019. After all, the damage to the F-35 program is immense when Korea rejects the F-35 to buy the Silent Eagle when the outsiders like you mistakenly believe that the F-35 has the contract in the bag.
As a matter of fact South Korea is in a similar position as Japan.
They are actually in a worse situation as they are planning the possibility of an all out war with China during the fall of North Korea.
Which, is decades off
Block 1 rolls out in 2020.
and will likely be very expensive
$70 million fly-away cost.
and any returns are highly questionable.
Again the “odds” are South Korea to will purchase F-35’s.[/I]
The current odds.
Silent Eagle : 90% <= Almost legal.
Typhoon : 10% <= Need to cut the price by 10% to be legal.
F-35 : 0% <= Buying the F-35 is illegal.
SlowManFifty years from now we won’t be debating China vs. the United States –that will have been settled by 2040 at the latest — but rather about whether it is the United States or India that is #2.
The biggest economy circa 2040s is projected to be India and not China. It is even doubtful that China could surpass the US in economy size based on two factors
1. A rapidly aging population due to one child policy. The median age of China will be higher than the US by 2025.
2. Lack of freedom that hurts creativity needed for high value goods and services.
3. Rampant, unbelievable level of government corruptions. Top level government officials do away with billions in bribes, embezzlement, and grafts. If a government official does away with $100 million, then he’s an honest man by the Chinese standard.
It would be a miracle for China to break out of the middle income trap and actually become a developed country, which looks unlikely.
SlowManI think it is very dangerous to draw this conclusion. The real reason the US and USSR never went to war is because there was never any compelling reason for them to do so — merely local flashpoints occasioned by the friction at the boundaries.
USA vs USSR analogy doesn’t work in China vs Everybody else situations.
The USA and USSR didn’t have territorial disputes nor was there any historical animosities.
In case of China vs Everybody, it’s the territorial disputes that are the basis for conflicts, fueled by historical animosities, where the nationalists of each nation says it’s OK to sacrifice some of their population if that kills more of the enemy.
SlowManin what situation you have 200 red jet vs 30 F-35 :confused::eek: Russian vs Australia ??? ww 3 ?
China vs Japan in the East China Sea and Taiwan(Japan has indicated that it would intervene in the event of the Chinese invasion of Taiwan). Since Japan will have 42 then switch over to the F-3, 30 is the most that could see action at any given moment.
I am not listing China vs Korea since Koreans are not buying the F-35.
F-35 is less stealth against L band but it shape and RAM still effective
Traditional RAM doesn’t work against L-band radar, this is why the so called 6th gen designs delete vertical tails altogether and are as flat as possible.
SlowMannot realistic , f-16 or almost every 4 gen , 4.5 fighter need drop tank to get the usefull range
It’s a standard practice to drop the drop tanks before engaging the enemy.
yeah imagine 5 F-16 ( or any other 4 , 4.5 gen fighter ) vs 5 f-35
Try 200 Red Jets vs 30 F-35s. Since the F-35 costs so much, F-35 operators can’t afford more than a handful of it.
instantaneous turn rate of F-35 is equal to other gen 4 , gen 5 fighter
The baseline standard used for the comparison was a clean Lockheed F-16 Block 50 with two wingtip Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAMs. “What an embarrassment, and there will be obvious tactical implications. Having a maximum sustained turn performance of less than 5g is the equivalent of an [McDonnell Douglas] F-4 or an [Northrop] F-5,” another highly experienced fighter pilot says. “[It’s] certainly not anywhere near the performance of most fourth and fifth-generation aircraft.”
only it’s sustain turn is bad
And sustained turn is what matters.
😉 really your AWACs can’t be shot down ?
When the enemy outnumbers you several times, you don’t have the time to.
AWACs operate all the time ?
In the massive air battles envisioned in Asia Pacific, yea sure. Both red and blue sides have AWACS, EW jets, tankers, etc.
L-band do improve from X-band but not that much
Many sources disagree, the F-35 is essentially non-stealth against an L-band radar.
SlowManThe matter of fact is that while it would be acceptable for European countries to witness their air forces collapse in strength, such scenario is not acceptable for Asia Pacific countries facing China, who must expand their air force strengths, not decrease it.
This is why the F-35 must be thrown out and be replaced by an A2A optimized substitute whose flight performance matches or exceeds latest F-16s. The lack of such an A2A 5th gen fighter is the reason behind the proliferation of Asian substitute projects, like the F-3, the KFX, and the AMCA.
SlowMan1-F-16 not faster or turn better with weapon on pylon
We are talking a 2 AMRAAM + 2 AIM-9X configuration, no drop tanks.
2- F-16 will be killed BVR
And the survivors keep charging on.
3- even if it come close with HOBS missiles ( aim-132 , CUDA , aim-120 ..etc ) and DAS , the chance of both side will be pretty equal
When it’s in WVR range, it’s a F-16 vs F-4(F-35’s agility is comparable to an F-4) fight. Guess who wins.
4- the only chance for F-16 is if F-35 run out of missiles
The F-16’s combat strategy is to make a supersonic dash toward the F-35 guided by AWACS(Yes, AWACS’s L-band radars can see F-35s from hundreds of km away), then launch its missiles.
but with the new missiles ( CUDA )
CUDA is an unfunded Lockheed Martin concept. Unless Lockheed Martin plans to develop and product CUDA with its own money, you need not mention it.
LoL , su-35 have nothing to kill f-35 , it will be shot down from BVR before pilot even know anything
Simulations disagree.
http://www.f-16.net/news_article4416.html
F-35 defeated in air combat simulation
September 7, 2011 (by Eric L. Palmer) – An unnamed source stated that earlier this year a presentation was given by an industry air combat threat assessment expert to defense officials of a NATO country which showed that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) would not survive air combat against threats it is likely to see in its alleged service lifetime.
Part of the presentation showed a computer simulation which calculated that the F-35 would be consistently defeated by the Russian-made SU-35 fighter aircraft. The defeat calculated by the scenario also showed the loss of the F-35’s supporting airborne-early warning and air-to-air refueling aircraft.
Sign In
