F-22 vs J-20 - aka USA-made jet fighters vs China-made jet fighters

[Deino]

It depends on both stealth and avionics, f-22 most likely has better stealth given what info is available and probably better radar but I don't know about ESM and j-20 has that EOTS. I also doubt the avionics will match f-22/35, this is their first generation stealth and that also includes the stealth of the radar and things that are not so readily seen. I think j-20 will be detected first but j-20 will be more difficult to find than f-22 is used to. F-35s and other sensors will play a big role and helping f-22 find j-20 and teamwork will be more important but f-35 and all the other networked sensors have had this in mind for a while now. J-20 will use its better range and long range weapons to try to sneak in and shoot from as far as possible and try to make it back. I don't think j-20 wants to tangle with f-22/35.

Please DO NOT use bolt text ... just the regular text, not need to hype anything.

 

[rcrmj]

there are only three countries in this world that invest heavily and continously in the research of future air combat, they are U.S, China and Russia. Regarding Russia, they are quite advanced in air comabt research field, however due to its financial and industry supply chain problem, most of its researches cannot be materialized. China on the other hand is doing much of the catch-up works, with strong finance, technological know-how, compete industrial supply chain and strong national will, is doing quite good atm. However, U.S is still leading by margin.

air combat isnt something you can understand by placing one aircraft vs another, it does not work in that way. Its a holistic system consist of different types of sensors, platforms, weapons and tactics``````````the situation in the air today is quite different from 10 years ago, most seemly "reasonable" or common sense may not apply to today's air combat now`````to detect one stealth plane is not one radar's job, but a collective result of the system. Stealth target cannot be detected is a popular misunderstanding, its far from the truce```to put easily, we can say that a stealth fighter reduces enemy's radar detection range, because the reduction is so significent, so it totally changed the ways of how to fight in real air battle in today's time.

J-20 is a revolutionary platform to PLAAF, but its far from perfection``and it is also applies to F-22 too, as it was revolutionary in late 90s and early 00s, but cant say the same in 2018. As far as I know, to PLAAF, it's most fear is not F-22 but hords of F-35 + EF-18G which was developed with the latest techs and knowledge of our time.

most people still imagine that 5th gen information centric air battle would be fought just like before, but the reality is otherwise.

anyway for the sake of the thread, here are few specs of J-20 that I am "allowed" to know
its AESA radar:
2200 T/R modules with 5% deviation`````
range: can "burn" through 170km of 0.1m2 target with 10% deviation`````and F-22 type target with 1XX KM with 5% deviation````` it has few LPI modes```
jamming and spoofing: XX modes

Its optical sensors: 360 degree vision, no blind spot```````can detect F-22 target at the range of 1XX, a great supplyment to its radar in case has been jammed by professional EW fighters``

Its air-to-air weapons: 4 PL-15 with effective range of 2XXkm, or 6 PL-12G (with folded wings) with effective range of 1XXkm for its main weapon bay; 2 PL-10 with effective range of 27km with 10% deviation for its side bay```

air-to-ground weapons: various guided bombs range from 30KM to 150KM```anti-radiation missile with range of 150KM (based on PL-15)```

air-to-sea weapons: various guided bombs range from 30KM to 150KM```and specially designed anti-ship stealth missile with range of 2XXKM```

for its expertnal load, it can carry 8 tons worth of fuel and weapons unders its 4 stations under the main wing`````


they are (around 2X units in service) currently using hybird Russian engine ```new WS-10 is at final stage of the certificate`````but WS-15 wont be ready for at least another 5-8 years`````

 

[SME11B]

there are only three countries in this world that invest heavily and continously in the research of future air combat, they are U.S, China and Russia. Regarding Russia, they are quite advanced in air comabt research field, however due to its financial and industry supply chain problem, most of its researches cannot be materialized. China on the other hand is doing much of the catch-up works, with strong finance, technological know-how, compete industrial supply chain and strong national will, is doing quite good atm. However, U.S is still leading by margin.



air combat isnt something you can understand by placing one aircraft vs another, it does not work in that way. Its a holistic system consist of different types of sensors, platforms, weapons and tactics``````````the situation in the air today is quite different from 10 years ago, most seemly "reasonable" or common sense may not apply to today's air combat now`````to detect one stealth plane is not one radar's job, but a collective result of the system. Stealth target cannot be detected is a popular misunderstanding, its far from the truce```to put easily, we can say that a stealth fighter reduces enemy's radar detection range, because the reduction is so significent, so it totally changed the ways of how to fight in real air battle in today's time.



