What's new

J-20 fighters now in every Chinese Theatre Commands, overtaking F 22 in numbers soon, making it the world's largest fifth-generation fighter force

_Nabil_

FULL MEMBER
Aug 22, 2021
819
-2
1,571
Country
Tunisia
Location
Tunisia
Intentionally dragging arab here you must be an iranians . To be honest any thing they bought is way better then your 5th gen plastic plane ( with charging cord) .
You completely missed the point, and the initial flow of discussion.

It was a parallel between Arabs buying and China producing large amount of military hardware. If the final goal of China is taking back Taiwan, then fine.

if not, it's just rotting devices like the Arabs are accumulating for no purpose, just to benefit the east / west military companies.
 

Crystal-Clear

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 28, 2017
5,790
-2
5,165
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Arab Emirates
You completely missed the point, and the initial flow of discussion.

It was a parallel between Arabs buying and China producing large amount of military hardware. If the final goal of China is taking back Taiwan, then fine.

if not, it's just rotting devices like the Arabs are accumulating for no purpose, just to benefit the east / west military companies.
The first one who mention Arabs here are you . If you are an iranian just use your flag .
.
.
Thats not the first time you drag Arabs in any thread ,i am not the first one who notice this neither i am the first one who said this . Arnt you proud of you iranian nationality ?
 

Bin Laden

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Jan 15, 2022
76
0
151
Country
Pakistan
Location
Saudi Arabia
Don't know about the other, Australia NEVER had 48 F-35. Maybe 24 is more likely number, as they only have 2 squadron flying them. The 3rd Squadron is going to be active in 2023. Which mean we will have 36 in 2023.
Minus the Australian f35s the point I was trying to make still stands۔ So.....?

And you need to update yourself, Because Australia DOESN'T HAVE 48 now they have 50!,( which btw have been handed to 3rd Squadron), And planned 72 will be by 2023.


There is an old article from janes from 2021 stating Australia had like 44 Delivered.


But ig you're right they are all lying and since there is no official Squadron yet which means in fact they don't EXIST! And in 2023 when they'll activate the 3rd Squadron suddenly f35s will come out of thin air cuz no preparation are required before hand right!

Same way jf17block3 doesn't exist because there is no Official Squadron flying 😕.

Edit; this is the complete list if each individual f35 delivered/to be delivered

 
Last edited:

_Nabil_

FULL MEMBER
Aug 22, 2021
819
-2
1,571
Country
Tunisia
Location
Tunisia
The first one who mention Arabs here are you . If you are an iranian just use your flag .
.
.
Thats not the first time you drag Arabs in any thread ,i am not the first one who notice this neither i am the first one who said this . Arnt you proud of you iranian nationality ?
Lolz, an Arab can't drag Arabs , what kind of logic is yours???

If you disagree with my statement, just give your opinion without trolling and saying bullshit.

Did the fact of living in UAE makes you feel obliged to lick Arab balls? What this patwari behaviour is yours ???
 

Hydration

FULL MEMBER
Feb 9, 2022
1,323
0
914
Country
Egypt
Location
Egypt
The first one who mention Arabs here are you . If you are an iranian just use your flag .
.
.
Thats not the first time you drag Arabs in any thread ,i am not the first one who notice this neither i am the first one who said this . Arnt you proud of you iranian nationality ?
Glad iam not the only one noticing that lol
 

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Oct 24, 2012
13,634
355
13,586
Country
China
Location
Australia
Minus the Australian f35s the point I was trying to make still stands۔ So.....?

And you need to update yourself, Because Australia DOESN'T HAVE 48 now they have 50!,( which btw have been handed to 3rd Squadron), And planned 72 will be by 2023.


There is an old article from janes from 2021 stating Australia had like 44 Delivered.


But ig you're right they are all lying and since there is no official Squadron yet which means in fact they don't EXIST! And in 2023 when they'll activate the 3rd Squadron suddenly f35s will come out of thin air cuz no preparation are required before hand right!

