J-20 goes operational again

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

jessmo112

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 460
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post12 Oct 2021, 02:03

milosh wrote:Well if USAF thought F-22 is must have they could save it by reducing F-35 order, but that happen so I am pretty sure USAF consider F-35 better option then something design for bygone era, ATF was cold war dinosaurs with quite narrow mission to intercept soviet fighters and bombers over Germany. So range wasn't that important, friendly bases were all around.

In case of Pacific from where exactly F-22 can take off and that base isn't in range of Chinese precise airfield buster weapons?

Tankers aren't option when Chinese have stealths, and even non stealths with that 6meter long missile are quite capable at engaging tankers for safer distance.


I think the opposite, and let me explain:

1. If you want to protect the tankers. You have to think beyond tanker range, and tanker escorts and think offensively.

2. All out strikes on Chinese bases with TLAM B-2, Hypersonic weapons, tactical fighters SM-3s and even Superhornets, B-1s B-52s with stand off weapons.

3. You don't need to hit all of China, you simply need to degrade sortie rates of the red forces opposing fighters.

4.If you don't want to use the above use 10-B-2s/B-21s and 30 F-22s as escort kill every airbase within 500 miles of your fighter basket.

Remember if the Chinese think that the U.S. tankers are
Vulnerable thr Chinese tanker issue is even worse.
The Chinese seem to think that thier basing is immune to I.S. weapons. Note how in Syria, F-35s are flying concentric circles around the Syrian air defenses.
You have Iranian, Russian, Chinese. And Syrian Kit all in the same country.no one has achieved a firing solution on F-35 or F-22.
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post12 Oct 2021, 18:14

jessmo112 wrote:
milosh wrote:Well if USAF thought F-22 is must have they could save it by reducing F-35 order, but that happen so I am pretty sure USAF consider F-35 better option then something design for bygone era, ATF was cold war dinosaurs with quite narrow mission to intercept soviet fighters and bombers over Germany. So range wasn't that important, friendly bases were all around.

In case of Pacific from where exactly F-22 can take off and that base isn't in range of Chinese precise airfield buster weapons?

Tankers aren't option when Chinese have stealths, and even non stealths with that 6meter long missile are quite capable at engaging tankers for safer distance.


I think the opposite, and let me explain:

1. If you want to protect the tankers. You have to think beyond tanker range, and tanker escorts and think offensively.

2. All out strikes on Chinese bases with TLAM B-2, Hypersonic weapons, tactical fighters SM-3s and even Superhornets, B-1s B-52s with stand off weapons.

3. You don't need to hit all of China, you simply need to degrade sortie rates of the red forces opposing fighters.

4.If you don't want to use the above use 10-B-2s/B-21s and 30 F-22s as escort kill every airbase within 500 miles of your fighter basket.

Remember if the Chinese think that the U.S. tankers are
Vulnerable thr Chinese tanker issue is even worse.
The Chinese seem to think that thier basing is immune to I.S. weapons. Note how in Syria, F-35s are flying concentric circles around the Syrian air defenses.
You have Iranian, Russian, Chinese. And Syrian Kit all in the same country.no one has achieved a firing solution on F-35 or F-22.


At short notice, what is the availability of B-2s or F-22s? Thinking that you can have 10 B-2s available at a moment's notice is quite ambitious. If you only 1 squadron of F-22s stationed in Asia, how many will be available for escorts? Let's use the assumption that B-2s can get in and make their bombings. How many sorties can they actually make over the space of several days if they have to fly from continental USA every time? Keep in mind that the Chinese air fields are not defenseless. While they may not be able to track B2/F-22 to know them down, they can probably detect their general presence or at least track them at shorter ranges. The local bases will definitely be on alert during a possible combat scenario. They have invested a lot of money in not only the long range SAMs and radar, but also close-in weapon system. How many PGMs can get through air defenses to cause problems? How quickly can Chinese workers rebuild things if air bases take damage? Remember, China can build things very quickly. There is a lot of man power around.

