What's new

China should ‘worry’ about Taiwan 2027 timeline, J-20 is just ‘OK’ fighter and “isn’t anything to lose sleep over”: US PACAF chief

Therefore, when an aircraft has two systems at the same time, it is fully capable of detecting maritime targets, and China's Air Police 200 and Air Police 500 have these systems. And you claim that China does not have any because the US has no.
lol, whatever,

I said what I said, and sure, if you think KJ-500 can do both, who am I to dispute you lol?? I mean, your source is "someone said it can be on an interview" sure, I believe you.

Next you will claim J-16 can detect ship 500km away, and I will believe you lol.
 
Last edited:
lol, whatever,

I said what I said, and sure, if you think KJ-500 can do both, who am I to dispute you lol?? I mean, your source is "someone said it can be on an interview" sure, I believe you.
Of course you should believe me, compare the photos you and I have given, we can clearly see that the Chinese AWACS has a mounting forward looking Radar that your so-called American AWACS does not have, of course you can continue to insist on your point of view, just as you claim those platforms are mounted in a helicopter instead of a jet or propeller。

lol, whatever,

I said what I said, and sure, if you think KJ-500 can do both, who am I to dispute you lol?? I mean, your source is "someone said it can be on an interview" sure, I believe you.

Next you will claim J-16 can detect ship 500km away, and I will believe you lol.
Yes, I can only believe that Hawker Siddeley Nimrod is a helicopter in your eyes.:yahoo:
 
Last edited:
Of course you should believe me, compare the photos you and I have given, we can clearly see that the Chinese AWACS has a mounting forward looking Radar that your so-called American AWACS does not have, of course you can continue to insist on your point of view, just as you claim those platforms are mounted in a helicopter instead of a jet or propeller。
Dude, EVERY AIRCRAFT has forward looking radar and can potentially pick up ground/naval target. Otherwise, how are F-18 or F-35 target ships??

How far is the range and where do they mount them is another issue. You are talking about AWACS, which is not going to be AWACS range, as I mentioned it time and again, if you mount a forward-looking radar or belly mounting inverted Aperture radar, you will have very short range on ground/sea target.

That's the point, because you cannot fly your AWACS and pick up enemy ship no better than a F-18 or J-16 or whatever on the same frequency, sure, it may be a bit longer range because the airframe is bigger, and it could have accommodated a bigger forward-looking radar on an AWACS than on a F-18. But definitely is not on AWACS range. Otherwise why you need AWACS anyway? If you can have the same mounted forward looking radar on a F-18 or J-16 perform as well as big antenna on top of that AWACS??

I mean, the nose of a E-2D or KJ-500 is bigger than a F-18 or J-16, but not that a lot bigger.
 
Dude, EVERY AIRCRAFT has forward looking radar and can potentially pick up ground/naval target. Otherwise, how are F-18 or F-35 target ships??

How far is the range and where do they mount them is another issue. You are talking about AWACS, which is not going to be AWACS range, as I mentioned it time and again, if you mount a forward-looking radar or belly mounting inverted Aperture radar, you will have very short range on ground/sea target.

That's the point, because you cannot fly your AWACS and pick up enemy ship no better than a F-18 or J-16 or whatever on the same frequency, sure, it may be a bit longer range because the airframe is bigger, and it could have accommodated a bigger forward-looking radar on an AWACS than on a F-18. But definitely is not on AWACS range. Otherwise why you need AWACS anyway? If you can have the same mounted forward looking radar on a F-18 or J-16 perform as well as big antenna on top of that AWACS??

I mean, the nose of a E-2D or KJ-500 is bigger than a F-18 or J-16, but not that a lot bigger.
I have not mentioned that the search distance of the Chinese early warning aircraft to the sea can reach the level of the air. But I'm skeptical that you say very short range。 How much does the so-called very short actually mean? For example, for a 1000 square meter RCS target, is the discovery distance 10KM? 100KM? or 200KM?
 