Same way jf17block3 doesn't exist because there is no Official Squadron flying 😕.

Edit; this is the complete list if each individual f35 delivered/to be delivered

Wasn't the "I don't know about the other country" part said that out loud already?

My post is about Australia, I don't really care or know about any country.

Also, since the entire post is about "technicality" Australia have taken 50 deliveries, but if you really follow Australian Defence News, 12 (or 14) of those are in Arizona used to train Aussie Pilot on. So technically we have not "had" those delivery.

The only RAAF squadron that flew F-35 currently, as of today. Are

No.3 Squadron - Based in RAAF Williamtown
No.77 Squadron - Based in RAAF Williamtown

OTOH

No 2 Conversion Training Squadron also operate F-35 for Training, they are the one based in Arizona

So only 24 (each squadron have 12 aircraft) are in RAAF service. No.1 Squadron from RAAF Amberley is planning to convert from F-18F to F-35, but at of this day, they still flown with F-18F
 

etylo

FULL MEMBER
Nov 9, 2021
1,228
-15
1,455
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
When Chinese said they have built a stealth fighter, I was naturally curious. When I saw it there was Mig 1.44 finger prints all over it. This is not new for China I thought. They bought Lavi fighter jet design and made J10. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same with J20. However, this new stealth plane is freaking huge. No wonder they needed to have those canards on the front for additional lift. If USAF with all their experience are having trouble operating stealth fighters in terms of cost then you bet Chinese would be having problems too not only in terms of cost but also technology. There is no way J20 would be effective without powerful engines. Even with powerful engines J20 cannot go super sonic for long periods of time. Going supersonic for long periods will result in structural damage and loss of stealth capabilities. This is a problem in F-35 too. Former USAF pilots called F-35 a fat whale when it was in the design and production phase. These guys grew up in the era of dog fights. So they didn't really catch up on the technological progress. F-35 sure is a huge *** plane. But the plane is packed with sensors and all sorts of goodies for a pilot to never engage in a dog fight. Even then F-35 is way too expensive to operate even for USAF. It costs $30,000 - $35,000 per hour to operate F-35. And USAF wants to induct 2,500 F-35's by 2040. The other factors like J20 only having frontal stealth and whether their avionics, sensor fusion, AESA radar are up to the standards of 5th generation fighters? We don't have much idea on those. Operating J20 in many different climatic conditions must also be a pain the *** I reckon. In February 2022, it was revealed that the aircraft’s aspiration to host Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) had run into trouble owing to its underpowered engines. Questions have also been raised on China’s ability to produce purpose-built engines on a war footing
Besides slandering China, what can you d*** Hindus do ? Everything China got is copied or stolen from your white dads and is of low quality, no surprise there. Even then J 20 that has the least slightest resemblance of Mig 1.44 and that of J 10 which is rightfully a Chinese indigenous design, you Indians are still making these bull crap claims on behalf of your white masters. You Indians are just like parrots imitating 10 times whatever your white masters say about China all the time.
 
Last edited:

Crystal-Clear

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 28, 2017
5,790
-2
5,165
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Arab Emirates
Lolz, an Arab can't drag Arabs , what kind of logic is yours???

If you disagree with my statement, just give your opinion without trolling and saying bullshit.

Did the fact of living in UAE makes you feel obliged to lick Arab balls? What this patwari behaviour is yours ???
If you are an Arab then why you are bashing thm that too on a very irrelevant thread .
.
You see you talk a lot about Western weaponry owned by Arabs but how cleverly you skip the part where i mention iranian 5th gen plastic plane (with a charging cord) .
.
Thats the real junk instead of F-15, F-16 etc .
Glad iam not the only one noticing that lol
I noticed it on 3 threads
 

