What's new

China Close To Testing Next-Gen Fighter - a serious failing in U.S. intelligence

gpit

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
3,954
Reaction score
0
Bradley Perrett/Beijing

A Chinese fighter of nominally the same technology generation as the Lockheed Martin F-22 will soon enter flight testing, while a jet airlifter larger than the Airbus A400M should be unveiled by year-end.

Beijing’s fighter announcement suggests a serious failing in U.S. intelligence assessments, mocking a July 16 statement of U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates that China would have no fifth-generation fighters by 2020. Industrial competition looks more remote than strategic competition, however, since China will want to fill domestic requirements before offering the aircraft abroad, even if it judges export sales to be a wise policy.

The new fighter “is currently under development,” says Gen. He Weirong, deputy air force chief. “[It] may soon undertake its first flight, quickly enter flight testing and then quickly equip the forces.

“According to the current situation, [the entry into service] may take another eight to 10 years,” he adds.

No details of the aircraft were given, but it is almost certainly designed for supersonic cruise without afterburning. In April, Adm. Wu Shengli, the navy chief, listed supercruising fighters among equipment that his service needed. Notably, all the other equipment on his wish list looked quite achievable by the end of the next decade, matching the timing that the air force now suggests for the fighter.

China classifies aircraft of the F-22’s technology level as fourth-generation fighters, although they are called fifth-generation aircraft in the West. China’s current advanced fighter, the J-10, is locally called a third-generation aircraft, which in Chinese terms means that it is comparable with the Lockheed Martin F-16.

Work on “the fourth-generation aircraft is now proceeding intensely,” He says.

Whether the upcoming fighter is really comparable with the F-22 remains to be seen. Low radar reflectivity would not be surprising, since aircraft and missiles with stealthy shapes are now popping up in many countries, including South Korea as recently as last month (AW&ST Oct. 26-Nov. 2, p. 42). But sensor performance, information fusion and maximum supercruise speed would also be assessed critically in measuring a claim to have caught up with technology levels that the U.S. did not deploy until 2005.

The existence of a Chinese fifth-generation fighter, usually tagged J-XX, has been rumored for years without official confirmation.

If the aircraft does go into service before 2020, then at that time China may well have jumped past Britain, France and other Western European countries in terms of deployed, domestically developed combat-aircraft technology. That will depend on how quickly those countries move to field combat drones to replace current strike aircraft, says Andrew Brookes of the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Brookes takes seriously the Chinese objective of technology equivalent to the F-22, and he sees no reason to doubt that the F-22 would be the standard against which they would judge their design. The know-how can be imported.

“The Russians have the technology and the Chinese have the money,” he says. “If they really set that as a target, then I think they can do it.”

The aircraft may not bother Western manufacturers in export markets, Brookes suggests, simply because an equivalent of the F-22 would be a destabilizing export that China would be prefer to keep to itself.

Even if China decides that it wants to export the fighter, Lockheed Martin should by then be well entrenched with the F-35, which should be mature and reliable at that point. Other manufactures may not be so well placed, however.

Gen. He made his remarks during an interview on China Central Television as part of the celebrations of the 60th anniversary of the air force of the People’s Republic of China. (The general’s surname is pronounced as “her” but without the “r.”)

China is probably working on two fifth-generation concepts, says Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center. One of those concepts, appearing most commonly in bits and pieces of evidence that have turned up from time to time, would be a heavy twin-engine fighter probably of about the same size as the F-22. The other is a single-engine aircraft probably closer to the Lockheed Martin F-35.

Gen. He could be referring to either of the aircraft when predicting an entry into service during the next decade. Fisher’s bet is that he is talking about the twin-engine concept.

Like Brookes, Fisher believes China is realistically aiming at the F-22’s technology level. “One has to assume that the People’s Liberation Army is confident in its projections, as it almost never makes such comments about future military programs, especially one that has been as closely held as its next-generation fighter.

“As such, one has to be asking very hard questions: How did the U.S. intelligence community get this one wrong? And inasmuch as no one expects the F-35 to replace the F-22 in the air superiority role, is it time to acknowledge that F-22 production termination is premature and that a much higher number is needed to sustain deterrence in Asia?”

In his July 16 speech, Gates said that even in 2025 China would have but a handful of fifth-generation aircraft.

The new Chinese fighter could come from the Chengdu or Shenyang plants of Avic Defense.

Gen. He says the Chinese air force plans to emphasize development of four capabilities: reconnaissance and early warning, air strike, strategic supply, and air and missile defense.

The J-10 began large-scale service entry in 2006, state media say.

When Wu raised the prospect of a supercruising fighter, an easy answer seemed to be an advanced version of the J-10. That looks less likely now that He describes the future concept as a full generation ahead of the J-10.

“I believe the Chinese have a difficult road if their design is tied to the J-10,” says a U.S. Air Force officer involved in the development of the F-35. “Significantly reduced signature requires more than coatings. It requires an integrated design philosophy with the right shaping, the right structure and the right surface coatings.”

Fisher assumes that China is developing improved fourth-generation fighters in parallel with the fifth generation.

The existence of the airlifter has been known for several years, if only because pictures of it have appeared fleetingly in presentations by the Chinese aviation conglomerate Avic.

As expected, it turns out to be a product of Avic’s large-airplane subsidiary, Avic Aircraft and, more specifically, of the subsidiary’s core plant, Xi’an Aircraft.

Avic Aircraft General Manager Hu Xiaofeng says the airlifter is in the 200-metric-ton class and will be unveiled at the end of this year.

In fact, its design has already unveiled in pictures shown by state media. The four-engine aircraft adopts the universal high-wing, T-tail configuration. The wing is mounted on top of the circular body, rather than passing through a deep segment of it and cutting out much of the usable cross-section. In that respect it is like the A400M, Ilyushin Il-76 and Kawasaki C-X but unlike the C-17, whose embedded wing presents less frontal area.

The main gear of the Chinese aircraft is housed in very protuberant sponsons, like those of the C-17.

A photograph of the cockpit shows five electronic displays of moderate size and conventional transport-style control columns. Engines are not revealed but would presumably be imported from Russia. A wind-tunnel model shows the engines are enclosed in long nacelles, like those of the Perm PS-90 from Russia.

The PS-90 has a standard maximum thrust of 35,300 lb. in its latest version. The C-17, with a gross weight of 265 tons, is powered by four Pratt & Whitney F117 engines of 40,400 lb. thrust.

The airlifter’s fuselage appears to be of conventional metal construction. The aircraft will be significantly larger than the A400M, which has a 141-metric-ton gross weight.

Hu says it has been independently developed in China. However, his parent company, Avic, has a long history of cooperation with Ukrainian airlifter specialist Antonov.


With David A. Fulghum in Washington.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...China%20Close To Testing Next-Gen Fighter
 
.
Why U.S. intelligence fails again?

I guess this is because there are too many people in the US like Mr. Gates and his follower Mr. Gambit, either due to their ideological prejudice and cold war mentality, or their judgment is compromised/suffocated by behaviors of that type of people surrounding them.

It could also be that they subconsciously believe Asians are inferior to Westerners, even though some of the believers are Asians themselves, due to long, painful, and dark history of Western oppression and exploitation against Asians.
 
.
is it time to acknowledge that F-22 production termination is premature and that a much higher number is needed to sustain deterrence in Asia?”

Hmmmmmmmm this sure doesn't sound like someone using the bogeyman to continue the F22 productions dose it now:whistle::usflag:
 
Last edited:
.
Why U.S. intelligence fails again?

I guess this is because there are too many people in the US like Mr. Gates and his follower Mr. Gambit, either due to their ideological prejudice and cold war mentality, or their judgment is compromised/suffocated by behaviors of that type of people surrounding them.

