One thing I don’t get is why the J-20 is expected to be less maneuverable than the F-35 in certain regimes. Engine power is between 125kn to 135kn, if you consider the latest AL-31s provided by the Russians to the Chinese, thrust to weight could possibly be lower, depending on how much the aircraft turns out to weigh, but it has canards to compensate in subsonic regimes and has been shown to have around 20 degree sustained turn rate and 30 degrees instantaneous turn rate at low speeds. Not excellent, but good enough, if you compare it to the F-35.
I mean, if you want to bash the J-20 as mediocre, be my guest; it’s built more for high-speed interception and high-speed maneuverability and at the present time it’s crippled by immature engines, but I can’t figure out why you’re rating the F-35 above it. The main advantages the F-35 has right now is sensors, simply because they should be somewhat more mature than the J-20, and in the future its DIRCM laser, but in every other aspect I’m having a tough time seeing how the J-20 is inferior.
===
Additions:
Let’s put it this way; if you want to say the F-22 with its superior 0 degree stealth and TVC is better than the J-20, be my guest, or that the T-50’s advanced TVC orientation + levcons can outmaneuver the J-20 in WVR, sure. The unimaginable thing is that you’re claiming that the F-35 is superior to the J-20 when both, according to estimates, are RCS -40 dBsm craft on off direct bore, the J-20 has a larger radar, is built for supercruise, and both have EODAS and IRST. The F-35 consistently loses in dogfights against 4th gens, the J-20 isn’t the most maneuverable aircraft but it’s competent compared to most 4th gens.
Other issues are, the J-20 seems to have a higher potential max Mach number (a Virginia Tech simulation by Americans using mostly accurate size estimates claimed that the J-20 will have max Mach 2.85 with proper engines and max Mach 2.1 with present engines), its wing area using Lockheed-style body lift is around 78-80 m^2, comparable to the F-22 and far superior to the F-35…
If you mean that magic missiles from Lockheed will shoot down the J-20 when fired from the F-35, I can believe that, or alternately that the F-35 has more advanced, if not larger radar and EODAS sensors, I can also believe that, but I can’t see how the F-35 is supposed to outmaneuver the J-20.
===
Also, @ Y-20 Bacon, if you’re not trolling, the Su-35 deal has been rumored for almost 10 years. It may occur, it may not occur, but the Chinese and Russians have been making announcements back and forth about the Su-35 forever. Even if the technology is better than the Chinese technology (and I note, the Su-35 runs on PESA, the latest Chinese Flanker derivatives have AESA), the Chinese are not desperate enough to accede to whatever terms the Russians might have in mind.
This feels awfully like trolling, basically. The facts are out there about the J-20; it’s an okay airframe, it’s underpowered, it has a larger radar, its stealth abilities, according to projections, are acceptable, it has EODAS, its weapon bay is not optimal for a striker function, and it has canards. According to the measurements shown, as well as videos of the J-20, it has been shown to do a 360 turn in 18 seconds and a 180 degree turn in 6 seconds.
It may be complete target practice for the USAF, but that has more to do with its subsystems, the relative training levels of the PLAAF and the USAF, as well as cyberwarfare.
your problem is with Janes, defencenet, and all the other military focused media, not me.
Sign In