I have not mentioned that the search distance of the Chinese early warning aircraft to the sea can reach the level of the air. But I'm skeptical that you say very short range。 How much does the so-called very short actually mean? For example, for a 1000 square meter RCS target, is the discovery distance 10KM? 100KM? or 200KM?
Dude, a forward mounting radar can only search in 1 direction, which is forward, because every other way is blocked by the entire airframe as well, and the first post also applies (The degree of curvature formula) , which mean you cannot search anything further away from the degree of depreciation, you can't see anything beyond your visual horizon.

Which mean if you use a forward mounting radar to search an area, it is pointless unless you are running up and down the field. Because if you are solely depending on forward mounting radar, this is your field of search

ce482ed3efa772df5e8d6be296764661.jpg
 
Dude, a forward mounting radar can only search in 1 direction, which is forward, because every other way is blocked by the entire airframe as well, and the first post also applies (The degree of curvature formula) , which mean you cannot search anything further away from the degree of depreciation, you can't see anything beyond your visual horizon.

Which mean if you use a forward mounting radar to search an area, it is pointless unless you are running up and down the field. Because if you are solely depending on forward mounting radar, this is your field of search

View attachment 882674
Therefore, KJ-500 is not only equipped with a forward mounting radar, but also has radar antennas on both sides of the fuselage.
In other words, the head, tail, and both sides of the fuselage constitute an omnidirectional detection system
kj-200.jpg
 
Last edited:
Therefore, KJ-500 is not only equipped with a forward mounting radar, but also has radar antennas on both sides of the fuselage.
In other words, the head, tail, and both sides of the fuselage constitute an omnidirectional detection system
View attachment 882677
Honestly, what's that have to do with anything?

And no, just because it was mounted on 4 sides, it does not make it omnidirectional. It's like saying if you have eye on all sides of your head, then your vision will be omnidirectional.

Can you see things over your shoulder without moving your head? If you cannot, then it is not omnidirectional.
 
AFA 2022 — The head of US Air Forces in the Pacific isn’t downplaying the challenge from China. But when it comes to a potential invasion of Taiwan, he thinks Beijing and its top military planners should be “worried” about their ability to take over the island nation.

Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach, the PACAF commander, also told reporters during a media engagement Monday that China’s J-20, its most advanced fighter in production, isn’t “anything to lose a lot of sleep over,” indicating his belief that American fifth-gen fighters would be more than a match for the Chinese-made jets.

Asked for his assessment on whether China would be able to invade Taiwan by 2027, a date pegged by a number of officials over the years and recently as this month, Wilsbach acknowledged that is a target for Beijing. But the outcome of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine should, he said, cause PRC leadership to “wonder” if that timeline is still realistic.

“If I was them, I’d be really worried, because you saw what happened with Russia trying to achieve their military objectives in Ukraine, and [Russia] should have had a relatively easy problem to solve. They had to drive across the border, they had to take over the country that they should have been superior to militarily, and yet they had a lot of failures, and they certainly haven’t achieved their objectives,” he said.

“China has a much more difficult military problem from the standpoint of, they have to accomplish one of the most difficult military events that you would have to do, which is an amphibious landing across 100 miles of open ocean and an air assault against a very well defended place like Taiwan — and a place that intends to defend themselves, clearly,” Wilsbach continued. “If I was them, I’d be worried. If I was a [Chinese] military commander, I’d be worried about 2027.”

Wilsbach also noted that there were lessons learned from China’s activities following US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s recent visit to Taiwan. And while he wasn’t willing to go into details in an open setting, he noted “they showed us some cards. They showed some cards, maybe they didn’t intend to, but we picked up on it. And so we’re incorporating that into our future plans.”