If it takes a while for F-35s to get to the East Asia theater, do you want them to be launching bombs and perform air combat duties? I can tell you that China would be very happy if most of the F-35s come over just to launch missiles before they fly back.

As for LACMs, hypersonic missiles and non-stealthy delivery systems. Keep in mind that they will still have to overcome a very large Chinese naval air defense fleet before they can even reach land. Now if your argument is that USN will sink most of that fleet, the counterpoint is that all this would still take time. You can't really launch effective disabling attacks on Chinese air fields until you get past their naval air defense and PLAAF. Which then brings us back to the original question of the safety of tankers and special missions aircraft in such an encounter.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1441
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post12 Oct 2021, 21:37

jessmo112 wrote:3. You don't need to hit all of China, you simply need to degrade sortie rates of the red forces opposing fighters.


While US fighters would fly very long hours (using bases which aren't in reach of Chinese anti base weapons) so number of sorties would be even less and will need to use tankers which can be detected from huge distance and be easy pray to PL-21 or R-37 (if Russians sell those for Chicom Su-35).

This is why USAF want fighter with excellent range. F-35 even though is smaller then F-22, have better range maybe noticable better. So it is better option for that conflict then F-22.

jessmo112 wrote:Remember if the Chinese think that the U.S. tankers are
Vulnerable thr Chinese tanker issue is even worse.


But Chinese fighters do not need to fly across "half" of world so tankers is lot less important in Chinese strategy then in US.

It is similar as in cold war, USSR didn't have massive tanker fleet because it couldn't build it but because war would be in its backyard.

jessmo112 wrote:The Chinese seem to think that thier basing is immune to I.S. weapons. Note how in Syria, F-35s are flying concentric circles around the Syrian air defenses.
You have Iranian, Russian, Chinese. And Syrian Kit all in the same country.no one has achieved a firing solution on F-35 or F-22.


Using Syria as some kind of example is nonsense. Syrian integrated air defense network isn't nothing like Chinese or Russian one. And its airforce is joke.

China and Russia don't rely just on air defense but people forget that.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7877
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Oct 2021, 23:31

It's not just range but time on station.....
Offline

skyward

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 13:33

Unread post12 Oct 2021, 23:46

Just have a jammer near the air refiller to hide from the radar.
Offline

jessmo112

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 460
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post13 Oct 2021, 01:11

milosh wrote:
jessmo112 wrote:3. You don't need to hit all of China, you simply need to degrade sortie rates of the red forces opposing fighters.


While US fighters would fly very long hours (using bases which aren't in reach of Chinese anti base weapons) so number of sorties would be even less and will need to use tankers which can be detected from huge distance and be easy pray to PL-21 or R-37 (if Russians sell those for Chicom Su-35).

This is why USAF want fighter with excellent range. F-35 even though is smaller then F-22, have better range maybe noticable better. So it is better option for that conflict then F-22.

jessmo112 wrote:Remember if the Chinese think that the U.S. tankers are
Vulnerable thr Chinese tanker issue is even worse.


But Chinese fighters do not need to fly across "half" of world so tankers is lot less important in Chinese strategy then in US.

It is similar as in cold war, USSR didn't have massive tanker fleet because it couldn't build it but because war would be in its backyard.

jessmo112 wrote:The Chinese seem to think that thier basing is immune to I.S. weapons. Note how in Syria, F-35s are flying concentric circles around the Syrian air defenses.
You have Iranian, Russian, Chinese. And Syrian Kit all in the same country.no one has achieved a firing solution on F-35 or F-22.


Using Syria as some kind of example is nonsense. Syrian integrated air defense network isn't nothing like Chinese or Russian one. And its airforce is joke.

China and Russia don't rely just on air defense but people forget that.


Syria is a perfect example. In Syrua you have, Syrian, Russian, Chinese, and Iranian Radars burning holes in the sky trying to locate F-35s. If Russian S-300/S-400 and Chinese long range radar cannot achieve said firing solution then. The entire Chinese Campaign is doomed.
As far as the tanker issue concerned the entire tanker argument is a rope a dope. The initial strikes will not primarily come from tactical fighters but from surging bomber forces from, Conus, Diego Garcia, and Australia.
When the B-21 comes on line it will be worse.
Between B-2,/21 B-1,B-52s Ohios, Virginia's, and what the 7th fleet decides to do the U.S can make Chinese red forces catch he'll the 1st few days. Once 5 more carriers and tactical fighters show up its lights out.
BTW the U.S. has practiced deploying Raptors across the pacific in strike packages for years now!

https://www.afrc.af.mil/About-Us/Innova ... id-Raptor/

There is nothing the Chinese can do.once we bring our full might to bear. They can't out nuke us. They can't out fight us. We are not the Philippians who you can bully
To make matters worse the Chinese have to fight nearly every surface fleet in Asia.
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post13 Oct 2021, 12:50

You would be making a huge mistake if you think what Syria has is anywhere close to what China has on its coasts. Thankfully, none of the US commanders are going to underestimate it.

This is also a case study of why China had to put J-20 into service even though AL-31s makes it vastly underpowered and detracts its stealth in various measures. Even if J-20 is a generation behind F-35 in stealth and EW suites, it's still something they can use to simulate an attacking force with advanced stealth and EW capabilities. It's still something they can use to practice deep penetrations and make iterative improvements to its avionics and stealth. Or at least learn how to maintain its stealth. And as we've seen with F-22, maintaining 5th generation aircraft and making them available for services is a difficult and costly task.
Offline

jessmo112

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 460
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post13 Oct 2021, 19:45

tphuang wrote:You would be making a huge mistake if you think what Syria has is anywhere close to what China has on its coasts. Thankfully, none of the US commanders are going to underestimate it.

This is also a case study of why China had to put J-20 into service even though AL-31s makes it vastly underpowered and detracts its stealth in various measures. Even if J-20 is a generation behind F-35 in stealth and EW suites, it's still something they can use to simulate an attacking force with advanced stealth and EW capabilities. It's still something they can use to practice deep penetrations and make iterative improvements to its avionics and stealth. Or at least learn how to maintain its stealth. And as we've seen with F-22, maintaining 5th generation aircraft and making them available for services is a difficult and costly task.


Let's see:
S-300 check
S-400 check
Chinese J-Y27 radar check.
Do you think the HQ-9 is that superior to the S-400?
Do you think that Russian Su-35s and even the Su-57 are so inferior to Chinese kit that it would make a difference.
The Syrians, Russians, and Iran atleast have experience firing thier kit in a war setting. When was the last time the Chinese shot down anything?

https://defence-blog.com/source-israeli ... -in-syria/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7877
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post14 Oct 2021, 01:16

tphuang wrote:You would be making a huge mistake if you think what Syria has is anywhere close to what China has on its coasts. Thankfully, none of the US commanders are going to underestimate it.

This is also a case study of why China had to put J-20 into service even though AL-31s makes it vastly underpowered and detracts its stealth in various measures. Even if J-20 is a generation behind F-35 in stealth and EW suites, it's still something they can use to simulate an attacking force with advanced stealth and EW capabilities. It's still something they can use to practice deep penetrations and make iterative improvements to its avionics and stealth. Or at least learn how to maintain its stealth. And as we've seen with F-22, maintaining 5th generation aircraft and making them available for services is a difficult and costly task.



Question was the F-14A "vastly" underpowered?
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post14 Oct 2021, 14:46

Corsair1963 wrote:
Question was the F-14A "vastly" underpowered?


I don't know the answer to that. For the mission profile that it has, J-20's current engines are underpowered.

Let's see:
S-300 check
S-400 check
Chinese J-Y27 radar check.
Do you think the HQ-9 is that superior to the S-400?
Do you think that Russian Su-35s and even the Su-57 are so inferior to Chinese kit that it would make a difference.
The Syrians, Russians, and Iran atleast have experience firing thier kit in a war setting. When was the last time the Chinese shot down anything?

https://defence-blog.com/source-israeli ... -in-syria/


Numbers do matter
Training does matter
Tactics do matter
having a whole system of radar and missiles do matter.

