The Reason Why America's F-35 Would Crush China's J-20 Stealth Fighter in Battle

[shhh]

Ladies and gentlemen, American mentality at its finest, where this specimen is unable to process the possibility of others catching up to them.

And then getting a$$ whipped by a bunch of AK-47 holders in Afghanistan

 

[Hellfire]

Are you kidding me? US today depend more on Immigrant engineers and Scientist, most Americans are just a big fat lazy people sit and do nothing...US is just in desperation and use money to attract foreign talented people, you really think there is a future for such nation that is dependent on immigrant for their scientific progress? and the worst nightmare if these people steal US patent or secret and bring back to their native land .
Contrary to US, China is filled a great pool of talented engineer and scientists purely Chinese, we don't depend on immigrant for our success, every Chinese give the sweat and blood for the pride of the nation beside of been get pay, even we're still behind US behid, with our rate of development, I don't have worry for China's future.

Wow! A gem ..... seriously what grade are you studying in?

@C130 drawing your attention to the fact that you all are lazy ...... now who the eff is kicking a$$ all over the world in education, research, technology, finance??

I need to know, did you get Martians to help you?

@gambit my sympathies, you have to fight such retards

@Joe Shearer a great gem here

 

[gambit]

Are you kidding me? US today depend more on Immigrant engineers and Scientist, most Americans are just a big fat lazy people sit and do nothing...US is just in desperation and use money to attract foreign talented people, you really think there is a future for such nation that is dependent on immigrant for their scientific progress?

That racket has been working for past couple hundred yrs. Considering how much more shitty the rest of the world is, we are in no danger of losing foreign talents to keep US going...and going...and keeping ahead of China.

...and the worst nightmare if these people steal US patent or secret and bring back to their native land

Now I guess we know how China got her technology.

And then getting a$$ whipped by a bunch of AK-47 holders in Afghanistan

You sure about that ? We kicked the Taliban out of power in a month. We did the same to Iraq's Army, the one that scared the ME. We snuck into your Pakistan and killed Osama bin Laden.

 

[Godman]

J-20 and F-35 are designed for different requirments.
If they do meet in combat the place and support they receive will play a bigger role in deciding the winnder

 

[shhh]

You sure about that ? We kicked the Taliban out of power in a month. We did the same to Iraq's Army, the one that scared the ME. We snuck into your Pakistan and killed Osama bin Laden.

No, Kid, they tricked you into landing your forces in the US and have been screwing you over since then

Iraq army had US weaponry (most of it).

Pakistan had been screwing you over for more than a decade and getting money for screwing you over from yourself .

USA has provided no evidence of Osama's discovery in Pakistan, it is just a claim and everybody knows how good US claims are.

Iraq has WMD.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

@gambit is that guy talking about kolchuga sensor type of thing.

This guy above is still living in the Soviet era.

Anyone with a slightest knowledge of China Passive Radar knows that I am referring to Czech "VERA and the TAMARA" PCL system which China YLC-20, etc are based.

With all the clue I have posted, what takes you guys so long to figure that out unless some of you guys are...

These type of Passive Radar System are commonly refer to as Bistatic Radar. Hence they are UNIDENTIFIABLE as well as UNDETECTABLE.

Put it this way, China may have perfected it to a degree that the stealthy F-22 and F-35 is now like the Emperor without his clothing.

The China radar system he mentioned based on Kolchuga, after they failed to buy VERA.
While Vietnam has both VERA and KOLCHUGA , and developed a domestic system based on them. They are early warning systems of air threat.

So according to China logic, J-20 can't hide from Vietnam radar system.

Vietnam

Yes. In a way you are right except the Czech "VERA" system was never perfected and that is why the West claimed that they as INACCURATE.

Based on Chinese sources, the Chinese PLC variants are pretty accurate and that is because of China own R&D. We can says has reinvented the wheel when it comes to Passive PLC radar system.

It is some who says that China T-96 series is based on T-59 which may be quite true. But these improved T-59 variants with its 1000hp engine has in fact humiliated the mighty Russia 1130hp T-72 then.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

Wow! A gem ..... seriously what grade are you studying in?