J-20 is a revolutionary platform to PLAAF, but its far from perfection``and it is also applies to F-22 too, as it was revolutionary in late 90s and early 00s, but cant say the same in 2018. As far as I know, to PLAAF, it's most fear is not F-22 but hords of F-35 + EF-18G which was developed with the latest techs and knowledge of our time.

F-35 in a high end war will have f-22 backup and f-35 is designed to complement f-22. F-35 as of now but maybe not in the future has a number of sensors and avionics f-22 lacks and f-22 has the raw performance and some stealth differences and extra missiles f-35 lacks.

most people still imagine that 5th gen information centric air battle would be fought just like before, but the reality is otherwise.

anyway for the sake of the thread, here are few specs of J-20 that I am "allowed" to know
its AESA radar:
2200 T/R modules with 5% deviation`````
range: can "burn" through 170km of 0.1m2 target with 10% deviation`````and F-22 type target with 1XX KM with 5% deviation````` it has few LPI modes```
jamming and spoofing: XX modes

I will have to assume "burn" means in a focused beaming mode. If these numbers are true than f-22 still has an edge in radar range and power despite having a smaller radar. Also I don't know what "XX" means and how they know how far they can detect f-22. Are the basing it on -40 dbsm?

Its optical sensors: 360 degree vision, no blind spot```````can detect F-22 target at the range of 1XX, a great supplyment to its radar in case has been jammed by professional EW fighters``

I assume you mean the maws or das or whatever it is since little is known about its functions. Again same as above don't know what xx means and how they know f-22 range.

Its air-to-air weapons: 4 PL-15 with effective range of 2XXkm, or 6 PL-12G (with folded wings) with effective range of 1XXkm for its main weapon bay; 2 PL-10 with effective range of 27km with 10% deviation for its side bay```



air-to-ground weapons: various guided bombs range from 30KM to 150KM```anti-radiation missile with range of 150KM (based on PL-15)```

Chinese HARM? Does it have a name?

air-to-sea weapons: various guided bombs range from 30KM to 150KM```and specially designed anti-ship stealth missile with range of 2XXKM```

for its expertnal load, it can carry 8 tons worth of fuel and weapons unders its 4 stations under the main wing`````

Is the 25,000 lbs of internal fuel and 1100km combat radius the official numbers now?

they are (around 2X units in service) currently using hybird Russian engine ```new WS-10 is at final stage of the certificate`````but WS-15 wont be ready for at least another 5-8 years`````

F-35 in a high end war will have f-22 backup and f-35 is designed to complement f-22. F-35 as of now but maybe not in the future has a number of sensors and avionics f-22 lacks and f-22 has the raw performance and some stealth differences and extra missiles f-35 lacks.
I will have to assume "burn" means in a focused beaming mode. If these numbers are true than f-22 still has an edge in radar range and power despite having a smaller radar. Also I don't know what "XX" means and how they know how far they can detect f-22. Are the basing it on -40 dbsm?
I assume you mean the maws or das or whatever it is since little is known about its functions. Again same as above don't know what xx means and how they know f-22 range.
Chinese HARM? Does it have a name?
Is the 25,000 lbs of internal fuel and 1100km combat radius the official numbers now?
I was expecting sooner. Are they still building j-20s? I thought there was some sort of hold up after about 8 prototypes and 20 or so early models.

 

[kungfugymnast]

It depends on both stealth and avionics, f-22 most likely has better stealth given what info is available and probably better radar but I don't know about ESM and j-20 has that EOTS. I also doubt the avionics will match f-22/35, this is their first generation stealth and that also includes the stealth of the radar and things that are not so readily seen. I think j-20 will be detected first but j-20 will be more difficult to find than f-22 is used to. F-35s and other sensors will play a big role and helping f-22 find j-20 and teamwork will be more important but f-35 and all the other networked sensors have had this in mind for a while now. J-20 will use its better range and long range weapons to try to sneak in and shoot from as far as possible and try to make it back. I don't think j-20 wants to tangle with f-22/35.

Scenario should be this way, the US sent in wings of F22s to perform sweep while F35s for air to ground sorties. China satellites would have spotted these stealth planes and scrambled J20, J10, j11. The j10 and J11 will serve as decoy, ECM to lure in the F22. The J20 would take flank attempting to get a track on radar looking for flaw radar signature angles. When comes to war, it is not about want to tangle but a must before the enemies get into effective missile range. US satellites above Chinese territory might be taken out when war started limiting US Intel.