White and Green with M/S

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 29, 2020
4,350
-1
2,197
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
When Chinese said they have built a stealth fighter, I was naturally curious. When I saw it there was Mig 1.44 finger prints all over it. This is not new for China I thought. They bought Lavi fighter jet design and made J10. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same with J20. However, this new stealth plane is freaking huge. No wonder they needed to have those canards on the front for additional lift. If USAF with all their experience are having trouble operating stealth fighters in terms of cost then you bet Chinese would be having problems too not only in terms of cost but also technology. There is no way J20 would be effective without powerful engines. Even with powerful engines J20 cannot go super sonic for long periods of time. Going supersonic for long periods will result in structural damage and loss of stealth capabilities. This is a problem in F-35 too. Former USAF pilots called F-35 a fat whale when it was in the design and production phase. These guys grew up in the era of dog fights. So they didn't really catch up on the technological progress. F-35 sure is a huge *** plane. But the plane is packed with sensors and all sorts of goodies for a pilot to never engage in a dog fight. Even then F-35 is way too expensive to operate even for USAF. It costs $30,000 - $35,000 per hour to operate F-35. And USAF wants to induct 2,500 F-35's by 2040. The other factors like J20 only having frontal stealth and whether their avionics, sensor fusion, AESA radar are up to the standards of 5th generation fighters? We don't have much idea on those. Operating J20 in many different climatic conditions must also be a pain the *** I reckon. In February 2022, it was revealed that the aircraft’s aspiration to host Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) had run into trouble owing to its underpowered engines. Questions have also been raised on China’s ability to produce purpose-built engines on a war footing
i just ask one question from you does your Kaveri engine is ready for Tej@$$ :lol: :rofl:;):enjoy:, China has hundreds of WS-10 on their J-11/J11BS/J-16/J-15/ J-10C and recently to J-20, does India have a capability to develop INDIGENOUS JET ENGINE AT HOME???;):enjoy:


And as for your rants about J-20 and J-10 is partially true right words for J-20/J-10 is not COPY but INSPIRED or BASED on design of Mig1.44/LAVI with lot of modifications and upgradations in design manufacturing techniques so they are not COPY or REVERSE ENGINEERED jet But totally INDIGENOUS DESIGNS using design principles of Mig-1.44/LAVI
 
Last edited:

Genghis khan1

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2015
5,055
0
6,759
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
There WILL BE NO tactical advantage gain for the PLAAF with the J-20 even if the J-20 does have some technical advantages. Here is why the J-20 and the Su-57 are DOA.

The below is a simplified visual explanation of how radars sees any body...

sHbTuos.jpg


...As a CLUSTER of voltage spikes.

The below is a more sophisticated visual representation...

y8Rpj48.jpg


The higher the operating freq and the more refined the data processing of the reflected signals, the more complex the final display.

Even if the reflected signals are 'stealth' meaning amplitude (strength) is low enough to blend/mask with background radiation, the CHARACTERISTICS of the reflected signals are still evident. The first character is amplitude, which is low enough to be filtered out by most radars. The second character is that clustering or grouping of signals. More detailed characters about the body are revealed by the radar pulse characteristics but we can leave those alone for now.

What is significant is that general types of bodies produces recognizable cluster signatures. A sphere would not produce a complex cluster like the above visual representations. A cube would also not produce complex signal clusters but the cube would produce a different cluster signature than the sphere. We have baseline library of simple shapes for decades.


Abstract:
Radar cross section (RCS) methods for simple shapes are reviewed with special attention being devoted to results rather than to derivations of the formulas involved. In addition, special emphasis is placed on an approach which can be extended to "complex" shapes. Where possible, comparisons between theory and experiment are provided to give a measure of the accuracy obtainable via the use of these techniques. The discussion is limited to perfectly conducting bodies: in particular, ellipsoids, finite cones, ogives, cylinders, thin wires, wire loops, and flat plates. An attempt is made to cover the complete spectrum of body dimension to wavelength ratios; that is, the Rayleigh region, the resonance region, and the optics region are all considered from the points of view of both monostatic and bistatic phenomena.​

A Rolls Royce cluster of signals would not be identical to a farm tractor but both clusters would have parallel characteristics. If the discrimination does not care if the clusters are Rolls Royce and John Deere, then the SIMILARITIES would be enough for 'other' purposes.

A major problem with most RCS calculations is that the seeking radar is usually static meaning ground based. Then the target aircraft is flown within the seeking radar beam. We already know that as aspect (viewing) angles changes, the reflected signals changes in terms of cluster amplitude and complexity. By the seeking radar being fixed on the ground, we have incomplete signal knowledge of the target. Airborne radars are not new but they are limited in construction due to aviation limitations such as size, weight, and aerodynamics.

Enter the RATT55...

XQTMQfA.jpg


This modified 737 is even more secret than the next 'stealth' platform.


The NT-43A radar aircraft testbed (probably where the “Rat” call-sign comes from) is most likely the last stop in advanced low-signature testing and validation for new stealthy aircraft, new radar absorbent coatings and heat mitigation technologies, as well as exotic and stealthy structural modifications to existing aircraft. In other words, whether it be a whole new aircraft or just a new radar absorbing material applied to an existing stealthy aircraft, the NT-43A evaluates it under realistic flight conditions with its powerful radars and infrared energy detecting devices. Even repairs and depot-level work on existing stealth aircraft may be validated in flight via the NT-43A.​
The NT-43A’s massive radars are most likely able to take incredibly detailed synthetic aperture ‘pictures’ of their target aircraft, as well as collecting sensitive ‘raw’ radar measurements and associated data. Its front and rear pods that give the jet such an ungainly appearance allow it to collect radar and infrared data (the IR sensors sit atop the radar fairings) from every angle around the target aircraft in flight without having to fly at oblique angles towards and away from it. The radar system may have some bistatic capabilities when both front and back arrays are used in conjunction with one another.​

The highlighted is important. By being airborne, the RATT55 is able to scan the aircraft from multiple aspects (viewing) angles that are mostly cleared of ground reflections that always contaminates the signal set. But that is not all, precisely because all aircrafts produces similar cluster signatures, we now have a base library of common signal characteristics that WILL enable us to extrapolate an unknown signal set.

As if that is not enough...

...an aircraft may have very little radar signature head-on, but at certain angles its radar cross section grows significantly. Once these intricacies are very well documented, the performance of enemy radars, infrared search and track systems and anti-air missile systems can be better theorized. This allows for a much more accurate understanding of how close a ‘stealth’ aircraft can get to different threats without being detected or without being engaged. Mission planners can then build elaborate routes around known enemy air defense systems and give crews good advice on how to present the best aspect of their aircraft to unplanned for ‘pop-up’ threats so that they have the best chance of surviving a mission.​

Using what RATT55 produced, US planners can, or more likely HAVE, created exercises with complex EW threats. The great thing about EW exercises is that they are not exercises. There is no need to actually launch a SAM in order to produce a virtual 'kill'. In an EW exercise, an electronic identification of a target constitutes a 'kill', making any EW exercise essentially the real thing. Is there any wonder why we fly all those SIGINT sorties?

The J-20 is Dead On Arrival (DOA) and their pilots do not even know it.
So to summarize, RATT55 is a test bed which tries to extrapolate (calculated guess) radar signature of the unknown side of an aircraft by using known aircraft signature (library) database.

Idea is that distance between front and back radar (bistatic) on the RATT55 will use the basic trigonometry in a highly complex way to guess the target signature, not only that but will calculate radar signature of the unexposed side.

I can guess there has to been lot of classified scientific detail missing to explain this magic because right now it’s sound like a skunks works another wet dream.

There is a limited advantage in mission planning for friendly aircraft, but to expect other stealth are going DOA. I don’t think so.

Also if air battle is over hostile territory and enemy does have decent amount of high/low frequency radars in the area. Some corner of Stealth aircraft will give its signature away.

Stealth reduces radar signature, doesn’t make aircraft invisible. I am assuming most radars algorithms are smart enough to highlight something move at 500 mph in the sky regardless the size of it.
 
