What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

.
Why is this even an point of argument? The source that claimed that the J-20 has no gun also stated that the aircraft has a space for a cannon should the need arise.

It is merely an issue of installing a cannon if a sortie requires such armament.
 
.
And WHY are all these sickening gun matters filling up this thread?

Does anyone intend to troll this thread??? :offtopic:


Just leave it behind: exists or not / be useful or not!!!
 
. .
if all WVRAAM missiles will expired and you're opponents will have WVRAAM what should you do, with respect i disagree with you sir, Gun still have a worth @Beast
Flee.... Dont make stupid Sacrifice. Enemy wth modern WVRAAM plus helmet mounted sight vs gun is sure one sided victory.

Days of vietnam war air battle is long over.. Technology improves, warfare evolves. We cannot continue cling onto the past.
 
.
As usual...Those with no military experience speaks the loudest about subjects they know nothing about.
 
.
Flee.... Dont make stupid Sacrifice. Enemy wth modern WVRAAM plus helmet mounted sight vs gun is sure one sided victory.

Days of vietnam war air battle is long over.. Technology improves, warfare evolves. We cannot continue cling onto the past.
you repeating same big mistake as USA did in Vietnam war, they think WVRAAM battle had been over and emphasis on BVR battle, and reduce F-4 maneuverability/agility and paid the price for that, so i kindly disagree with you, gun still worths in future battles for last resort @Beast
 
.
As usual...Those with no military experience speaks the loudest about subjects they know nothing about.
And you keep on trolling the Chinese thread along with Akasa / SinoSoldier.

Why don't guys fill up the USA threads?

I can care less YOUR opinions here!

Optional gun pod @LKJ86 sir


Its a important matter @samsara
Important or not it's everyone own OPINION.

And there won't be conclusive info on thing like this, so enough is enough just leave it behind, no need to fill up this thread with the gun matter !

@Beast please do not feed the trolling acts to spoil this thread!
 
.
Flee.... Dont make stupid Sacrifice. Enemy wth modern WVRAAM plus helmet mounted sight vs gun is sure one sided victory.

Days of vietnam war air battle is long over.. Technology improves, warfare evolves. We cannot continue cling onto the past.
This is exactly what engineers at Lockeed Martin thought before the Vietnam war as well. And guess what, they were wrong. Running out of WVRAAMs would make the J-20 extremely vulnerable in combat ... a gun would help alleviate this worst case scenario. Remember the J-20 is an air superiority fighter. The fact that TVC is being tested within the PLAAF should show you that WVR combat is still partially here to stay!
 
Last edited:
.
The best use of gun would be use of it for low value targets like drones but for that China don't need to send J20
 
.
And you keep on trolling the Chinese thread along with Akasa / SinoSoldier.

Why don't guys fill up the USA threads?

I can care less YOUR opinions here!


Important or not it's everyone own OPINION.

And there won't be conclusive info on thing like this, so enough is enough just leave it behind, no need to fill up this thread with the gun matter !

@Beast please do not feed the trolling acts to spoil this thread!
this is not a trolling but important consideration, and we are discussing J-20 capabilities that why J-20 still haven't gun and what philosophy behind the J-20's gun elimination and last you're avoiding this important issue, now who is trolling @samsara

This is exactly what engineers at Lockeed Martin thought before the Vietnam war as well. And guess what, they were wrong. Running out of WVRAAMs would make the J-20 extremely vulnerable in combat ... a gun would help alleviate this worst case scenario. Remember the J-20 is an air superiority fighter. The fact that TVC is being tested within the PLAAF should show you that WVR combat is still partially here to stay!
please correct sir F-4 was a McDonald Douglas product not Lockheed Martin product @Figaro :angel:
 
.
Flee.... Dont make stupid Sacrifice. Enemy wth modern WVRAAM plus helmet mounted sight vs gun is sure one sided victory.

Days of vietnam war air battle is long over.. Technology improves, warfare evolves. We cannot continue cling onto the past.

A gun allows you to take out targets you sneak up on without wasting a missile, is insurance in a dog fight, and allows strafing for air support. All at cheap cost.

this is not a trolling but important consideration, and we are discussing J-20 capabilities that why J-20 still haven't gun and what philosophy behind the J-20's gun elimination and last you're avoiding this important issue, now who is trolling @samsara


please correct sir F-4 was a McDonald Douglas product not Lockheed Martin product @Figaro :angel:

The rules of this forum are either agree with me or you're trolling apparently.
 
.
The rules of this forum are either agree with me or you're trolling apparently.
you're not Mod, senior analyst/defense expert here on PDF to agree with you, you're just troll, i just give my sane opinion @SME11B :hitwall::hitwall::hitwall::hitwall:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
We cannot continue cling onto the past.
Really? What wise words -- NOT.

How many times in this forum have you guys posted images of Chinese soldiers practicing hand-to-hand combat techniques? The rifle is not good enough? But never mind soldiers. Pilots are essentially 'special operations' combatants. In the sky, the environment requires extraordinary skills and knowledge which inevitably only a few can assimilate, few have the physical attributes to endure the stresses of combat flying, and even fewer that can handle both. Combat pilots are indeed 'special operations' combatants in the same philosophical mold as ground forces have their specialists.

Now we look at the tools of specialists. For the ground forces, the special operations member carries with him an assortment of tools that ordinary infantry do not have. He will have a main weapon like the standard issued rifle and a pistol. Why a pistol? The pistol is shorter range and less accurate. Further, he will also be trained in hand-to-hand combat training that an infantry soldier do not have. Why hand-to-hand combat training? Because of the environment that the special operations soldier must be in. He is far from support so his tools must be as versatile as he can possible carry with him. The last resort weapon is himself -- what nature gave him.

This is why the fighter aircraft have two levels of ranged missiles like the radar guided AMRAAM and infrared guided AIM9. The gun is the weapon of last resort or when a situation requires the pilot to make positive identification which necessitate a distance that missiles are not feasible. Radar and infrared are not identifiers, the pilot is. Sensors tells of an object but it is the human that determines the details of that object for further classification and actions. Radar and infrared sensors cannot tell if the aircraft's insignia is Chinese or American or Russian. The pilot does that. When the pilot is required to make positive identification, the gun is the weapon of ONLY resort.

Just like the ground forces special operations experts, combat pilots must have as versatile tools as possible because of the environment they operates in. The SEAL have a rifle, a pistol, and hand-to-hand combat training. The fighter pilot should have similar gradations of weapons available to him to deal with situations that he may encounter.
 
.
Really? What wise words -- NOT.

How many times in this forum have you guys posted images of Chinese soldiers practicing hand-to-hand combat techniques? The rifle is not good enough? But never mind soldiers. Pilots are essentially 'special operations' combatants. In the sky, the environment requires extraordinary skills and knowledge which inevitably only a few can assimilate, few have the physical attributes to endure the stresses of combat flying, and even fewer that can handle both. Combat pilots are indeed 'special operations' combatants in the same philosophical mold as ground forces have their specialists.

Now we look at the tools of specialists. For the ground forces, the special operations member carries with him an assortment of tools that ordinary infantry do not have. He will have a main weapon like the standard issued rifle and a pistol. Why a pistol? The pistol is shorter range and less accurate. Further, he will also be trained in hand-to-hand combat training that an infantry soldier do not have. Why hand-to-hand combat training? Because of the environment that the special operations soldier must be in. He is far from support so his tools must be as versatile as he can possible carry with him. The last resort weapon is himself -- what nature gave him.

This is why the fighter aircraft have two levels of ranged missiles like the radar guided AMRAAM and infrared guided AIM9. The gun is the weapon of last resort or when a situation requires the pilot to make positive identification which necessitate a distance that missiles are not feasible. Radar and infrared are not identifiers, the pilot is. Sensors tells of an object but it is the human that determines the details of that object for further classification and actions. Radar and infrared sensors cannot tell if the aircraft's insignia is Chinese or American or Russian. The pilot does that. When the pilot is required to make positive identification, the gun is the weapon of ONLY resort.

Just like the ground forces special operations experts, combat pilots must have as versatile tools as possible because of the environment they operates in. The SEAL have a rifle, a pistol, and hand-to-hand combat training. The fighter pilot should have similar gradations of weapons available to him to deal with situations that he may encounter.
@Beast will not understand your sane logic and commonsense @gambit sir:angel:
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom