J-20 goes operational again

PLAAF just revealed the WJ-700 UCAV maiden flight. The UCAV is claimed to be a high altitude, higher-speed (~380 knots), payload and high endurance (20hr) UCAV. Capable of carrying anti-ship missiles (150km ranged C705) and ARMs (100km ranged CM102). Not that stealthy yet.

Imagine J-20s acting as a quarterback for expendable stealthy UCAVs with the same payload/performance above. Sure looks like an evolving role for the J-20 from being just a pure interceptor.

PLAAF just revealed the WJ-700 UCAV maiden flight. The UCAV is claimed to be a high altitude, higher-speed (~380 knots), payload and high endurance (20hr) UCAV. Capable of carrying anti-ship missiles (150km ranged C705) and ARMs (100km ranged CM102). Not that stealthy yet.

Imagine J-20s acting as a quarterback for expendable stealthy UCAVs with the same payload/performance above. Sure looks like an evolving role for the J-20 from being just a pure interceptor.

J-20 squadren leader.

https://youtu.be/HL6DJFw9veA

The "Home by Christmas" statements.

https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/public/Ma ... entSet.pdf

Some of us who have studied history (and taken its lessons) prefer to be a little bit more cautious when dealing with rebel scum (esp those who have blown up death stars once before).

[quote="weasel1962"]The "Home by Christmas" statements.

https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/public/Ma ... entSet.pdf

Some of us who have studied history (and taken its lessons) prefer to be a little bit more cautious when dealing with rebel scum (esp those who have blown up death stars once before).

I would like to remind you that if Truman would have listened to Mac and delivered nuclear bombs, the boys would have been home by Christmas, and we would be looking atca very different China today.
China only survives by Gods grace.

The twin seat J-20 actually looks more aesthetically pleasing.

Regarding weight, the J-20 fuselage length is quite a bit longer, so I'm not expecting it to much lighter than an F-22, but on the other hand, if most of that length is empty space for fuel tanks, it may not be as heavy as it looks. I would think something in the neighborhood of 45,000 lbs is likely. With the longer fuselage the fuel load of this aircraft may actually be quite substantial.

I don't buy Chinese propaganda (they don't actually say much about this aircraft), but jessmo's gloating looks like nationalist chest beating. He might not take it seriously, but USAF certainly is, and USMC certainly is.

If there is a dual seat J-20 on the way, I see that as a sign.. You don't see 2 seat F-22's or 35's, and they certainly aren't flying any less demanding missions. They don't need another crew member, because the computing power, algorithims and automation take care of all of that.

You may argue the F-15EX is a two seater, but then again it isn't a true 5th gen bird. That, and I'm pretty sure I read where USAF plans to fly it with only the pilot. That 2nd seat IMO is there for 2 reasons...

1.) Possible replacement down the line for the F-15E and;
2.) That's what's in Boeing's production line TODAY. A single seater would have to be re-qualified with USAF, or at least have to jump through many more hoops.

Ergo, the 2 seat model..

From my own post a few pages ago. (About slits)
I didn't know that the F-22 also has slits.

The F-35 doesn't look like it has a slits. The reason for my misunderstanding is that the baseline standard for my stealth aircraft was the F-35. (Beginner)

I was able to see the inside of the J-20 engine.
@0:33~
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6DgP_9od84

Is the J-20 used by bringing an iPad into the cockpit !?

@2:23~
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6DgP_9od84

PLAAF just revealed the WJ-700 UCAV maiden flight. The UCAV is claimed to be a high altitude, higher-speed (~380 knots), payload and high endurance (20hr) UCAV. Capable of carrying anti-ship missiles (150km ranged C705) and ARMs (100km ranged CM102). Not that stealthy yet.

Imagine J-20s acting as a quarterback for expendable stealthy UCAVs with the same payload/performance above. Sure looks like an evolving role for the J-20 from being just a pure interceptor.

AFAIK the J-20 is a pure interceptor in the same way the F-35 is a pure striker; both of them (even if you go with low 1350 km internal fuel radius for the J-20) can shave fuel range and get fairly good T/W and wing loading figures. As I've stated here, if they can get it to 2000 km on internal fuel, it actually becomes a fairly good defensive air superiority fighter in that it can supercruise (WS-10 is a high bypass engine on the level of the F110, it needs WS-15) within home airspace from a variety of bases. The J-20 might not be superior to either the F-22 or F-35 as an air superiority fighter on a tactical level, but on an operational level, the ability to concentrate J-20s as needed from home basing makes them difficult to engage as the J-20s can attempt defeat in detail using superior speed and superior or comparable agility under low fuel conditions.

That said, the WJ-700 is pretty garbage; it's a UCAV that seems targeted for export in the "Predator Clone" market. Launching C705s means that it's designed to launch short-ranged last-last-generation Chinese AShMs, when they themselves operate YJ-12s that are roughly a clone of the Russian Klub.

More interesting Chinese UCAVs might be the high-speed Anjian drone:



This, however, one suspects won't have a proper weapons bay and might be as crippled as the J-20 when it comes to strike capabilities. The J-20 is a bad striker since its weapons bay is too short to load "proper" Chinese AShMs; it can launch F-35-style AShMs with its weapons bay design, but China, officially, doesn't seem to have operational F-35-type short AShMs. The Anjian UCAV looks as though it'd likely suffer from the same deficit in weapons bay length.

On another note Im really skeptical of the J-20s ISR/ESM and the ability to achieve a firing solution.
Ill explain why:

1. Have they demonstrated LPI techniques? Just because they have AESA doesnt mean there Radar is top shelf.

2. When was the last time the Chinese built ( not just assembled) a world class radar system? How come countries are not scrambling to buy J-17s with Aesa? Where are the customers? Even with their advanced UAV sales I hear rumors of very poor equipment that breaks easily.

3. How will the Duel in denied space with the very advanced APG-81 radar? A radar that jammed and tracked the F-22?

4. How do you process firing solutions? Send data have Comms? If you cant radiate LPI and out duel the APG-81 then the entire campaign falls apart.
To make matters worse any thing emitting when the ballon goes up is dead.

5. IR alone cant save you since its short ranged and you need to stay out of F-22/35 range whos trying to track you NOT with radar but with ESM!
Once again we are back to!

https://youtu.be/HL6DJFw9veA

This was posted by someone dated 5 February. Poster said it shows 7 J-20s in primer and several J-10Cs underneath camo netting.


The same poster posted this image pointing out several errors in this cutaway.

This was posted by someone dated 5 February. Poster said it shows 7 J-20s in primer and several J-10Cs underneath camo netting.


The same poster posted this image pointing out several errors in this cutaway.

For example...........

If Re teaming, in the case of RAAF's Loyal Wingman all it's PR artistic conceptual renderings have it flying with two seat shornet and E-7A. All of RAAF's small F-Shornet fleet are strike aircraft (interim replacements for F-111 retirement until replaced by a more capable deep strike aircraft), suggesting the teaming intended is strike related.

The main fight even in OCA is A2G, so it makes sense that the initial teaming is oriented towards that main fight with 2-seat strike platform control, which then matures into a more automated tool for the single seat strike, with decentralized network/SQN level control, rather than direct F-35A pilot control.



Imagery of Loyal Wingman working with a single-seat RAAF F-35A simply doesn't exist.

So a two seat development would certainly lean towards greater advantages for a J20 force of single-seaters with a two seat in a flight of 4 mix say, plus a drone or two.

You've got this all wrong. Loyal Wingman is being developed by Boeing Australia. The BOEING promotional material, only shows it flying with BOEING aircraft. It will most certainly be paired up with the F-35 as well.

The question of effectiveness when it comes to having a dedicated battle manager vs. adding to pilots duties is a different question.

If Re teaming, in the case of RAAF's Loyal Wingman all it's PR artistic conceptual renderings have it flying with two seat shornet and E-7A. All of RAAF's small F-Shornet fleet are strike aircraft (interim replacements for F-111 retirement until replaced by a more capable deep strike aircraft), suggesting the teaming intended is strike related.

The main fight even in OCA is A2G, so it makes sense that the initial teaming is oriented towards that main fight with 2-seat strike platform control, which then matures into a more automated tool for the single seat strike, with decentralized network/SQN level control, rather than direct F-35A pilot control.



Imagery of Loyal Wingman working with a single-seat RAAF F-35A simply doesn't exist.

So a two seat development would certainly lean towards greater advantages for a J20 force of single-seaters with a two seat in a flight of 4 mix say, plus a drone or two.

You've got this all wrong. Loyal Wingman is being developed by Boeing Australia. The BOEING promotional material, only shows it flying with BOEING aircraft. It will most certainly be paired up with the F-35 as well.

The question of effectiveness when it comes to having a dedicated battle manager vs. adding to pilots duties is a different question.

I don't know how that happened, but I wanted to point out to you that the quote within the quote you quoted above isn't my quote. (Did that make sense?)

https://breakingdefense.com/2021/03/cou ... e-problem/

Great article here