Last edited:

Genghis khan1

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2015
5,055
0
6,759
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Issue isn’t detecting stealth but get a clear enough radar picture to get a missile lock on it. RATT55 is trying to do it when ground radar stations aren’t available.


1664183269402.jpeg


A5328493-3CFB-4953-9BE2-ADE4BDF3254D.jpeg


1664183569154.jpeg
 
Last edited:

gambit

PROFESSIONAL
Apr 28, 2009
26,987
147
25,137
Country
United States
Location
United States
So to summarize, RATT55 is a test bed which tries to extrapolate (calculated guess) radar signature of the unknown side of an aircraft by using known aircraft signature (library) database.

Idea is that distance between front and back radar (bistatic) on the RATT55 will use the basic trigonometry in a highly complex way to guess the target signature, not only that but will calculate radar signature of the unexposed side.
Essentially -- yes.

I can guess there has to been lot of classified scientific detail missing to explain this magic because right now it’s sound like a skunks works another wet dream.
You guessed correctly. And we have a better than most history of making 'wet dreams' tactical reality. Underestimate US at your peril. After all, no one expected the F-117, right?

There is a limited advantage in mission planning for friendly aircraft, but to expect other stealth are going DOA. I don’t think so.
Sure, other air forces can believe their 'stealth' are not DOA. Only one way to find out.

Stealth reduces radar signature, doesn’t make aircraft invisible.
We have never said 'invisible'.

I am assuming most radars algorithms are smart enough to highlight something move at 500 mph in the sky regardless the size of it.
Yes, it is called the Doppler component. But I have challenged this claim on this forum YEARS ago.

Every radar system have a filter. Inside that filter can be many things that are used to remove A target from display. Usually, as %99 of the time, the first disqualifying criteria is amplitude. We are not talking about highly specialized radar systems like weather and airborne wildlife tracking. Amplitude is strength of echo or those voltage spikes I showed earlier. In order to calculate the Doppler component of EACH voltage spike, I have to remove that amplitude disqualifier meaning I have to process literally every return inside the radar beam. A specific radar system does this -- radar altimeter.


The Delay Doppler/SAR altimeter differs from a conventional radar altimeter in that it exploits coherent processing of groups of transmitted pulses. It is not pulse-limited like classical radar altimeters, so the full Doppler bandwidth is exploited to make the most efficient use of the power reflected from the surface.​
Delay Doppler/SAR altimetrer “stares” at each resolved along-track cell as the radar passes overhead for as long as that particular cell is illuminated. Note that each cell is viewed over a larger fraction of the antenna beam than the pulse-limited; thus more data is gathered, which leads to substantial benefits (e.g. it uses most of the power received).​


The key innovation in the delay/Doppler radar altimeter is delay compensation, analogous to range curvature correction in a burst-mode synthetic aperture radar (SAR). Following delay compensation, height estimates are sorted by Doppler frequency, and integrated in parallel. More equivalent looks are accumulated than in a conventional altimeter.​

Note the time of the IEEE source -- Sept 1998. So this idea is decades old. It also mean that I am not pulling my arguments out of thin air.

The reason why the F-22 is disqualified, despite its high Doppler component, is because its average RCS amplitude is similar to that of an insect or a bird, aka 'too low' to display. The radar system does not care if inside the radar beam echoes, there is one 'insect' or one million 'insects'. As long as the 'insect' have a certain amplitude, it is disqualified from further processing. But now, in order to detect the F-22, the system must remove the amplitude criteria and process all those one million 'insects' signals.

You are looking at a GLOBAL retrofit of all military radar systems, ground and airborne. Air forces that must import their defense may not benefit because their sellers may not want to give them that edge. Those that can retrofit, now must essentially redesign the entire avionics system, or at least %50 of the avionics package, of the variety of platforms they fly. Now we are looking at literally years of R/D and manufacture.

This is why what the RATT55 does is dangerous for our 'stealth' adversaries. And am not going further than that. Sorry. :enjoy:
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom