INTL An Initial Assessment of China's J-20 Stealth Fighter

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Posted for fair use......
http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=37903&tx_ttnews[backPid]=7&cHash=ed4b8fd6034b256ee038e501896086c9

An Initial Assessment of China's J-20 Stealth Fighter
Publication: China Brief Volume: 11 Issue: 8
May 6, 2011 05:31 PM Age: 15 hrs
By: Carlo Kopp

The maiden test flight in January 2011 of China's J-20 stealth fighter prototype is an important strategic milestone in several different respects, and is part of an ongoing effort by China to develop advanced military technology [1]. The J-20 is the first combat aircraft developed by China that qualifies as "state of the art" by Western measures. It also shows that China has mastered "stealth shaping" technology—the essential prerequisite for developing stealth aircraft. Finally it shows that China has managed to integrate its strategic planning with the functional definition of a modern combat aircraft. Once fully developed, the J-20 has the potential to alter the regional balance in the Asian air power strategic game, by rendering nearly all regional air defense systems ineffective.

The People's Liberation Army (PLA) has yet to disclose any of the intended performance parameters of this fighter aircraft, or its intended avionic systems and weapons fit. As a result, analysts are left with one choice only, which is to apply analytical criteria such as size, shape and configuration to draw an estimate of the aircraft's characteristics. If applied with rigor, this technique can produce highly accurate results [2].

Scaling the dimensions of the J-20 against proximate ground vehicles of known types in photographs does yield very accurate dimensions, showing that the J-20 is a large fighter, in the size class of the United States F/FB-111 family of aircraft, or the proposed but never built FB-22A "theater bomber." This in turn indicates an empty weight in the 40,000 – 50,000 lb class, depending on construction technique used in the design, and an internal fuel load of up to 35,000 lb. Inevitably, this yields subsonic combat radius figures in the 1,000 – 1,500 nautical mile class, subject to the thrust specific fuel consumption of the production engine in subsonic cruise. The J-20 is therefore a fighter built for reach, and would be competitive in range performance against the F/FB-111 series, the F-15E Strike Eagle series, and the new Russian Su-35S Flanker series. The implications of this will be discussed further.

J-20 Capability Assessment

The shaping of the J-20 prototype has important implications from the perspectives of aerodynamic performance and stealth.

The delta canard configuration of the J-20 design is common to the earlier Chengdu J-10, the European Eurofighter Typhoon, the French Rafale and the prototype of the Russian MiG I.42 super cruise fighter. This configuration provides for high supersonic performance, excellent supersonic and transonic turn performance, and better short field landing performance than conventional delta wing designs. If equipped with suitable engines, a J-20 would be very efficient in supersonic cruise regime, with excellent close combat maneuver performance. The intended engine fit has not been disclosed, although there has been speculation that the prototype may be fitted with imported Russian Al-41F1S or Item 117S engines common to the Su-35S and T-50 PAK-FA prototypes. The Al-41F1 is an evolution of the supersonic cruise engine developed for the MiG I.42, with a more powerful Item 129 engine in development for the production T-50 [3].

There has been some media speculation about an indigenous engine for the J-20, designated the WS-15, but no substantial official disclosures to date [4].

The detail airframe stealth shaping design of the J-20 is clearly based on shaping design rules developed by the United States, and employed primarily in the F-22A Raptor, but with an engine inlet design closer to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. This is important insofar as most radar signature improvement in stealth designs is a result of shaping, with radar absorbent materials and detail design employed primarily to "clean up" unwanted reflections that could not be suppressed by shaping. Qualitative and quantitative analysis performed by the author indicates that the J-20 has the potential to yield much better stealth performance from the front and sides than the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and possibly as good as the F-22A Raptor, should Chinese designers master materials and detail design techniques adequately. The design has only two apparent weaknesses, which are the curvature in the slab side shaping, which provides broader reflection lobes than necessary, and the circular exhaust nozzle, a weakness common to the F-35 and T-50. Both may be artifacts of the prototype and may not be features of a future production aircraft.

The shaping design will be highly effective against radars operating above the 1 GigaHertz L-band, but much less effective below this band. This band coverage encompasses most surface based and airborne search, acquisition and fire control radars used by the United States and its allies in Asia.

A survey of twenty-six unclassified English language Chinese research papers on radar absorbent materials indicates a high level of research effort in the area, but mostly for materials not suitable for aircraft applications. Research in this area is usually not published in the West and there is no reason to believe China would do differently [5].

The available data supports the proposition that the J-20, once fully developed, will be a high performance stealth aircraft, arguably capable of competing in most cardinal performance parameters (i.e. speed, altitude, stealth, agility) with the United States F-22A Raptor, and superior in most if not all cardinal performance parameters against the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The intended role of the J-20 has not been disclosed officially, and widely varying views have been expressed by various observers.

The suitability of this design for various roles will depend primarily upon what engines are installed, and whether faceted stealthy exhaust nozzles modeled on the F-22 design are employed, the latter being important for deep penetration through air defense systems.

If the engines deliver 40,000 – 50,000 lb class thrust performance, the J-20 will be viable as an air combat fighter, air defense interceptor and deep strike fighter. If thrust performance falls below this benchmark, the aircraft would lack the agility for close air combat, but still be very effective as an interceptor or bomber.

What this suggests is that if Chinese engine technology has not matured enough by the latter half of this decade, when IOC is planned for the J-20 [6], early variants could be employed as strike aircraft, or interceptors, with later variants "growing" into the air combat role as more powerful engines become available.

China has deployed or developed a range of new guided weapons suitable for internal carriage by the J-20. While no imagery as yet exists showing the configuration of the J-20 internal bays, the aircraft layout could permit a similar arrangement to the F-22A, but with a longer and deeper fuselage bay capable of carrying larger bombs, or even more weapons.

Richard Fisher at the International Assessment and Strategy Center has detailed a number of Chinese 5th Generation Air-Air Missiles, including evolved variants of the PL-12, modeled on the United States AIM-120 AMRAAM, the ramjet powered "PL-13" modeled on the European MBDA Meteor, and the agile thrust vectoring PL-ASR/PL-10, modeled on the A-Darter and Iris-T missiles [7].

Guided bombs suitable for strike against surface targets are also abundant. At the Zhuhai and CIDEX 2010 arms expos, Luoyang/CASC (China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation) displayed a range of new guided bomb designs. These include the "Lerting" (Thunderbolt) LT-3, which is modeled on the US GBU-55/56(V)/B Laser JDAMs, the FT-1, FT-3 and FT-5 modeled on the U.S. GBU-32/35/38 JDAM satellite aided bombs, and the winged FT-2, FT-4, FT-6 and LS-6 planar wing glide bomb variants, broadly modeled on the Australian JDAM-ER glide bomb family. The LS-6 family also includes 50 kg and 100 kg small bombs, modeled on the U.S. Small Diameter Bomb series, but with cruciform strakes rather than planar wings [8].

The heavy emphasis placed by Luoyang/CASC on glide bombs is important, as these can be released by stealth aircraft from ranges well outside the detection range of the aircraft itself, which can thus remain unseen through the whole delivery maneuver, effecting complete surprise.

The strategic impact of a mature production J-20, even if limited to strike roles alone, would be profound. With sufficiently good stealth performance to defeat air defense radars in the L-band through Ku-band, the aircraft could easily penetrate all air defense systems currently deployed in Asia. Even should the aircraft be tracked by a counter-stealth radar, the high altitude supersonic cruise penetration flight profile makes it extremely difficult to engage by fighter aircraft and Surface to Air Missiles. The only fighters deployed in the Pacific Rim with the raw performance to reliably intercept a supersonic J-20 are the F-22A Raptor and Russian MiG-31 Foxhound.

The size of the J-20 and resulting fuel fraction indicate that the aircraft will be able to cover the "First Island Chain" without aerial tanker support, and with tanker support, reach targets across the "Second Island Chain" on subsonic cruise profiles. Nearer targets would be accessible on supersonic cruise profiles [9].

The Impact of the J-20

There can be no doubt at this time that a mature production J-20 with fully developed stealth and supersonic cruise capability would qualify as a "game changer" in the Asia-Pacific region.

The J-20's combination of stealth and supersonic cruise—the cardinal design feature of the F-22A Raptor—provides the capability to defeat nearly all extant Integrated Air Defense Systems. Defeat is effected by denying detection, and should detection occur, by kinetically defeating launched missiles, which cannot close with the target before it exits radar tracking range. Even without stealth, high altitude supersonic aircraft are challenging targets for all but the largest and longest ranging Surface to Air Missiles. Interceptor aircraft without a capability for sustained supersonic flight are typically ineffective against high altitude supersonic targets.

The development of the J-20 around the combination of stealth and supersonic cruise results in a design, which will be undetectable at range by almost all air defense radars operated by the United States and its numerous allies in the Asia-Pacific region. In practical terms, this results in the "block obsolescence" of most Asian air defense systems.

Another important consideration is that the J-20 is a large fighter and therefore, if flown on fuel efficient subsonic cruise profiles, will be able to reach targets at ranges of around 1,000 nautical miles without aerial refueling tanker support.

If flown from PLA airbases along the eastern seaboard of mainland China, the J-20 will thus be able to comfortably reach any target within China's "First Island Chain," unrefueled. These targets include airfields in Japan, South Korea, and former US Air Force airbases in the Philippines.

With modest aerial refueling support, the J-20 will be able to reach most targets situated along China's "Second Island Chain," including the strategically critical Guam facilities.

The strategic choices available to the United States and its allies for dealing with the J-20 are very limited; such is the potency of all aircraft combining stealth and supersonic cruise capabilities. These distill down to the deployment of large numbers of F-22A Raptor fighters in the region, and the development and deployment of "counter-stealth" radars operating in the HF, VHF, and UHF radio-frequency bands. Funding for the production of the F-22A was stopped in 2009, following an intensive political effort by Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates. There is no program to fund the development and volume production of "counter-stealth" radars.

The incumbent U.S. Administration has thus committed itself politically to a path in developing air power for the U.S. armed services and allied air forces, predicated wholly on future opponents operating obsolete Soviet era air defense weapons and fighters. The unveiling of the Russian T-50 PAK-FA and Chinese J-20 over the last two years has not produced any significant changes in U.S. planning, which may challenge the United States and its Pacific Rim allies’ strategic advantage in conventional air power.

Notes:

1. Military talents build-up to be enhanced: Hu, People's Daily Online, April 20, 2011, english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90786/7356841.html.
2. Kopp C. and Goon P.A., Chengdu J-XX [J-20] Stealth Fighter Prototype; A Preliminary Assessment, Technical Report APA-TR-2011-0101, Air Power Australia, January, 2011, www.ausairpower.net/APA-J-XX-Prototype.html.
3. "Изделие 129" для ПАК ФА создадут раньше срока ("Item 129" for the PAK-FA will arive ahead of schedule), News report, Lenta.ru, www.lenta.ru/news/2011/04/13/pakfa/.
4. Fisher, R., Jr, October Surprises In Chinese Aerospace, International Assessment and Strategy Centre, December, 2009, www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.219/pub_detail.asp.
5. Refer supplementary list of papers.
6. In November, 2009, the Deputy Commander of the PLAAF cited 2018-2019 as an IOC, refer L.C. Russell Hsiao, CHINA’S FIFTH-GENERATION FIGHTERS AND THE CHANGING STRATEGIC BALANCE, CHINA BRIEF, VOLUME IX, ISSUE 23, NOVEMBER 19, 2009, Jamestown Foundation, www.jamestown.org/uploads/media/cb_009_64.pdf.
7. Fisher, R, Jr, China’s Emerging 5th Generation Air-to-Air Missiles, International Assessment and Strategy Centre, February, 2008, www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.181/pub_detail.asp; also Kopp C., PLA Air to Air Missiles, Technical Report APA-TR-2009-0802, Air Power Australia, August, 2009, www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-AAM.html.
8. Kopp C. and Andrew M., PLA Guided Bombs, Technical Report APA-TR-2009-0808, Air Power Australia, August, 2009, www.ausairpower.net/pla-air-pwr.html.
9. Kopp C., The Strategic Impact of China's J-XX [J-20] Stealth Fighter, APA NOTAM #70, Air Power Australia, January, 2011, www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-090111-1.html.
 

The Cub

Behold, I am coming soon.
and how did a country that did not have toilets 15-20 years ago develop hi-tech fighters, anti-aircraft carriers, missiles and space technology in record time?

Answer: Clinton/Bush
 

Archetype

Veteran Member
Just because peasants out in the countryside didn't have toilets, don't underestimate the Chinese. Public sanitation was probably not one of their priorities, weapons were. The Chinese detonated their first nuke in '64, and their first H-bomb three years later, making the transition quicker than we did. They were building jet fighters and missiles when Bill Clinton and Bush (at least George W.) were in high school.
 

Archetype

Veteran Member
Read sometime about Qian Xuesen, the MIT graduate scientist who was one of our top rocket experts in the WWII and early postwar years (yes, we didn't have to solely rely on Germans). One of the driving forces behind JPL. He was accused on being a communist, held for years here, and eventually traded to the Chinese for downed US flyers. The Undersecretary of the Navy said: "It was the stupidest thing this country ever did. He was no more a Communist than I was, and we forced him to go." He wasn't a communist here, but he sure as heck turned into one after his treatment, and basically founded the whole PRC missile program. The DF-series ballistic missiles? His babies. Silkworm? His. So don't think that the Chinese are these ignorant "yellow people" who have to steal secrets to get anywhere. They'll take what they can get from espionage (as would any other country) but they didn't magically gain a missile force because of Bill Clinton.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Archetype, China Connection, Doc and Kent are all correct.

IMHO, the biggest historical hindrance to the development of China has been a combination of tyrannical, incompetent and corrupt regimes holding onto power with their fingernails in some cases all the while operating in a country surrounded by other predatory nation states, if not provincial governors or party leaders.

_______

ETA: Here is another analysis from January.....

Posted for fair use.....see source for replies....
http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2011/01/j-20-had-its-first-flight-what-now.html

Saturday, January 15, 2011
J-20 had its first flight, what now?

This past week, all of the Chinese forums and aviation forums online were left buzzing with pictures and videos of the first flight of J-20. At the same time, news of Hu Jintao being surprised by Gates asking him about the first flight of J-20 were also circulated around the web. Either way, the recent news of J-20's appearance has caused a lot of headlines around the world. The question is what now? What does this mean for the Chinese aviation industry and PLAAF?

When we read the news online reporting J-20, we see a lot of different opinion. There are some that are immediately dismissive toward the plane, toward China's ability to field a 5th generation fighter jet and to weed of reliance on Russian support. I find much of these articles to be extremely misinformed on the current situation in PLAAF and Chinese aviation industry. For example, one common misconception is that China is still relying on AL-31F on J-10 and J-11 at the moment. While it is true J-10s are still using AL-31FN, it is also quite evident that J-11Bs are entering service in two different regiments (one in PLAAF and one in PLANAF) with FWS-10 as the power plant. I will get back to the issue of engine later. At the same time, there are also a lot of excited PLAAF fans online who are looking at this as the F-22 competitor and the F-35 killer. Some are even wondering about the need to continue produce more J-10 variants with the apparent arrival of J-20. While it is easy for a PLA follower like myself to get excited about J-20, it is also apparent that China has a long way to go.

I have always said that I expected the 5th generation fighter jet to first achieve operational status around 2018 (meaning having at least one full regiment converted to this plane and completed basic training on it). At this point, I still expect it to be so if everything works out. The first and the biggest question is engine. I was extremely surprised to find out a particular upgraded variant of WS-10 was used for the first flight instead of AL-31F. I believe that J-11BS's first prototype was also using WS-10, but did not think it had enough thrust for J-20. I think that J-20 made its first takeoff without the need to turn on its afterburners and took off at much shorter distance than J-10S. I don't think a fighter jet with two severely underpowered engines would be able to do that, so its engines should have more power than that of standard WS-10. Right now, there are basically two plausible theories right now regarding to the engines:

1) They are a specially modified version of WS-10G (an upgraded variant of WS-10) that generates comparable thrust to 117S. This variant has been in development for a while and has already finished long endurance testing. However, due to the continued struggle of Shenyang Liming (factory 606) in mass production of the basic variant of WS-10, this variant also could not move forward in its deployment. Due to the immaturity of the design, it would have much shorter service life and MTBO than more mature engines like AL-31F or even WS-10.
2) They are a specially modified version of WS-10's basic variant. These two engines are carefully prepared with more advanced materials and are switched to operate at higher thrust level than a normal production copy. Again, the MTBO time of these engines are much shorter than the normal WS-10s, because they have to handle the wear and tear of continuously generating more thrust.

Of the two, I think the first one is more likely. What does this say about WS-10? I think that while there are problems with the design, it can be successfully deployed in service if it is produced and maintained properly. PLA would not allow one of their biggest projects to make first flight with an engine that they have no faith in. I guess that is the main problem. Shenyang Liming has become the joke of Chinese aviation industry with its recent failures. After several years of fanfare, the WP-14 (Kunlun) project was recently abandoned. I would think much of that is due to Liming's problems with project management and quality control. At the same time, WS-10 and J-11B program have been delayed by at least 2 years due to continued troubles with the quality of WS-10 produced by Liming. WS-10 has only recently been fielded on J-11B after a lot of changes. You can only discover all the little problems with an engine after it has been installed on many aircraft and flown many hours. And I hope in the coming couple of years, Shenyang AeroEngine Research Institute (SAERI, not to be mistaken with Shenyang Liming) will be able to really increase the reliability of the design and use that in its other projects like QC-280, WS-10G and WS-10-118. However, even a really well designed engine can have a lot of problems if the manufacturer does not have good production or quality control processes. I hope that Shenyang Liming can fix its current problems. Otherwise, all of the production responsibility should be shifted to Xi'an AeroEngine PLC (factory 410). XAE has been mass producing WS-9 for JH-7A without any major reported problems and is also responsible for one third of the parts on WS-10. I believe that it is also responsible for producing WS-15 and large bypass turbofan engines for Y-20 once those engines are ready for mass production. It is obviously a long way from reaching the manufacturing quality of GE, PW and RR, but it is the golden standard of Chinese AeroEngine companies. It also scored major boast recently when it formed join venture with Nexcelle to produce and assemble jet engine nacelle components of the C919 project. These things will only help the project management and quality control of XAE. At this point, you may wonder why China does not just give up on Liming and pass everything on to XAE or even any of the other AeroEngine manufacturer. I think that China is trying to keep several factories around to foster competition. It remains to be seen whether or not XAE or GuiZhou Liyang or Chengfa group (factory 420) or any other factories will get in on WS-10. So, while J-20's first flight with WS-10 is a good sign, we still need to wait a couple of years to see if Liming or XAE or anyone else can finally reliably mass produce WS-10 engines for J-10 and J-11.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
continued....

Questions have also been raised about whether other parts of a 5th generation program like missiles, avionics, aerodynamics, materials and stealth can reach that level. I think what we have seen recently in Zhuhai airshow with regards to PGMs and AShM + reports of different 5th generation AAMs in advanced development show that this is not an area of concern. In fact, aviation week reported that most of the next generation missiles were all designed with the weapon bay of J-20 in mind. I also find radar and avionics to not be an area of concern. The J-10B platform will be used to test out a lot of avionics that will eventually deployed on J-20 (albeit improved in performance). From the recent CIDEX 2010, it is apparent that the Chinese electronics industry has come a long way in a short time and is more than capable of developing and producing top notch of avionics for fighter jets and other military hardware. I think aerodynamics is another area that should be quite well developed. I certainly expect J-20 to be far more maneuverable than F-35 and at least on the same level as T-50 and F-22 in flight performance. The areas that I do question are material and stealth. Does China have the ability to produce the high quality composite carbon polymer, titanium and other material needed for a 5th generation fighter jet. I think they do due to all of the work they have with airliners, which are at the cutting of material technology. For example, Harbin aviation industry group is cooperating with Airbus as a supplier for composite material on A350. At the same time, AVIC-1 is also cooperating with Hexcel and Boeing to produce composite materials for Boeing jets. SAC is in charge of the entire aluminum-lithium fuselage for Bombardier's C-Series jets. That leaves us with the biggest question of stealth. I've already heard plenty of complaints about the effect that the canards and the variable DSI-like intake would have on stealth. I think when CAC was developing J-20, they had to make compromises between its weight, aerodynamics and stealth. They definitely developed it with the intention of creating a LO-platform as we can see from internal weapon bay, the general shaping of the aircraft, the jagged edges of all the compartments and panels and the "stealthy nozzles" on the engine. However, what kind of affect would the canards or the intakes or anything else would have all the signature of the aircraft. Did they develop J-20 with full aspect stealth in mind? And what kind of results have they achieved in plasma stealth and application of radar absorption material? These are the things I don't know and we will have to wait to be answered. One of the most significant part of J-20's development is that these areas of development can be applied on J-10 and J-11 to improve their capabilities.

What does J-20 mean for the aircraft makers of AVIC-1? It appears to all of us that CAC/611 Institute has overtaken SAC/601 Institute as the top dog of AVIC-1. After all, CAC beat SAC in the competition for the 5th generation jet and the 4th generation jet (J-10). It also scored many export contract with J-7s and JF17s, while SAC has not done anything. From this, SAC has taken a lot of heat for its inability to produce anything new, while continuing to develop new variants of J-8. I do think that a lot of it is unwarranted. It probably does not have the ability to innovate like CAC, but it has done a lot of good things with flankers. China made the decision to locally produce Su-27s, because it could not at that time develop a comparable fighter jet. While CAC was given resources to develop J-10 (and it did a great job), SAC was forced to learn something as complex as Su-27 and produce it. Sukhoi has been very surprised to find out that SAC was able to learn enough about su-27s so shortly to be able to develop (or copy as the Russians call it) and completely locally produce J-11B and J-11BS. With its experience in developing J-11B/S and studying T-10K prototype, it was able to fast track and quickly develop J-15 fighter jet. Even though CAC is the main contractor for the J-20 project, SAC's experience in heavy fighter and high quality titanium and aluminum alloy with J-11 project has been extremely important in J-20's development. So as we move forward, CAC and SAC are both very important in the future of Chinese military aviation. As SAC has shown in its ability to land major supplier contracts with Boeing, Cessna and Bombardier. I also hope that Xi'an AC and Shaanxi AC will continue to advance in RnD and production through future transport and bomber projects. It is important to continue to foster competition within AVIC-1 and compete in international aerospace industry.

The other big question is what J-20 will mean for PLAAF. In the current time, J-10 and J-11 form a good light-heavy fighter jet combination with JH-7A as the main strike bomber and H-6 as strategic bomber. PLAAF still has a large number of J-7 and J-8 regiments that will need to be replaced in the coming years. In spite of what some may think, PLAAF does not have endless amount of cash that it can spend on new weapons procurement. It is important to spend an increasingly amount of budget on recruiting the best pilots and putting them through the best training programs. Even if PLAAF is somehow handed the entire F-22 inventory of USAF today, it would not have enough budget to operate and maintain them while also maintaining all of its other aircraft divisions. Even in 10 years when J-20 first enters PLAAF in meaningful number, PLAAF will not have enough budget to field it in large number. You may ask at this point why they do not just shrink the size of its air force like what most other air forces are doing. They have actually shrunk their air force quite a bit already when J-6s were put out of commission and will probably shrink a little more when J-7s retire. However, China has a very large airspace and cannot shrink past a certain point. As a result, PLAAF will likely be made up of a combination of the very hi (J-20), the middle (J-10s, J-11B+), the lo (early flankers variants, J-7/8s) and non-fighter jets (JH-7A, AWACs, K-8, L-15, Y-8/9...) by 2020-2025. Over the next 10 years, J-7 and J-8 regiments will slowly retire out of service. At the moment, J-7s are replaced by J-10s while J-8s are replaced by flankers and newer variants of J-8s. Flankers are likely to remain in service with PLAAF for a long time, because they will be very useful in the roles of fighter-bomber and strike aircraft even after the proliferation of stealth aircraft. If XAC does not develop a replacement for JH-7, then J-11BS could eventually be used to replace JH-7 regiments. Some people have wondered about the role of J-10 in PLAAF after J-20's induction. Some have even questioned the need for J-10B or future variants of J-10s. I think that J-10B or a future variant of J-10 will form a hi-lo combination with J-20 as the backbone of PLAAF's air superiority fighter jets. Some of the technologies tested on J-10B can then also be used on J-10A to improve its performance. Either way, I think J-10s will continue to replace J-7 regiments around the country and become the work horse of PLAAF. It is important to watch out the engine situation of J-10s. I'm hoping that WS-10 series will soon become reliable enough to be used on J-10s. Aside from J-10s and J-11s, it seems that PLAAF also wants to use a cheaper 4th generation option to replace some of the remote J-7 regiments. After all, you don't really need J-10s to protect the airspace against Kazakhstan or Mongolia.

That seems to be where JF-17s come into play. From what I'm gathering on Chinese bbs, it seems that PLAAF wants an ultra cheap option under $15 million to replace some of the J-7 regiments. You may think it is crazy that PLAAF regards the $25-30 million price tag of a J-10 to be too expensive, but that is the case. If PLAAF does pick JF-17 (or a new cheap 4th generation) design, it will not be as fancy as the one prepared for PAF. It would have to be using a domestic engine like WS-13 to lower the cost. It would probably not be required to have more than 7 hard points or have any significant multi-role capability. Its radar will probably be similar to KLJ-7 and not required to have greater concurrent engagement capability. Basically, you can think of it as a low cost, bare bone JF-17 that can fire BVR weapons and have reasonable range. At this point, we will have to wait for pictures from CFTE to see when or if this cheap 4th generation fighter jet theory will come to fruition. Either way, I think PLAAF will continue to stay within its budget and not go after too many expensive options and retain quantity to counter all of its perceived threats.

J-20's first flight is a significant turning point in the history of PLAAF and Chinese aviation industry. It shows the progress that Chinese military aviation industry has made in the past 15 years. It really shows that CAC has turned out a young and energized generation of engineers capable of designing advanced military aircraft. We will likely see continued progress of J-20, J-10, JF-17 and different UAVs from CAC in the coming years. We should also not overlook the many challenges, like engine and stealth technology, that China faces in its development. J-20's unveiling does not mean China has caught up with the west, but rather it has learnt a lot from everyone and has gained a lot from cooperating with everyone. And the Chinese aviation industry can only grow from continuing to cooperate with Western companies in C919 and other aircraft programs.
Posted by Feng at 12:21 PM
 
Top