Since when does NATO have a problem with China?
Mabye always. ๐
slipperysam, no need to get angry.
F-4 Phantom loadouts:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]218000[/ATTACH]
The Super Hornet will provide an excellent “Tanker” for the F-35C.:cool:
FLY NAVY
The F-35 will provide an exellent “Ground Attack” machine for the F/A-18 and Super Hornet ๐
Ahhh mi paรญs Mรฉxico ๐ But Mรฉxico doesn’t have a strong force because Mexico doesn’t have any enemies. They’ve never been in a recent conflict. So it’s a quiet Airforce. But they have to buy newer military aircraft.
I’m sure Deino is referring to those self-proclaimed armchair “experts” (with american aircraft names as their usernames usually) who somehow know exactly the hows and whats of the J-20, but that would have absolutely no clue whatsoever of for instance what those numbers and letters in your image represent ( not that i have the slightest clue;) )
Are you claiming me or TomcatViP?
F/A-18F Super Hornet VFA-41 Black Aces.
F/A-18F Super Hornet VFA-2 armmed with 6 AIM-120’s


Guess the Mig-21 is the most loved lightweight plane. But widely used. How about i but myself a Mig-21? :dev2:
The J20 is not highly maneuverable. It’s a double delta Canard with a low relaxed stability gradient. It’s a striker or more likely a fleet “denier”.
Both are formidable design but (my guess) with fragile feet.
I think you should learn before making things up. I think the J-20 is maneuverable beacuse the big canards. It doesn’t have fragile feet, if it did then why is it standing up?
The dimensions of the J-20 are very similar to those of the YF-23, they’re actually remarkably close, well within a couple of feet in height, length and width. The differences between wing areas of the aeroplanes aren’t that significant, same for weight. The point is, during the trials of the YF-23, the aircraft showed very promising performance results that were on par or even exceeded the YF-22. It was, and would have been, an incredibly capable aeroplane, there’s no doubt about it! Unlike the YF-23, the J-20 will be an incredibly capable aeroplane be it in A/A or A/G. The size of it’s airframe isn’t an issue.
If it looks right, it’ll most certainly fly right. And one must say, it looks stunningly menacing! I’d be rather nervous if I had to face it, even if I was in an ASRAAM & Meteor armed Typhoon!
Well long plane means nothing. But it’s important to add capabilities. But im sure the Chinese Airforce is happy with their new 5th gen fighter. ๐ But i think it will do well in BVR. But the Airframe is stunning. Just reminds me of amine planes from china/Japan. But i wouldn’t be nervous facing the J-20 while in a SH. ๐ฎ But in BVR i’ll be very nervous there. But in WVR i wont mind a SH facing the J-20, But glad to see China has made a potent fighter in their force.
Look at the front. It’s definitely a missile.
Can see it ๐
CAS ground attack?
CAS? You mean the same thing the A-10 performs?
I think we’re done here, shows over.
No, Ground attack performing either CAS or dropping bombs at high altitudes. The person giving the ground attack mission brief is to what the J-20 has to do.
You know as well as the rest of us that comparing various aircraft without a common known quantity to scale them from is a fruitless exercise
Even with the above, your image gives J-20 a 21m length. A bit bigger than the commonly accepted 20.5m length, but whatever.
Mistakes are mistakes, thanks for the corrections. But don’t think this could be fruitless.
Also the scale in your picture is wrong. J-20 is less than 21 meters long and T-50 is over 20 meters.
Guess the J-20 is 20.00?
PAK FA guess=25.00?
If they wanted it to have A2G as its primary role its belly should be big and bulbous like F-35 to carry large diameter bombs. Better yet, delete the canards and introduce a large FB-22 delta wing.
But the way its main weapon bay is set out means it can’t be that deep, suggesting a primary orientation for A2A (along with every other aerodynamic feature we’ve seen). If this thing is meant for A2G, it will be terrible at it. I doubt that weapon bay is even deep enough to hold a JSM sized weapon. A couple of glide bombs at best.
It doesn’t have to be such a big blob. Also how could it be a terrible A2G plane? I think the J-20 can do fine at it. But IMHO, the J-20 will have the primary role as ground attack. 2nd air to air. But the large bays should let the J-20 carry bigger bombs. Or else more bombs. But in A2A IMHO will do good at BVR. Long range and stealthy. But i don’t know in WVR. Such big canards and weight should make it maneuverable. But doubt it could do such slow speed maneuvering like the SH. But J-20 in A2A and A2G should do fine. But since there’s no A2A combat, the J-20 will have the primary role as CAS ground attack. A2A later when threats occur.
The main weapons bay is long, but not particularly deep. I’m thinking they’re for future BVRAAMs.
And FYI all estimates using known quantities gives us a ~20.5m length, so the aircraft isn’t that long.
Long bays= carry more long ordinance. There for A2G weapons and BVR weapons.
So the aircraft is not that long? Compare these

Top side:
J-20= 21m long
F-22= 18.92m long
F-35=15.47 long
PAK FA= 20m long
So J-20 is longer on top side
Side view:
j-20=?
F-22=18.92m
F-35=15.47m
PAK FA=?
J-20 is longer on side.
Front view:
j-20=13.80
F-22=13.56
F-35=10.70
PAK FA=14.00
Front view J-20 is taller
In WVR , I take an HMS (HMD) over TVC anyday .
Cheers .
Yes agree. But Why would people want TVC on a military aircraft? Seriously, very overated of my understandings. What you need is the aircraft to be maneuverable. Which the plane needs to be unstable to maneuver dramatically. But it’s the Sukhoj fanboys that are overhyped about TVC. But in a dogfight you wouldn’t even consider using TVC. Pretty much TVC is useless at close in range fights. But TVC is actually a thing for entertainment at airshows. But that’s what the Sukhoi craft does, show maneuverability with TVC but they are far away to be able to use ACM in a real close in engagement.
But let’s face it all you need is good situational awareness and good piloting skills in order to kill the enemy in a engagement close in. But we already have advanced missiles to do the trick to outmaneuver the most maneuverable fighter. Like AIM-9x is very maneuverable and can take out the most maneuverable fighter of today. But what makes me Luagh is that many enthusiast say that using TVC can actually outmaneuver missiles. Which is not very possible to do.
But TVC is overated.
TVC in airshows= Entertainment
Can’t even see the missile. LoL, but i can see the fins of the missile showing ๐