 

[SME11B]

Scenario should be this way, the US sent in wings of F22s to perform sweep while F35s for air to ground sorties. China satellites would have spotted these stealth planes and scrambled J20, J10, j11. The j10 and J11 will serve as decoy, ECM to lure in the F22. The J20 would take flank attempting to get a track on radar looking for flaw radar signature angles. When comes to war, it is not about want to tangle but a must before the enemies get into effective missile range. US satellites above Chinese territory might be taken out when war started limiting US Intel.

Destruction of satellites can go both ways, even sm-3 can do it. It will be hard to ambush a plane what is harder to spot and has better eyes than you. This plan seems to gamble on the US pilots being very unlucky or stupid. The firing of an aim-120 is far more likely to be the first than tracked than just an inferior angle, J-20 has even more of those. China at this point can leverage it's home ground advantage and try to outnumber the f-22/35 combo. Everything else puts them at a disadvantage. They cannot out number them yet or enough in the near future most likely unless they put up a very large portion of their fleet all at once and then the unfavorable exchange rates kick in. It may not be worth it even for China.

 

[kungfugymnast]

Destruction of satellites can go both ways, even sm-3 can do it. It will be hard to ambush a plane what is harder to spot and has better eyes than you. This plan seems to gamble on the US pilots being very unlucky or stupid. The firing of an aim-120 is far more likely to be the first than tracked than just an inferior angle, J-20 has even more of those. China at this point can leverage it's home ground advantage and try to outnumber the f-22/35 combo. Everything else puts them at a disadvantage. They cannot out number them yet or enough in the near future most likely unless they put up a very large portion of their fleet all at once and then the unfavorable exchange rates kick in. It may not be worth it even for China.

The first encounter most likely over the sea. If F35s already reached land area, that means they would have launched some air to ground JSOW and taken out strategic ground targets mostly radar and SAM sites. So most likely the first stealth air warfare would take place at sea. F22s flown in from Japan bases while F35s from Japan and aircraft carriers. Both sides would have to rely on visual pods to search for targets. Do long range IR guided missiles like R-27T/ET work better than radar guided missiles at range above 10Nm & below 20Nm if a stealth target being tracked. Frontal vs frontal engagement between stealth fighters might go into less than 10 or 5nm if AESA failed to capture RCS.

US might use their F-18s for decoy and to lure enemy fighters away from stealth strike groups flying in from another direction. Surviving conventional fighters will carry out air sweep and strikes. Based on US current inventory, they could allocate 4 carriers to China campaign.

 

[rcrmj]

F-35 in a high end war will have f-22 backup and f-35 is designed to complement f-22. F-35 as of now but maybe not in the future has a number of sensors and avionics f-22 lacks and f-22 has the raw performance and some stealth differences and extra missiles f-35 lacks.
I will have to assume "burn" means in a focused beaming mode. If these numbers are true than f-22 still has an edge in radar range and power despite having a smaller radar. Also I don't know what "XX" means and how they know how far they can detect f-22. Are the basing it on -40 dbsm?
I assume you mean the maws or das or whatever it is since little is known about its functions. Again same as above don't know what xx means and how they know f-22 range.
Chinese HARM? Does it have a name?
Is the 25,000 lbs of internal fuel and 1100km combat radius the official numbers now?
I was expecting sooner. Are they still building j-20s? I thought there was some sort of hold up after about 8 prototypes and 20 or so early models.

according to security code and regulations, they are not allowed to disclose the excet number so I used "XX"```

they have developed dozens advanced target drone aircrafts, to emulate various America's, Russia's and others aircraft and missiles````few years ago, they have developed a stealth target drone aircraft that has RCS lesser than 0.01m2 to mock F-22, and B2``````well, they say, China and U.S's intelligence knows each other much better than we know```

in 5th gen information centric air combat, the "raw performance" isnt as significent as it is to 3rd/4th gen conventional air-battle````for example, super sonic cruise is a double edged sword, as it can extend our side's missile's None escape zoon, but it will also extend enemy's missile's range, and also a super crusising target will be lit like a red-light district on enemy's optical sensor`````

they are building J-20s according to plan, and there is no hold up, the speed is slow due to parts supply problem````there are doezens suppliers are envolved, few suppliers are still struggling to decrease the rate of final product's deficiency````some parts' final good product rate is less than 25%``````

 