It could also be that they subconsciously believe Asians are inferior to Westerners, even though some of the believers are Asians themselves, due to long, painful, and dark history of Western oppression and exploitation against Asians.
May be you should aks why did Soviet and Chinese intelligence services failed to anticipate the F-117. Or better yet, why both failed to anticipate the sudden and ignoble collapse of the Soviets which led to a reformation of China which pretty much discredited communism?

:lol:
 
.
May be you should aks why did Soviet and Chinese intelligence services failed to anticipate the F-117. Or better yet, why both failed to anticipate the sudden and ignoble collapse of the Soviets which led to a reformation of China which pretty much discredited communism?

:lol:

So, according to you, Soviet and USA are essentially the same?

A hilarious parallel from you!

:rofl:
 
.
I think everybody on Defence.pk even knew something like this is in the works. I doubt they were caught off guard. Just usual scaremongering to trump up the sales of American hardware.

China still lacks the capability (and hasn't even shown interest in acquiring it) to take a big warring fleet to American shores for an invasion. The only threat the westerners face from these new Chinese capabilities is if they intervene in China's regional conflicts which they CAN just sit out.
 
.
So, according to you, Soviet and USA are essentially the same?

A hilarious parallel from you!

:rofl:
We did not collapse. The laugh is on you.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...dline=China Close To Testing Next-Gen Fighter
“Significantly reduced signature requires more than coatings. It requires an integrated design philosophy with the right shaping, the right structure and the right surface coatings.”
We have yet to see even an F-117 equivalent from either Russia or China. Body shaping from angle faceting was difficult enough for US. The F-117 had no radar, used a modified F404 engine (F-18) for propulsion (2 engines), has only a GPS enhanced INS, and a flight control system from the F-16. That mean body shaping remains the most difficult part of creating a 'stealth' aircraft. Due to physical limiations, the 'official' unofficial standard for 'stealth' is less than one meter squared at between 200-250 km radar range. Any error in body shaping, either through angular faceting or continuous curvatures, that result in higher than one meter squared (F-16), will have the design in the same class as the F-16.
 
.
I think everybody on Defence.pk even knew something like this is in the works. I doubt they were caught off guard. Just usual scaremongering to trump up the sales of American hardware.

China still lacks the capability (and hasn't even shown interest in acquiring it) to take a big warring fleet to American shores for an invasion. The only threat the westerners face from these new Chinese capabilities is if they intervene in China's regional conflicts which they CAN just sit out.
Ask yourself if AVIATION WEEK anticipated the F-117 way back when. If not, and they did not, then why should we give the magazine any more credibility about this supposedly Chinese 'stealth' fighter? The reason why the Chinese jumped on this article is because the authors made an inflammatory comment about the US, nothing more. No one even gave Gates the benefit that perhaps he made his comment based upon information not available to AVIATION WEEK.
 
.
We did not collapse. The laugh is on you.

Cheap derail from intelligence argument.

BTW, US collapse every 4 years, don't you remember that? :lol:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...dline=China Close To Testing Next-Gen Fighter

We have yet to see even an F-117 equivalent from either Russia or China. Body shaping from angle faceting was difficult enough for US. The F-117 had no radar, used a modified F404 engine (F-18) for propulsion (2 engines), has only a GPS enhanced INS, and a flight control system from the F-16. That mean body shaping remains the most difficult part of creating a 'stealth' aircraft. Due to physical limiations, the 'official' unofficial standard for 'stealth' is less than one meter squared at between 200-250 km radar range. Any error in body shaping, either through angular faceting or continuous curvatures, that result in higher than one meter squared (F-16), will have the design in the same class as the F-16.

According to this, though can't verify the authentication as usual, parallel development claimed by the aviation weekly is corroborated. http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-photos-multimedia/38822-falcon-brigade.html

J-10 has claimed a cross section of 0.3 m^2 (from originally 5m^2) after coating and air-inlet improvement. Again, it's not official, but a "leak".

Anyway, enjoy your denial. I fully believe we both can live for two or more years to see the evolution of the reality. :wave:
 
.
Cheap derail from intelligence argument.

BTW, US collapse every 4 years, don't you remember that? :lol:



According to this, though can't verify the authentication as usual, parallel development claimed by the aviation weekly is corroborated. http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-photos-multimedia/38822-falcon-brigade.html

J-10 has claimed a cross section of 0.3 m^2 (from originally 5m^2) after coating and air-inlet improvement. Again, it's not official, but a "leak".

Anyway, enjoy your denial. I fully believe we both can live for two or more years to see the evolution of the reality. :wave:

Wait, that's just a spoof from the series. The real RCS I believe is actually 3m^2
 
.
Cheap derail from intelligence argument.
The article made a ridiculous and illogical claim, that US intelligence 'failed' to anticipate an F-22 equivalent from China. Based upon what? That a Chinese said there is an F-22 equivalent in the works? How do we know that Gates dismissed the Chinese claim based upon intelligence the public does not have access? But wait...Because the Chinese general made some statement to the contrary at a later time, voila, therefore the Chinese claim is superior and that US intelligence 'failed'. If the US SecDef at a later date then make another statement that contradict the Chinese general, would that be acceptable? Then another Chinese general say something else, then a USAF general say something else, and so on...

Evidence, my boy...Evidence...

BTW, US collapse every 4 years, don't you remember that?
Nonsense...The US have a peaceful transition of power regularly. Collapse is when one cannot and does not rise again.

:lol:

According to this, though can't verify the authentication as usual, parallel development claimed by the aviation weekly is corroborated. http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-photos-multimedia/38822-falcon-brigade.html

J-10 has claimed a cross section of 0.3 m^2 (from originally 5m^2) after coating and air-inlet improvement. Again, it's not official, but a "leak".

Anyway, enjoy your denial. I fully believe we both can live for two or more years to see the evolution of the reality. :wave:
Right...Another 'claim' or 'leak'. Who is really living in denial here? This is getting to be like the PUKE-FA.
 
.
Why U.S. intelligence fails again?

I guess this is because there are too many people in the US like Mr. Gates and his follower Mr. Gambit, either due to their ideological prejudice and cold war mentality, or their judgment is compromised/suffocated by behaviors of that type of people surrounding them. ..
Sorry, gpit, but Mr. Gambit might need a special visa to take on that role...:hitwall:
 
.
Cheap derail from intelligence argument.

BTW, US collapse every 4 years, don't you remember that? :lol:



According to this, though can't verify the authentication as usual, parallel development claimed by the aviation weekly is corroborated. http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-photos-multimedia/38822-falcon-brigade.html

J-10 has claimed a cross section of 0.3 m^2 (from originally 5m^2) after coating and air-inlet improvement. Again, it's not official, but a "leak".

Anyway, enjoy your denial. I fully believe we both can live for two or more years to see the evolution of the reality. :wave:

Mr Gambit, "sir," Indians are you enemies too so why don't you go to their sub forums and invade. Go preach to them that the "Arihunt" is incapable of deterring any external forces, and that it completely defies the laws of physics as it disobeys buoyancy and its density is far lower than that of water's even with the chamber filled with sea water so it impossible to force sink. Go tell them that, with "all due respect," sir.
 
.
Cheap derail from intelligence argument.

BTW, US collapse every 4 years, don't you remember that? :lol:



According to this, though can't verify the authentication as usual, parallel development claimed by the aviation weekly is corroborated. http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-photos-multimedia/38822-falcon-brigade.html

J-10 has claimed a cross section of 0.3 m^2 (from originally 5m^2) after coating and air-inlet improvement. Again, it's not official, but a "leak".

Anyway, enjoy your denial. I fully believe we both can live for two or more years to see the evolution of the reality. :wave:

gpit buddy, well said, I also fully believe you can live to see the

evolution of the reality, HaHaHa, but i highly doubted about uncle

gambit, after all, age is catching up with him

:china::cheers::china:
 
.
Back
Top Bottom