I dont see much of difference between flushness of possible j20 bays and flushness seen on f35 and especially bays on f15se. There lines are visible only as dark lines on gray background. j20 being black here they’d be even harder to spot on dark background.

Current China Air Force (estimation):
J-11 (Chinese copy of SU-27): +/- 200 built by 1998-2010
J-10 (Chinese built): 180+ built by 2002 to 2010. Maybe few additional dozens by 2011-2013 before production line close…
SU-30: +/- 150, built through the 2000’s
SU-27: +/- 70 built by 1998-2004
J-8 (Chinese built): +/- 180 built by 1979-early 2000
J-7 (Chinese copy of Mig-21): 400 to 600+, built by mid 1960’s/1990’s

while i won’t get into the pissing contenst about what will/should happen with plaaf in the next 10-20 years, i will correct the above figures as there are much more precise estimates on the web, courtesy of scramble.nl which uses different sources and witnesses to list all the active squadrons in china.

j11a- around 100
j11b/j11bs- 25-50
j10- around 200
su30mkk – exactly 100 (these were bought from russia and never locally produced, of which 24 mk2 variant for planaf)
su27sk/ubk – exactly 76, minus a few that may’ve crashed since then or have been retired. (also bought from russia)
q5d- around 50
q5 (older variants)- around 75. (these are on the very fast way out of service)
j8I – around 50 (also on the fast way out)
J8IIb – a squadron of 24 (also on the fast way out)
J8IIf- around 100
j8IIh- around 75
jh7- around 50
jh7a- around 150
j7II/c/d/h – around 440
j7e/g – around 260

with j11b/bs, jh7a and j10 being still in production, we are likely to see q5, older j7, J8I and older non f/h J8II variants being replaced by them by 2020.

Still, at witnessed production levels, that realistically means 240-360 more j10s (a or b), around 240 more j11b/bs and probably not very many more jh7as, as there is little need for 1on1 replacement of q5s with them.

With 7 years being the norm from first flight to operational capability of first squadron or two, in 2018. when we might see 24-48 j20s there should also be:
around 250 j7e/g
around 450 j10a/b, mostly as
around 300 j11a/b/bs
around 100 su30
around 25 su27
around 50 j8IIf
around 250 jh7/jh7a

Assuming j11b production will cease by then (which may not happen due to politics) the first ones to be replaced by further j20s, by say 2025. should be su27s and j8, as well as a squadron or two of early j11as. I really dont see more than 200 j20s in service by 2025, perhaps 350 by 2030, replacing all of the j11as.

By then we should also see the fifth gen j10 and jh7 successors.

Yes, all of this, except the current plaaf/planaf force numbers is taken out of my rear. Thank you for reading. 🙂

Now while there may be lines on the sides of the fuselage indicating side bays, let us assume for a moment we will not actually find side bays there.

What if the only weapon bay is on the bottom of the plane? It offers an interesting possibility. Even if we assume j20 is really no longer than f22, its main fuselage is clearly longer. From nosetip to end of nozzles f22 is some 17 meters, while j20 seems to be close to 19 meters. If we assume engines on both planes are of samilar length (f22s may actually be longer, with the stealthy 2d nozzles. 5 meters for f119 is quite long for an engine) then we clearly have close to 2 meters of additional internal space inside j20.

Now while f22 has its intakes swerving right after the canopy, what if j20 can afford to have more or less straight intakes alongside the body and then swerving towards the engines only around the main landing gear point. Unlike f22 which had shallow main weapon bay, partly because of the position of intake channel which is above it, j20 could in theory afford to have quite voluminous and deep main weapons bay. not only for thicker weaponry like winged bombs and such but perhaps even stacked aa missiles. Stacked system may have been at times cited as unrealiable but fact remains northrop believed in it enough to put it on yf-23, regardless of what USAF later said about it.

When we use the high res pic from underneath, shown a couple of posts back, and run it through contrast/brightness correction in photoshop, one can see a very faint long line right in the middle of the underbelly, more or less in the same position where f22 has its line.

they shouldn’t be called canards but levcons – leading edge vortex controllers. Like slats on the leading edge of wings, they add more lift during slow speeds – at takeoff and landing, meaning they shorten the take off and landing distances. During high speed flight they are also useful for added controlability of the plane at high alpha manouvers.

Isn’t the mmw range VERY susceptible to atmospheric conditions? That is basically the reason why its range is as short as it is. Simply adding more power to the emitter just won’t give corresponding returns in added range as it would in, say, X-band.

Thanks for pointing out the bit about the operational use of LGBs. Now i know more. 🙂

you’ve probably seen these pics already but just in case… That seems to be the final operational iteration of the L variant. The thing in the nose is definitely a LST, not a designator. Hence the designator pod seen in those two pics. There were reports some earlier variants (perhaps E or F?) had to have another plane designate the targets for the bomb carrier plane. (maybe E was the bomb carrier, F the designator?)

One can see that the belly tank isn’t there, but in its place one can find enough room to place the designator pod so the plane can self designate the targets. Though i must i shudder to think what sort of lowly range a q5L, with two 500 kg bombs, a designator pod and with, at most, two tiny fuel tanks on outboard wing stations can achieve.