[SME11B]

according to security code and regulations, they are not allowed to disclose the excet number so I used "XX"```

they have developed dozens advanced target drone aircrafts, to emulate various America's, Russia's and others aircraft and missiles````few years ago, they have developed a stealth target drone aircraft that has RCS lesser than 0.01m2 to mock F-22, and B2``````well, they say, China and U.S's intelligence knows each other much better than we know```

in 5th gen information centric air combat, the "raw performance" isnt as significent as it is to 3rd/4th gen conventional air-battle````for example, super sonic cruise is a double edged sword, as it can extend our side's missile's None escape zoon, but it will also extend enemy's missile's range, and also a super crusising target will be lit like a red-light district on enemy's optical sensor`````

they are building J-20s according to plan, and there is no hold up, the speed is slow due to parts supply problem````there are doezens suppliers are envolved, few suppliers are still struggling to decrease the rate of final product's deficiency````some parts' final good product rate is less than 25%``````

So .01 m2 is the rcs they believe f-22 is? If that's true the official claims are far off. Not that I believe that.

 

[LeGenD]

@rcrmj

You seem to have deep insight and professional aptitude for assessment. I notice many good points in your posts in general. Credit where due.

But I have my share of contentions.

J-20 is a revolutionary platform to PLAAF, but its far from perfection``and it is also applies to F-22 too, as it was revolutionary in late 90s and early 00s, but cant say the same in 2018.

Not much is known about the capabilities of F-22A Raptor to this day, but its qualities are significant to the extent that F-35 variants will not substitute it even with cutting-edge in avionics + sensor suite in the picture.

F-22A, as a platform, is not stagnant in terms of receiving mission enhancement packages and/or replacements in its internal hardware:

anyway for the sake of the thread, here are few specs of J-20 that I am "allowed" to know
its AESA radar:
2200 T/R modules with 5% deviation`````
range: can "burn" through 170km of 0.1m2 target with 10% deviation`````and F-22 type target with 1XX KM with 5% deviation````` it has few LPI modes```
jamming and spoofing: XX modes

I am not sure how the AESA radar system of any combat aircraft, operating in the X-band, can detect an F-22A from over 100 KM distance. Does not sound realistic because the power-aperture product of this type of radar system is much lower than in the case of AWACS.

Information leaks:

RCS values in this table are not mere estimates but drawn from accessible patents and other forms of authentic records in relation to each aircraft.

Not sure which AWACS platform is the source of benchmark in terms of detecting each aircraft in this chart, but highlighted detection ranges are very telling. Look authentic because F-22A proved its VLO capabilities in the Northern Edge exercise (2006) even in the presence of powerful AWACS platforms to complement RED forces. Related discussion: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/russ...realistic-numbers.589471/page-4#post-10992190

RCS values are subject to change (improve over time) in the case of F-22A and F-35 variants in part due to advances in the domain of RAM coating materials for application on these aircraft and the B-2 Spirit bomber. Aviation Week have explored this subject in great detail [I have a copy].

---

The AN/APG-77(v)1* radar system [of F-22A] have following properties: Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) [Side Info], Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR) - Narrow Beam Interleaved Search and Track [Class Info], Continuous Tracking Capability [Phased Array Radar], Track While Scan (TWS), Low Probability of Intercept (LPI), Pulse Doppler Radar (Full LDSD Capability), and Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA). Probably more.

*Not to be confused with the original AN/APG-77 specification. AN/APG-77(v)1 can detect and identify potential targets up to 407.4 KM away, and can perform full volume search in under 3 seconds. Each of the T/R modules in AN/APG-77(v)1 is capable of operating at an individual frequency and changing frequency [over] 1000 times a second.

The AN/APG-77(v)1 radar system is integrated (electronically fused) with the ALR-94 EW suite (RWR; 30+ antennas; 463+ KM scanning range in azimuth and elevation), making it possible for F-22A to perform complex offensive and defensive EW operations in combination at any given point in time, and minimize/stop its transmissions in the process. In layman terms, the AN/APG-77(v)1 does not have to transmit its signals for long, and the ALR-94 can "passively" track an enemy aircraft’s RF signals (radar, data link, jamming, etc.), and then cue AN/APG-77(v)1 to provide a firing solution [excellent for BVR engagements]. The entire architecture is VLO-compliant in functioning (technicalities and specifics are classified in large part), and a potent EW platform on top.

Similarly;

AN/APG-81 radar system is integrated (electronically fused) with the ASQ-239 EW suite (RWR), making it possible for F-35 variants to perform offensive/defensive EW operations in combination, and vice versa. The entire architecture is VLO-compliant in functioning (technicalities and specifics are classified in large part), and a potent VLO platform on top.

Informative set of responses in the following:

[1] https://www.quora.com/How-is-that-t...iving-a-chance-for-the-enemy-to-trace-it-back
[2] https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-...ft-in-the-world-like-Global-Security-suggests
[2] https://www.quora.com/Can-an-F-22-r...r/Abhirup-Sengupta-5?share=d79c9f91&srid=m6SN

Its optical sensors: 360 degree vision, no blind spot```````can detect F-22 target at the range of 1XX, a great supplyment to its radar in case has been jammed by professional EW fighters``

What about IR-suppression measures in F-22A and F-35 variants?

1) Engines

"The engines of both also have stealthy augmenters. Aft of the low-pressure turbine are thick, curved vanes that, when looking up the tailpipe, block any direct view of the hot, rotating turbine components. Fuel injectors are integrated into these vanes, replacing the conventional afterburner spray bars and flame holders. The vanes mask the turbine and contain minute holes that introduce cooler air." - Aviation Week

-

"Pratt & Whitney’s F119 engines use a number of techniques to shrink their plumes and limit the IR signature of the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor. Just visible in this photograph are the end of the curved vanes which block direct view of the low-pressure turbine and contain minute holes that inject cooler air to the exhaust. The “wedge” nozzles also flatten the exhaust, which shortens the plume by mixing it with ambient air as well as narrowing it from the side." - Aviation Week

2) Tail structures

"The horizontal tails of both aircraft extend well beyond the nozzles, restricting the view of the exhausts and plume core in the azimuthal plane from the side and into the rear quadrant." - Aviation Week

-

"The F-22’s “non-axisymmetric,” or 2D, thrust-vectoring nozzles have upper and lower surfaces ending in wedges with blended central edges. These nozzles further mask the engine hot parts while flattening the exhaust plume and generating vortices. Minute holes are evident on their inner surfaces, likely providing bypass air for enhanced cooling." - Aviation Week

3) Airframe coatings

"Both aircraft also feature IR-suppressive skin coatings. The final addition to the F-22’s low-observable treatment is a polyurethane-based “IR topcoat” precisely sprayed by robots." - Aviation Week

The aforementioned measures are intended to frustrate dedicated IRST solutions in developing a fire control solution for a VLO target at ranges in excess of 10 KM.

J-20 incorporate EODAS (5 sensors in total):

- but this system is not ready for combat operations YET:

"Even if the 歼-20 is not equipped with a helmet display, we are definitely working hard to develop related equipment. I believe that it will be put into use in the near future to unlock all the functions of the EADOS system. This is also the reason why the EADOS system of the current stage 歼-20 may not be perfect." - Chinese source (2018)

This is not surprising because EODAS is an exceedingly difficult system to develop and master, even with relevant technical blueprints at hand.

J-20 also incorporate EOTS-86 IRST solution which is PROJECTED to notice an F-22A around 110 KM mark, but it is also PROJECTED to notice a B-2 Spirit bomber around 150 KM mark (is this a joke?). These projections are not realistic due to IR-suppression measures of the aforementioned targets.

===

B-2 Spirit is [the] most VLO platform in existence; it feature a combination of physical structure + onboard systems + IR-suppression measures* + noise-suppression measures, with no equal in the world (even F-22A is not a peer). B-2 Spirit stand apart from other VLO platforms in the domain of IR-suppression measures, noise-suppression measures, optical deceiving (not kidding), and being VLO across ALL frequency bands (this level of VLO is impractical for FIGHTER aircraft designs due to strong emphasis on aerial engagements and kinematics in them). B-2 Spirit is an ideal platform to penetrate defenses of any country, and lay waste to its logistics mechanisms, infrastructure, and defenses on the surface, while other assets divert attention and take care of the remainder. B-2 Spirit can also be armed with long-range cruise missiles (AGM-129) to strike at potential targets from afar.

*Short explanation: "Buried deep within the flying wing, the B-2’s engines are prevented from heating the outer surface. Exhaust is cooled by bypass air, including from secondary air intakes, and flattened prior to exiting over “aft deck” trenches built of titanium and covered in low-emissivity ceramic tiles. Likely containing magnetic radar-absorbent material (RAM), these extend several feet behind the nozzles, blocking the plume’s core from below and the side. Also, the engine fairings and aft deck both terminate in large chevrons, which introduce shed vortices." - Aviation Week

Meaningful pointers in following:

[1] https://www.wearethemighty.com/gear-tech/how-b2-stealth-bomber-works
[2] https://www.quora.com/How-is-the-F-22-different-from-B-2-in-terms-of-stealth
[3] https://militarymachine.com/b-2-bomber-facts/

Some of the top developers of radar systems in the world have [openly] admitted that B-2 Spirit is the most evasive aircraft in existence, and their is no reliable counter for it even today. It deflects radar beams in full (no returns). You might also want to take a dig at the complex Defensive Management Suite (DMS) of B-2 Spirit and how it help the host aircraft to evade numerous set of defenses on the surface. This aircraft is 2 billion USD per piece, man.

===

BACK TO EOTS-86:-

EOTS-80 can cue the radar system in J-20 to produce a weapons-grade lock for a VISIBLE target (advantage of sensor fusion technologies), but we need to keep in mind that F-22A will frustrate this measure by virtue of its VLO characteristics [extremely low RCS across a number of bands + IR-suppression measures + 4th generation LPIR AESA radar system + potent EW capabilities (LPIR AESA radar system + complex RWR system) + MDL]. F-22A and F-35 variants are designed with a wide range of contingencies in mind. They are designed to frustrate opposing aircraft in WVR situations, and virtually impractical to engage in BVR situations.

It is also important to have an idea of the RCS of J-20. Taiwan's assessment in here: http://top81.ws/show.php?f=1&t=1779388&m=14941934

Not sure about the accuracy of Taiwan's assessment, but J-20 does fall short in the domain of VLO in comparison to F-22A and F-35 variants* (general consensus).

*In here: https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2017-10/professional-notes-us-f-35-versus-prc-j-20

Your focus should be on WHEN an F-22A can unmask the presence of a J-20 in a hypothetical engagement scenario. Keeping in view of the capabilities of AN/APG-77(v)1 + ALR-94 (active + passive detection ranges exceeding 400 KM in combination, with cancellation of active detection measures in under 3 seconds; full volume search is established), F-22A have a fairly good chance in unmasking the presence of J-20 earlier than the latter. ALR-94 is the most complex piece of engineering within F-22A, and a big factor in why F-22A posit a major threat to potential opponents in a contested environment.

I get the impression from my readings that J-20 is ready for combat operations in general [at present], but not ready for [head-on] clashes with F-22A and F-35 variants [at present]. J-20 need better engines and operationally mature onboard systems to unlock its full potential in aerial engagements (this will take a while). Nevertheless, J-20 is a symbol of pride for China and rightfully so. Chinese aviation industry have caught up to Russian at the least.

As far as I know, to PLAAF, it's most fear is not F-22 but hords of F-35 + EF-18G which was developed with the latest techs and knowledge of our time.

And those fears are not misplaced.

The single greatest advantage USAF and USN have over other forces is in the domain of network-centric warfare capabilities:

Those communication networks are among the most elusive in terms of operations. Different communication channels between SISTER aircraft, but different squadrons can TALK to each other as well. These squadrons blanket opposing forces with unparalleled levels of EW and subject them to enormous levels of firepower at the same time.

FYI: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...as-f-35-would-crush-chinas-j-20-stealth-17315

"One area that the Chinese are almost certainly lacking is what Air Combat Command commander Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle once described to me as “spike management.” Fifth-generation aircraft such as the F-22 and F-35 have cockpit displays that indicate to the pilot the various angles and ranges from which their aircraft can be detected and tracked by various enemy radars. The pilots use that information to evade the enemy by making sure to avoid zones where they could be detected and engaged. It is a technology that took decades for the United States to master—through a lot of trial and error. "

You forgot to account for E-2D Advanced Hawkeye in your calculations. This beast incorporate a revolutionary UHF-band mechanically/electronically-scanned HYBRID radar system (AN/APY-9) to unmask a new range of targets in real-time which are almost invisible to [purely] mechanically-scanned as well as electronically-scanned PESA/AESA solutions: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/russ...realistic-numbers.589471/page-8#post-10997370

Therefore;

PLAAF has to contend with the hordes of F-35 variants + EA-18G Growlers with F-22A, B-2 Spirit and the cutting-edge E-2D Advanced Hawkeye in the mix. J-20 will be unmasked and BVR engagements will be impractical for PLAAF (on the whole) in this kind of battlespace. Does not look good from any angle.

It make sense for China to invest in asymmetric measures such as the KILL CHAINS for DF-21D and DF-26 ASBM to complicate operations of USN near China (but USN have developed a new range of countermeasures for these type of threats by now). And disrupting (any) kill chain is not difficult for the aforementioned airborne assets.

And not to forget than B-52 will be taking pot shots from afar with long-range standoff cruise missiles:

Some pointers in following links:

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-russia-china-radar-counter-stealth-2017-5
[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorent...t-of-the-f-35-fighter-story-you-havent-heard/

---

I strongly emphasize in my discussions that a large number of visually appealing missiles noticed in impressive exhibitions (e.g. Zuhai), will be useless in the face of a war-machine which have mastered the principles of stealth and surveillance techniques.

An aircraft (e.g. J-10B) can be equipped with an A2A missile that is MACH 4+ and KM 300+ in flight speed and range, but these specifications are USELESS in the face of F-22A, F-35 variants and EA-18G Growler types in the shoes of opposition.

Don't get me wrong; China is a powerful and dangerous adversary to any potential foe, with lot of firepower at its disposal. I believe that China can defeat the likes of India in a full-scale war.

However, if you are war-gaming US as the adversary, you will be frustrated to enormous degree.

 

[rcrmj]

So .01 m2 is the rcs they believe f-22 is? If that's true the official claims are far off. Not that I believe that.

not they believe, it is what they know! and also no one apart from the design team knows the exact number of the figures```besides, 0.01m2 rcs is a "safe" and layman's figure for public consumption````any flying object's RCS is not a solid figure, it changes to great degree when the angle changes, plus half dozens of other factors``` for example, a stealth fighter, its perfect frontal RCS would be smaller than a sparrow, but its back wouldnt be any significantly smaller than a regular 4th or 3rd gen fighters```````p.s, dont take any media figures or "official claims" too seriously, they all for public amusement````

all you need to know is```J-20, F-22 and F-35 are the fighters that no other any fighters can challenge them in the air, unless they have a whole, advanced system and good tactics to support them`````otherwise its a one way slaughter``````

 

[rcrmj]

@rcrmj

You seem to have deep insight and professional aptitude for assessment. I notice many good points in your posts in general. Credit where due.

But I have my share of contentions.

However, if you are war-gaming US as the adversary, you will be frustrated to enormous degree.

it was a bit length to read`, well I get all you points, unfortunately due to my language constraint, I cant go into details with you, but I am very much like to ``````

I will try my best to put my thoughts together here````

firstly, F-22 is indeed a revolutionary plane, and you are right to the point that it will receive up dates during its service life, in fact all the plane do```for countries like U.S, Russia and China, they will carry out small upgrades in one or two years time, a big one in around 5 years time (there isnt any rules to require them to do so, its just the competition among these three are too fierce````sorry no disregard to other aviation powers like France, Sweden and Britain`) ``` the J-10A produced in 2003 itself would be a quite different plane when it comes to 2008, and would be very safe to say that J-10C is so different (almost nothing alike inside) that they have to give them a different designation```

the problem with F-22 was due to two things,1: too confident to themselves that lead to wrong judgement on China's will and capability on 5th gen stealth fighter; 2: technological and structural constraints, it was designed at early 90s, most of the latest techs bits and bots cannot fit into the current body, unless a significant structural changes are needed, and then, the money issue comes in, plus with "bad mouthing" from the lobby`````` so you know the digit stopped at 187``````

regarding the X-band radar, well, I only quoted the rough number, in fact the latest radars nowadays used by China, U.S. and Russia can detect stealth target longer than what we would believe```and Russia even has developed a special "trick"``that a serving fighter for the first time has two types of radar bandwidth```X and L band`````Su-35 has this "trick"```the PLAAF cant get enough of it ```

they were worshiping APG -77 when it came out, but APG-81 and latest radars on Su-35, J-20, J-16 and J-10C are not only more "smarter", "powerful" and "accurate" than 77， but, it packs dozens and dozens more functions than 77```

China is not seeking head-on confrontation to the U.S, not in another 20 years time, actually we are trying our best to avoid it, even loads Chinese military fans believe that China can take on U.S in South China sea````well```cant blame them, just put yourself in our position when you see the huge leaps of our scientists have done for past 20 years, revealing new weapons system almost every year from land to sky, from space to sea````people can easily get toasted, I used to be high too, but more you talk to the people from the circle, learning from them, more ignorance you feel yourself have and how tiny "facts" you know about military techs```` and I become more reserved, hence on Chinese forums I am easily being labeled as unpatriotic pessi````

we still have lots of catch-ups (fundamental researches, systematic engineering and various institutions managerial problems) to do to match the U.S, but thats it, just the U.S, the rest are not in the same league```

anyway, these are my random thoughts```maybe they are not what you are really looking for, but thats best what I can do````

 

[Brainsucker]

it was a bit length to read`, well I get all you points, unfortunately due to my language constraint, I cant go into details with you, but I am very much like to ``````

I will try my best to put my thoughts together here````

firstly, F-22 is indeed a revolutionary plane, and you are right to the point that it will receive up dates during its service life, in fact all the plane do```for countries like U.S, Russia and China, they will carry out small upgrades in one or two years time, a big one in around 5 years time (there isnt any rules to require them to do so, its just the competition among these three are too fierce````sorry no disregard to other aviation powers like France, Sweden and Britain`) ``` the J-10A produced in 2003 itself would be a quite different plane when it comes to 2008, and would be very safe to say that J-10C is so different (almost nothing alike inside) that they have to give them a different designation```

the problem with F-22 was due to two things,1: too confident to themselves that lead to wrong judgement on China's will and capability on 5th gen stealth fighter; 2: technological and structural constraints, it was designed at early 90s, most of the latest techs bits and bots cannot fit into the current body, unless a significant structural changes are needed, and then, the money issue comes in, plus with "bad mouthing" from the lobby`````` so you know the digit stopped at 187``````

regarding the X-band radar, well, I only quoted the rough number, in fact the latest radars nowadays used by China, U.S. and Russia can detect stealth target longer than what we would believe```and Russia even has developed a special "trick"``that a serving fighter for the first time has two types of radar bandwidth```X and L band`````Su-35 has this "trick"```the PLAAF cant get enough of it ```

they were worshiping APG -77 when it came out, but APG-81 and latest radars on Su-35, J-20, J-16 and J-10C are not only more "smarter", "powerful" and "accurate" than 77， but, it packs dozens and dozens more functions than 77```

China is not seeking head-on confrontation to the U.S, not in another 20 years time, actually we are trying our best to avoid it, even loads Chinese military fans believe that China can take on U.S in South China sea````well```cant blame them, just put yourself in our position when you see the huge leaps of our scientists have done for past 20 years, revealing new weapons system almost every year from land to sky, from space to sea````people can easily get toasted, I used to be high too, but more you talk to the people from the circle, learning from them, more ignorance you feel yourself have and how tiny "facts" you know about military techs```` and I become more reserved, hence on Chinese forums I am easily being labeled as unpatriotic pessi````

we still have lots of catch-ups (fundamental researches, systematic engineering and various institutions managerial problems) to do to match the U.S, but thats it, just the U.S, the rest are not in the same league```

anyway, these are my random thoughts```maybe they are not what you are really looking for, but thats best what I can do````

I'm curious, are you one of the wall climber who have been invited to drink tea with the official?

 

[SME11B]

not they believe, it is what they know! and also no one apart from the design team knows the exact number of the figures```besides, 0.01m2 rcs is a "safe" and layman's figure for public consumption````any flying object's RCS is not a solid figure, it changes to great degree when the angle changes, plus half dozens of other factors``` for example, a stealth fighter, its perfect frontal RCS would be smaller than a sparrow, but its back wouldnt be any significantly smaller than a regular 4th or 3rd gen fighters```````p.s, dont take any media figures or "official claims" too seriously, they all for public amusement````

all you need to know is```J-20, F-22 and F-35 are the fighters that no other any fighters can challenge them in the air, unless they have a whole, advanced system and good tactics to support them`````otherwise its a one way slaughter``````

It's not characteristic of the US arms industry to exaggerate that much so I'm skeptical. I should instead take some random internet comment seriously? You expect me to believe china completely caught up with f-22/35 on their first try? You will have to understand my skepticism and need for a bit more evidence especially since everything else seems to suggest something else. Maybe f-22is .01m2 from one of it's worst angles or in a lower frequency like L band that sounds more realistic. Our radars wouldn't have such a hard time in exercises if it's rcs was that big and that would also mean the pilots are lying. I would guess that rcs is j-20 signature best case.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

I think F-22 RCS is considerably larger than rumored. Russians say it is 0.3 m^2 but for me that is conservative. I think 0.6 m^2 or more is likely. Hell, not even the much celebrated solar panel can absorb 25% of incoming solar radiation. RAM is far less capable than solar panel considering how thin they are.

 

[Ortis]

The f-22 has been used extensively in the field and is generally sought by most countries, albeit the F-35 is replacing it & despite the bad investment st the start, it's set to be the most advanced multi-role in the world yet. That said the J-20 has no combat experience where as the F-22 does. We'll have no way of ever knowing which is better until China actually uses her military in action, otherwise all these threads will ever be is speculation. And in terms of dogfighting which doesn't happen anymore, you're more likely to be hit from afar by missiles before you see your opponent. Its all dependant in the pilot wielding the tech, China's pilots have yet to see actual military conflict like America's has