As for China’s specific military capabilities, the PACAF chief seemed unimpressed by one of Beijing’s most high-profile platforms, it’s fifth-generation J-20 stealth fighter jet, which began operating roughly a decade ago. Asked to describe his assessment of the jet, Wilsbach verbally shrugged, saying “It’s their most modern aircraft. We’ve had a limited opportunity to assess it. Seems okay. It seems okay. It’s not anything to lose a lot of sleep over, but they seem to be a building a lot of them.”

He added that “It’s nothing that I would worry too much about. Our forces are really well trained and we’re very well equipped.”



When India does not take J20 seriously, obviously US won't give it a shit. It is a plane to boast for Chinese and claim that they too have something equivalent to US. Chinese plane doesn't nave any building block of 5th generation, yet it is a fifth generation plane.
 
Honestly, what's that have to do with anything?

And no, just because it was mounted on 4 sides, it does not make it omnidirectional. It's like saying if you have eye on all sides of your head, then your vision will be omnidirectional.

Can you see things over your shoulder without moving your head? If you cannot, then it is not omnidirectional.
if you have eyes on all sides, then don't move your head, what direction can you not see?
 
if you have eyes on all sides, then don't move your head, what direction can you not see?
If you have a single eye on all 4 side, you can see a field of view of 95 degree of all 4 sides, you are missing 85 degrees from each side, hence it is not omnidirectional.

Even with 2 eyes, our vision on a single plane is not 180 degree, it's 170 degrees, which mean there are roughly 10% of your eyes cannot see. In fact, even with 3 or 4 or 5 eyes, you cannot never achieve 180-degree vision on a single plane. That's some principal regarding stereoscopic vision I forgot the name.

So no, even if you stack the entire side of a KJ-500 with sensor, the sensor cannot pick up a certain degree depends on the field of transmission of that antenna. Like human eyes, anything with an arc will not achieve true omnidirectional.
And with 1 sensor, depends on that sensor antenna field of view. Say if that side sensor is 120 degrees side to side and 90 degrees up and down, then you will have 60 degrees on both sides and 90 degrees on elevation they cannot see.
 
Are you really that dense? My Point is, there are no such thing as "Sea Radar"

Unless you can release some "Chinese Physics" that can bend the magnetic field around the earth or can allow radio wave travel thru water, IT CANNOT BE DONE......

LOL @gambit
I told ya guys so... :lol:
 
When India does not take J20 seriously, obviously US won't give it a shit. It is a plane to boast for Chinese and claim that they too have something equivalent to US. Chinese plane doesn't nave any building block of 5th generation, yet it is a fifth generation plane.
What can you loser indians build of fighters other than defame chinese products all the time ? Like the shit LCA chinese should care then ?
 
All ports on Taiwan's west coast are under radar on the other side, and anti-ship missiles have enough range to destroy any ship approaching a Taiwanese port.
Look at this radar horizon calculator...


Ten meters is a reasonable baseline elevation/height starting point for most horizon calculations. Using 10 meters as height for the radar antenna and for any target, the maximum radar horizon is 26 km. The distance between China coast and Taiwan is 160 km.

So in order for a mainland China radar to 'see' Taiwan, its elevation must be 1500 meters to make that 170 km distance. Fifteen hundred meters is pretty much airborne.

Now do you see why I mock you guys for your 'Chinese physics'?

 
Look at this radar horizon calculator...


Ten meters is a reasonable baseline elevation/height starting point for most horizon calculations. Using 10 meters as height for the radar antenna and for any target, the maximum radar horizon is 26 km. The distance between China coast and Taiwan is 160 km.

So in order for a mainland China radar to 'see' Taiwan, its elevation must be 1500 meters to make that 170 km distance. Fifteen hundred meters is pretty much airborne.

Now do you see why I mock you guys for your 'Chinese physics'?
No, you confirmed my opinion. For example, the three radar stations in Fujian are located on Meihua Mountain, Yanding Mountain and Jiufeng Mountain.
The heights of these three towers were more than 1800 meters.
 

Back
Top Bottom