China's coastal area will have a wide range of radar, SAMs and CIWS. If you think these systems cannot handle a few PGMs and cruise missiles, you are badly mistaking. China will never export anything close to its best system to any country, let alone Syria. That's even if we assume they will be unable to track F-35s at a useful range and that their large East Sea Fleet cannot provide any type of warning.

Yes, HQ-9 with a large national network of radar/surveillance system that's trained against attacking forces is far superior to export version of S-400 operated by people with very little experience.
Offline

jessmo112

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 460
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post14 Oct 2021, 15:11

tphuang wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
Question was the F-14A "vastly" underpowered?


I don't know the answer to that. For the mission profile that it has, J-20's current engines are underpowered.

Let's see:
S-300 check
S-400 check
Chinese J-Y27 radar check.
Do you think the HQ-9 is that superior to the S-400?
Do you think that Russian Su-35s and even the Su-57 are so inferior to Chinese kit that it would make a difference.
The Syrians, Russians, and Iran atleast have experience firing thier kit in a war setting. When was the last time the Chinese shot down anything?

https://defence-blog.com/source-israeli ... -in-syria/


Numbers do matter
Training does matter
Tactics do matter
having a whole system of radar and missiles do matter.

China's coastal area will have a wide range of radar, SAMs and CIWS. If you think these systems cannot handle a few PGMs and cruise missiles, you are badly mistaking. China will never export anything close to its best system to any country, let alone Syria. That's even if we assume they will be unable to track F-35s at a useful range and that their large East Sea Fleet cannot provide any type of warning.

Yes, HQ-9 with a large national network of radar/surveillance system that's trained against attacking forces is far superior to export version of S-400 operated by people with very little experience.


1. How are the Chinese systems any better than the Russian systems? Or did you forget Russia is also in Syria?!

2. A few pgms? A few cruise missiles? The U.S. response to a Chinese attack will be nothing short of shock and awe.

3.Your thinking wrong. China has to realize that they are playing in a entirely new paradigm. Stuffing the coast with Sam's won't really change the out come.If 20 S-400s can't stop F-35s how will 100?
Offline

tphuang

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post14 Oct 2021, 18:25

jessmo112 wrote:1. How are the Chinese systems any better than the Russian systems? Or did you forget Russia is also in Syria?!

2. A few pgms? A few cruise missiles? The U.S. response to a Chinese attack will be nothing short of shock and awe.

3.Your thinking wrong. China has to realize that they are playing in a entirely new paradigm. Stuffing the coast with Sam's won't really change the out come.If 20 S-400s can't stop F-35s how will 100?


My last point on this. Even if we assume that Chinese air defense naval ships, aircraft and land based radars cannot track LO platforms at effective range, there are only so much munitions that can be deployed if we consider how many B-2/F-22/F-35s can arrive in that theater in a timely manner and the availability on those aircraft. There is just not enough munition that can be delivered by stealth platforms that can do real damage on China's coastal air bases. At least nothing that Chinese construction workers can't repair in short period of time.

And if we focus more on j-20. You can take a look at scramble's PLAAF ORBAT and see how far J-20 air bases are from the coast.

So, you would have to rely on a much larger fleet, which has to go through a very large Chinese naval fleet fighting in its back yard. Which means, it has full support of land based aircraft from near by, land based long range radar, all the land based drones, anti-ship BM, underwater surveillance network, diesel submarines and a whole bunch of anti-ship missile deployment platforms (Type 022/056).

Which brings us back to the original point of needing tankers and surveillance aircraft in any of the realistic combat scenario. Which is why USAF/USN has to prepare for the threat of J-20 going after tankers.
Offline

jessmo112

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 460
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post14 Oct 2021, 23:03

tphuang wrote:
jessmo112 wrote:1. How are the Chinese systems any better than the Russian systems? Or did you forget Russia is also in Syria?!

2. A few pgms? A few cruise missiles? The U.S. response to a Chinese attack will be nothing short of shock and awe.

3.Your thinking wrong. China has to realize that they are playing in a entirely new paradigm. Stuffing the coast with Sam's won't really change the out come.If 20 S-400s can't stop F-35s how will 100?


My last point on this. Even if we assume that Chinese air defense naval ships, aircraft and land based radars cannot track LO platforms at effective range, there are only so much munitions that can be deployed if we consider how many B-2/F-22/F-35s can arrive in that theater in a timely manner and the availability on those aircraft. There is just not enough munition that can be delivered by stealth platforms that can do real damage on China's coastal air bases. At least nothing that Chinese construction workers can't repair in short period of time.

And if we focus more on j-20. You can take a look at scramble's PLAAF ORBAT and see how far J-20 air bases are from the coast.

So, you would have to rely on a much larger fleet, which has to go through a very large Chinese naval fleet fighting in its back yard. Which means, it has full support of land based aircraft from near by, land based long range radar, all the land based drones, anti-ship BM, underwater surveillance network, diesel submarines and a whole bunch of anti-ship missile deployment platforms (Type 022/056).

Which brings us back to the original point of needing tankers and surveillance aircraft in any of the realistic combat scenario. Which is why USAF/USN has to prepare for the threat of J-20 going after tankers.



I don't see how you discount the U.S. sub fleet and the U.S. bomber fleets. These 2 fleets can put several hundred cruise missiles into a facility at a time.
The U.S. army and Marines will soon be in on the action by fielding hypersonic weapons, and stand off cruise weapons. Sub tech in particular is one area that the Chinese lag far behind. If I worked on a Chinese cruiseer I would be terrified to try and fight a Virginia or a seawall.
In fact you must assume that when your ship or Sub leaves port that it's already tracked.
Think of how a few German U-boats, and the U.S sun's in the pacific campaign forced alot of resources to be tied up. Now you have Sub classes that not only hunt your fleets with impunity, but that can fire 150 TLAMs into a base.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3909
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post15 Oct 2021, 16:00

tphuang wrote:


My last point on this. Even if we assume that Chinese air defense naval ships, aircraft and land based radars cannot track LO platforms at effective range, there are only so much munitions that can be deployed if we consider how many B-2/F-22/F-35s can arrive in that theater in a timely manner and the availability on those aircraft. There is just not enough munition that can be delivered by stealth platforms that can do real damage on China's coastal air bases. At least nothing that Chinese construction workers can't repair in short period of time.


Any attack wouldn't just involve B-2/F-22/F-35. There would be B-1B/B-52, SSNs, SSGNs, AEGIS destroyers/cruisers, F-15E, F-16, F-18, EA-18G. China would have to deal with thousands of missiles, and that's just with a 2021 force structure. As we progress in this decade, you can start adding in Army, Navy, Marine, Air Force hypersonic missiles, upgraded SM-6, and B-21s, just to mention a few new capabilities.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3909
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post15 Oct 2021, 16:14

jessmo112 wrote:



I don't see how you discount the U.S. sub fleet and the U.S. bomber fleets. These 2 fleets can put several hundred cruise missiles into a facility at a time.
The U.S. army and Marines will soon be in on the action by fielding hypersonic weapons, and stand off cruise weapons. Sub tech in particular is one area that the Chinese lag far behind. If I worked on a Chinese cruiseer I would be terrified to try and fight a Virginia or a seawall.
In fact you must assume that when your ship or Sub leaves port that it's already tracked.
Think of how a few German U-boats, and the U.S sun's in the pacific campaign forced alot of resources to be tied up. Now you have Sub classes that not only hunt your fleets with impunity, but that can fire 150 TLAMs into a base.

Exactly. Each of the 4 SSGNs can fire 154 TLAMs (616 missiles if all 4 subs used). Seawolf SSNs can launch 50 TLAMs (150 missiles if all 3 subs used). Virginia SSNs can currently carry 37 TLAMs, and with the Block V upgrade, will carry 65 TLAMs. Los Angeles SSNs can carry 12 TLAMs in their VLS tubes, and additional missiles from their torpedo tubes. That's a lot of missiles in theory, without even counting the ones on ships, or the JASSM-ER/XR on bombers and fighters.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests