PRC new stealth fighter "J-20"

Chockstock

The Stars and Stripes Forever
10-Year Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
827
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808704576061674166905408.html?mod=yhoofront

2vkc4zm.jpg


BEIJING—The first clear pictures of what appears to be a Chinese stealth fighter prototype have been published online, highlighting China's military buildup just days before U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates heads to Beijing to try to repair defense ties.

The photographs, published on several unofficial Chinese and foreign defense-related websites, appear to show a J-20 prototype making a high-speed taxi test—usually one of the last steps before an aircraft makes its first flight—according to experts on aviation and China's military.

The exact origin of the photographs is unclear, although they appear to have been taken by Chinese enthusiasts from the grounds of or around the Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute in western China, where the J-20 is in development. A few experts have suggested that the pictured aircraft is a mock-up, rather than a functioning prototype of a stealth fighter—so-called because it is designed to evade detection by radar and infrared sensors.

But many more experts say they believe the pictures and the aircraft are authentic, giving the strongest indication yet that Beijing is making faster-than-expected progress in developing a rival to the U.S. F-22—the world's only fully operational stealth fighter.

China's defense ministry and air force couldn't be reached to comment on the latest photos. Even without official confirmation, however, the photographs are likely to bolster concerns among U.S. officials and politicians about China's military modernization, which also includes the imminent deployment of its first aircraft carrier and "carrier-killer" antiship ballistic missiles.

Such weapons systems would significantly enhance China's ability to hinder U.S. intervention in a conflict over Taiwan, and challenge U.S. naval supremacy in the Asia-Pacific region.


I dont know, looks shabby to me. Anyway, the increasing arms race/militarization of countries around the world is unsettling. Have we decided yet on purchasing F-35s?


-CS
 
I find it interesting that the leadership decided to show this in public fairly early in its life, I believe before the first flight. I know Skunk Works was kept under pretty tight wraps for a loooonnnnngggg time.

99.9% of military moves like this have some sort of geopolitical reasoning. Have to wonder why the rush to "show" the world their cards.
 
I find it interesting that the leadership decided to show this in public fairly early in its life, I believe before the first flight. I know Skunk Works was kept under pretty tight wraps for a loooonnnnngggg time.

99.9% of military moves like this have some sort of geopolitical reasoning. Have to wonder why the rush to "show" the world their cards.

Propaganda for their own citizens or, like you said, muscle flexing to the US and Japan. Relations between China and Japan are hot but yeah, China would never go to war unless as a last resort or as a easy means to advance itself. So I cant guess at what their intentions are either
 
Chockstock: on the F-35 question; Yes. Development not going as smoothly as hoped, but the F-35 is still getting produced as we speak. In fact, the first operational birds should be ready for their first flight in a few weeks.

As to China's reasons for this rather public display of their high speed taxi tests? Well, just speculation here, but the SECDEF arrives in China this weekend, at the same airport this bird is currently parked at. Not-so-subtle message for when he steps of the flight stairs and this bird is sitting on the taxiway across from him. Sort of like: "Look what we can do". I can only hope his response to that statement is "not much".... :thumb:
 
Bullet (and anyone else) just out of curiosity I would love to know your thoughts regarding how China's Airpower stacks up against ours? A few guys at my det think they will be technologically equal with us in 5-7 years. I am quite skeptical of this claim. I believe you know a good deal about the 35 and figured you would have a good perspective on this. Thanks in advance!
 
Bullet will have a much more experienced answer. But consider this from a presentation I had as a firstie at USAFA from another in our MSS class. China has ~1000 fighters I believe. Mostly 3rd gen and some 4th gen. We have 2000+ fighters mostly 4th gen and some 5th gen.

Again, Bullet can answer better, but I am hardly worried. Same stack up (if not less fighters) when looking at Russia.
 
OK, without getting into any classified discussion or areas where Opsec would apply, I would simply tell those guys in your det: "you're wrong if you think China will catch up to us in fighter technology in the next decade. And while they're playing catch-up, were continuing to move the finish line ahead."

Lots more to the technology aspect of tactical / fighter aviation than just stealth. And that's about all I'll say on that....

One particular area where China out-performs us is Mass. The can throw up a heck of lot of aircraft if they wanted to protect their homeland or project power into the near vicinity. We may have a quality advantage, but sometimes quantity has a quality all its own....
 
If we go to war with China, the war after that will be fought with sticks and rocks.
 
If we go to war with China, the war after that will be fought with sticks and rocks.

Possibly, but outside of the discussion of "will China be able to match our tactical aviation technology within the next few years"...
 
Possibly, but outside of the discussion of "will China be able to match our tactical aviation technology within the next few years"...

Not really, because China's "tactical aviation technology" will be a big "who cares?" if our forces ever go head to head. Their fighters will be incinerated in the mushroom cloud with everything else.

I can promise that whatever tactical airpower China has will be vaporized by a gift from northwestern North Dakota (or from the seas, or the skies). I don't think they would start at us in a conventional matter, but I suppose anything is possible. Luckily, I think any military action with the Chinese is a pretty unlikely scenario.
 
Last edited:
Not really, because China's "tactical aviation capabilites" will be a big "who cares?" if our forces ever go head to head. Their fighters will be incinerated in the mushroom cloud with everything else.

I can promise that whatever tactical airpower China has will be vaporized in 30 minutes or less (or the next one is free) by a gift from northwestern North Dakota (or from the seas, or the skies).

Luckily, I think it's a pretty unlikely scenario.

Didn't happen during the Korean conflict when our fighters went toe-to-toe with another Nuclear superpower's air forces, so to say that ANY confrontation with China will only lead to nuclear exchange is a little presumptive.

Just the last 50 years of history demonstrates that more than likely there will be plenty of opportunities out there for proxy conflicts between our technology and theirs, or even direct conflict between our two militaries, where there would be a "Gentelmen's Agreement" not to escalate it to the "doomsday" level.

You really think if China were to invade Taiwan, our first reaction would be to bring in the Apocalypse?
 
Didn't happen during the Korean conflict when our fighters went toe-to-toe with another Nuclear superpower's air forces, so to say that ANY confrontation with China will only lead to nuclear exchange is a little presumptive.

Just the last 50 years of history demonstrates that more than likely there will be plenty of opportunities out there for proxy conflicts between our technology and theirs, or even direct conflict between our two militaries, where there would be a "Gentelmen's Agreement" not to escalate it to the "doomsday" level.

You really think if China were to invade Taiwan, our first reaction would be to bring in the Apocalypse?

I don't think China will invade Taiwan precisely because of the threat of Apocalypse.

I might be willing to give you the "proxy conflict" scenario, although given that we have such a financial interest in China (and they in us), I'm not sure I see it as likely. The potential is certainly there. As for a direct confrontation, I just can't see that occurring without nukes.

I'm actually glad for this little give and take, Bullet. I think it makes a strong point for the continuing importance of deterrence (a mission I participated in). :thumb:

Also, all of this is presumptive. None of us have a crystal ball, so we have to make presumptions based on our experiences. I may turn out to be dead wrong, and there could be a conventional war of limited scale between our tactical air forces and armies. I hope I'm not wrong, and that deterrence works. I'm a former missileer, so I think like one on issues that involve nuclear powers. That may cloud my view on the matter.
 
Last edited:
I don't think China will invade Taiwan precisely because of the threat of Apocalypse.

I might be willing to give you the "proxy conflict" scenario, although given that we have such a financial interest in China (and they in us), I'm not sure I see it as likely. The potential is certainly there. As for a direct confrontation, I just can't see that occurring without nukes.

I'm actually glad for this little give and take, Bullet. I think it makes a strong point for the continuing importance of deterrence (a mission I participated in). :thumb:

Also, all of this is presumptive. None of us have a crystal ball, so we have to make presumptions based on our experiences. I may turn out to be dead wrong, and there could be a conventional war of limited scale between our tactical air forces and armies. I hope I'm not wrong, and that deterrence works. I'm a former missileer, so I think like one on issues that involve nuclear powers, and that may cloud my view on the matter.

Just as you use your frame of reference based on your missileer background, I am using my fighter background to present my view on the matter, so no need to worry about the give-and-take aspect of our discussions.

Nuclear Deterrence remains a very important aspect of our military strategy (just a quick look at the CSAF's stated priorities will confirm this, as it is listed as his #1).

I do look at China not only as a potential adversary (the Straights of Malaca are another area of concern, plus China's push to control the Spratley's due to the oil reserves there), but also as a potential competitor for military sales (just like Russia was). While direct conflict with China may remain low risk due to the Nuclear deterrence aspect, we may see other hot spots in the world where our "stuff" may go against their "stuff", and neither our pilots or theirs will be in the cockpit. Therefore, a comparison of our capabilities remains a valid discussion.

My ultimate question is: if I (or the future pilots who will be benefitting from my current efforts) shoot down a J-10 or J-20, will there be a different type of red star painted under my canopy than the ones we used during Nam, Desert Storm, and Bosnia?
 
I don't think China will invade Taiwan precisely because of the threat of Apocalypse.
Against my better judgement I'll throw in my two cents. I feel just the opposite can be claimed as I see their short term and long term buildup (and it's total, comprehensive, technology wise: Army, Navy and Air Force modernization, the best American consumer dollars have afforded China which is substantial) as a way to eventually overwhelm and take over Taiwan before we can really do much. Stealth can't be counted on to stop stealth and their stealth can come over to Taiwan or any other within range base and at will wipe out any fixed wing runways and eventually any carrier within range of their stealth aircraft and stealth anti-ship missiles. Yes, we can stealthily bomb them too if we wanted but I don't think we have the will to do so. Obviously, China is not like anyone we've done battle with recently at all. They'll probably buy is off by saying leave the Taiwan situation alone and we'll fogive some percentage of the gazillion dollars worth of loans we've taken from them in terms of bonds...Joe Blow US politician is not going to go allow nukes to be used if China overwhelms Taiwan overnight.

Another analogy. No matter how many stealth fighters Israel has, if all their enemies around them have stealth fighters too then nothing can stop their enemy's fighters from coming into Israel and catching theirs on the ground and vice a versa. Once a war starts, stealth just flies past stealth more or less and all sides are going to be much worse off ground damage wise in a conventional type war, IMO.

ps, should add, China is obsessed with Taiwan so I don't think they can be counted on to act 'rationally'.
 
Last edited:
While direct conflict with China may remain low risk due to the Nuclear deterrence aspect, we may see other hot spots in the world where our "stuff" may go against their "stuff", and neither our pilots or theirs will be in the cockpit. Therefore, a comparison of our capabilities remains a valid discussion.

This I can accept.
 
Another analogy. No matter how many stealth fighters Israel has, if all their enemies around them have stealth fighters too then nothing can stop their enemy's fighters from coming into Israel and catching theirs on the ground and vice a versa. Once a war starts, stealth just flies past stealth more or less and all sides are going to be much worse off ground damage wise in a conventional type war, IMO.

Except I don't think stealth is truly stealth anymore. Some Bosnia theories are out there. Radar isn't the only technology for detection.
 
Except I don't think stealth is truly stealth anymore. Some Bosnia theories are out there. Radar isn't the only technology for detection.

Low observable doesn't mean invisible and I'm not swayed yet to change my opinion. I listened to the first hand account of the nighthawk pilot on TV like everyone else and read internet stuff too and that loss was as much a problem with operational planning as it was their 'counter stealth' cell phone tower type radar 'technology'.... all the successes over downtown Baghdad still very much apply.
 
Low observable doesn't mean invisible and I'm not swayed yet to change my opinion. I listened to the first hand account of the nighthawk pilot on TV like everyone else and read internet stuff too and that loss was as much a problem with operational planning as it was their 'counter stealth' cell phone tower type radar 'technology'.... all the successes over downtown Baghdad still very much apply.

lol yes. I agree with ya. ;) I have a feeling, just instinct, that some of our skunkworks has figured out this problem! Just a hunch though.
 
As much as I trust RAND, I don't think it's quite correct. It also seems they are using one battle scenario and I know the RAND battle-simulators run for days on multiple scenarios. Seems like other techs are understated, that of our sub fleet.

Regardless, a China-America war is fun to speculate about. Good discussions ensue. Let's just hope it doesn't happen.
 
Back
Top