@C130 drawing your attention to the fact that you all are lazy ...... now who the eff is kicking a$$ all over the world in education, research, technology, finance??

I need to know, did you get Martians to help you?

@gambit my sympathies, you have to fight such retards

@Joe Shearer a great gem here

True hurt

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Also kolchuga is much like an ECM system,those passive sensors are only good at making guess,at all depends upon fighters how much energy it transmits and F22,35 b2 all kind of signatures have been well masked with background.Only left one is heat signature which can be detected by IRST that too is only fruitful for a opponent of same Generation becuse even if it is detected by fighters like Su-27 series,then still they will have to get close enough to acquire a radar lock which is not possible for 4 gen fighters because they will be shot during target acquisition process.

Then these guessworks must be so INACCURATE that USA had to bombed the Radio Transmission Room in Chinese Embassy in Belgrade in 1999 with 5 JDAM guided bombs after US intelligence received reports that China had been secretly assisting Yugoslavia to accurately predicted the flight and location of the intruding stealth F-117 Nighthawk.

Some in disbelieving claimed that this is only an allegation but is it?

Yes, I do know about the Kolchuga system. It is not a solution against 'stealth'. The system is large and imprecise.

Here is the deal about using the bi-static solution...

Imagine each of those receiver stations is a Kolchuga station.

What happens to the entire network if we destroy the power station to the city ? Or that we damaged the transmitting ability of the transmitter itself ? What good will those Kolchuga stations be ? So while the Kolchuga stations moves and struggles to coordinate themselves, we fly past and do whatever we want ?

This is why Cappy does not understand why the concept of a 'passive' radar does not exist. It cannot exist.

Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive.

Without one, you cannot have radar. If I put a Kolchuga in the middle of the Sahara Desert and put a 747 in front of the station, it would not detect the airliner at all. Why ? Because the transmit part of the process is not there. We can see the 747 with our human eyes, but the Kolchuga is effectively blind. That is why at the conceptual level, there is no such thing as a 'passive' radar. You can have a passive receiver station. But not a 'passive' radar.

In your attempt and desperation to prove me wrong, you continue to contradict yourself.

Bistatic radars are RADAR by any definition today and no matter how you try to disprove their unconventional working principles. End of story.

Thank to your limited KNOWLEDGE you believe that "Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive." Passive Radar are not new and were first developed by the Japanese Imperial Army as well the German during World War II.

Thanks for amusing me ONCE AGAIN.

 

[gambit]

In your attempt and desperation to prove me wrong, you continue to contradict yourself.

Now the following is truly entertaining...

Bistatic radars are RADAR by any definition today and no matter how you try to disprove their unconventional working principles.

I did not tried to disprove the concept of the bi-static radar system. In fact, I explained the concept on this forum long ago, before you got here.

First, I explained the bi-static radar's TACTICAL weaknesses and physical vulnerabilities. That you obviously missed.

Second, there are three components of the bi-static triangle: Transmit, Receive, and Target.

If either Transmit or Receive is absent or degraded, the triangle is broken and the Target will not be detected. There is no bi-static triangle in the mono-static configuration. It means that while we can call the Receiver a 'radar', if you need both Transmit and Receive for radar to work, that mean either Transmitter or Receiver by themselves are -- useless.

The authors of the book Advances In Bistatic Radar said the label 'passive' is a misnomer, meaning misleading. Merrill Skolnik, editor-in-chief of the standard Radar Handbook pretty much said the same in his lectures.

End of story.

Thank to your limited KNOWLEDGE you believe that "Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive."

Prove that process is wrong.

Passive Radar are not new and were first developed by the Japanese Imperial Army as well the German during World War II.

Here is what wiki have on the 'passive' radar...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radar

It is a specific case of bistatic radar, the latter also including the exploitation of cooperative and non-cooperative radar transmitters.

See the highlighted ? It means what is conveniently called the 'passive radar' is actually a COMPONENT of the bi-static radar concept. That is what 'specific case of' mean.

Thanks for amusing the readers ONCE AGAIN with your stubborn refusal to learn the truth.

These type of Passive Radar System are commonly refer to as Bistatic Radar. Hence they are UNIDENTIFIABLE as well as UNDETECTABLE.

Here we have a typical case of 'Chinese physics' in action. Sad.

The bi-static radar is a physical separation of the radar process, which contains Transmit and Receive. This physical separation often results in the two components being geographically distinct as well. But in no way does that mean the entire configuration is undetectable.

How can it be undetectable when the transmitter is -- transmitting ?

If the transmitter shut down, either by will or else, the receiver have nothing to receive.

So here we have 'Chinese physics' saying that the two-parts process of radar detection is wrong and that the bi-static transmitter is undetectable.

And these guys says Americans are stupid.

 

[T-Rex]

The US has more experience in flying 5th generation fighters and now they have the experience of using their F-22s in real battle in Syria. So, definitely it's a plus point for them but then again the F-22's have not so far faced the Russians. Nobody can tell whether the Russians can monitor the raptors or not. Now I hear reports claiming that the Chinese have perfected a Czechoslovakian radar which can detect these raptors, if so, the US is in for a rude surprise if hostilities break out at the SCS and the US tries to use her raptors against Chinese targets.

 

[BoQ77]

The US has more experience in flying 5th generation fighters and now they have the experience of using their F-22s in real battle in Syria. So, definitely it's a plus point for them but then again the F-22's have not so far faced the Russians. Nobody can tell whether the Russians can monitor the raptors or not. Now I hear reports claiming that the Chinese have perfected a Czechoslovakian radar which can detect these raptors, if so, the US is in for a rude surprise if hostilities break out at the SCS and the US tries to use her raptors against Chinese targets.

They claim everything, even the Czech govt can't confirm that they sold the system to China.

 

[T-Rex]

They claim everything, even the Czech govt can't confirm that they sold the system to China.

Do you think buying is the only method to acquire? Wake up, the world isn't a perfect market place.

 

[BoQ77]

Do you think buying is the only method to acquire? Wake up, the world isn't a perfect market place.

Even Czech claim that their system can detect stealth fighter, is doubtful

 

[Qutb-ud-din Aybak]

The same Americans that said China will collapse.

The same Americans that said China will stand absolutely no chance in the Korean War.

oh really. i thought pakistan was the only country predicted by them to collapse.

 

[gambit]

Here is how the Kolchuga and VERA systems theoretically works...

Say I am the F-22 being painted and received this way...

Basic geometry says angle of deflection = angle of incident (arrival). So we are going to give this bi-static set up an ideal situation. Receiver B is exactly 90 deg from Transmitter, which means B receives the most of the return signal from me, the F-22. Receiver A receives some, but far less.

The argument is this...

These type of Passive Radar System are commonly refer to as Bistatic Radar. Hence they are UNIDENTIFIABLE as well as UNDETECTABLE.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/the-reas...fighter-in-battle.443618/page-6#ixzz4HZsJQhhu

This is where the argument gets idiotic.

Which is unidentifiable and undetectable ? Surely not the transmitter. It is active. I can, thru my RWR set, see where these transmission coming from. I can analyze its characteristics to know what kind of radar is it.

Do I care if there are two receivers picking me up from those reflected signals ? No, I do not.

Do I even KNOW if there are two receivers picking me up from those reflected signals ? No, I do not.

Since my RWR told me where the transmitter is, what if I drop a few SDBs on the transmitter ?

Now what are those receivers going to do ? Absent transmission signals, I would not be reflecting anything. Those two receivers are essentially -- useless.

Do I even care if they exists ? No, I do not. All I care about is the transmitter. Destroy or degrade the transmitter, and I have just broken up the necessary bi-static triangles of the set up.

Real physics says: Radar detection is a two-parts process, Transmit and Receive.

But 'Chinese physics' disagrees, as mocked by Corny here, and 'Chinese physics' did not explain how radar works.

Radar detection is a two-parts process: Transmit and Receive.

Absent either one, and there is no radar detection. It does not matter if the transmission signals are from dedicated transmitter, or from a TV tower, or from a cell phone tower, or from a radio tower, or even from Mars. As long as there is a transmission source or sources, we will have radar detection.

There is no such thing as a 'passive' radar. Real physics says so.