| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| The Reason Why America's F-35 Would Crush China's J-20 Stealth Fighter in Battle |
| 2016-08-12 |
| "The United States Air Force would maintain an "asymmetric" advantage over potential adversaries in the Western Pacific even after the Chinese People's Liberation Army Air Force inducts the Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter into operational service. That's the contention of the service's top uniformed officer--who was asked about the potential geopolitical implications of the introduction of the new Chinese warplane. "When we apply fifth-generation technology, it's no longer about a platform, it's about a family of systems," Air Force chief of staff Gen. David Goldfein told reporters at the Pentagon on Aug. 10. "It's about a network and that's what gives us an asymmetrical advantage, so that why when I hear about an F-35 versus a J-20, it’s almost an irrelevant question. While Goldfein used the Nighthawk as a comparison--he probably did not intend to suggest that the J-20's systems are quite as basic as the 1980s-era F-117. While accurate information about the J-20 is scarce, there are indications that the Chinese aircraft is equipped with a phased array radar, a robust electronic warfare systems and an electro-optical/infrared sensor that is similar in concept to the F-35's systems. However, while it is possible that the Chinese aircraft might have decent sensors--Air Force officials have suggested that the J-20 lacks the "sensor fusion" and networking to be as effective as the F-22 or F-35. One area that the Chinese are almost certainly lacking is what Air Combat Command commander Gen. Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle once described to me as "spike management." Fifth-generation aircraft such as the F-22 and F-35 have cockpit displays that indicate to the pilot the various angles and ranges from which their aircraft can be detected and tracked by various enemy radars. The pilots use that information to evade the enemy by making sure to avoid zones where they could be detected and engaged. It is a technology that took decades for the United States to master--through a lot of trial and error." |
| Posted by:Vast Right Wing Conspiracy |
| #22 Wargame: Red Dragon I'd prefer Robot Jox. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2016-08-12 21:38 |
| #21 SO we will have Chinese and US pilots trying to hack each others guidance system at 100 km? Is that the new warfare our geeky generals want to fight? Or maybe they will go on the internet and fight it out playing World of Warcraft or Mortal Kombat XXVI? |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2016-08-12 21:27 |
| #20 The pilots use that information to evade the enemy by making sure to avoid zones where they could be detected and engaged. When do they stop evading and start fighting? Once they start fighting will we have enough fighters to get the job done? When does the battlespace becomes so cluttered with evading ninja planes that they interfere with each other? Who will be doing the CAS after the A-10 follows all of the other A-series planes into retirement? The General seems ... unpersuasive. |
| Posted by: magpie 2016-08-12 21:00 |
| #19 And remind me where the chips (to include knockoffs that somehow find their way into the DoD procurement system) are made and get into the aircraft system? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2016-08-12 20:49 |
| #18 Rumour is Israel are not far off deploying railguns with inflight guidable projectiles. Which would appear to obsolete all aircraft that need to get with a 100 odd kms of their target. Thus obsolete all fighters. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2016-08-12 20:23 |
| #17 "Why do we even need pilots then? (/sarc)" Because unmanned combat aerial vehicles are not quite ready to compete with the more skilled pilots, and most importantly the law of warfare is a big uncertainty WRT lethal use of an autonomous robotic system. |
| Posted by: Flineger Sneresh8946 2016-08-12 19:53 |
| #16 Best plane in the world generally requires a pretty good pilot with lots of training and practice. Do Chinese pilots get lots of training and practice? Everything I have come across suggests a built culture, something akin to whether a soldier can parade or fight. 104 pilot said something like, It isn't whether a pilot can fight, but whether a fighter can pilot. Maybe a Rantburger can correct or expand on this. I watched a documentary, the name slips me at the moment, about the Israeli air force during their war of independence, and it credited their success to being combat vets of WWII. I am of the school that there is no substitute for real experience. Training will help with the real, but only when it is real do you see what does and does not work. Example, just joined the VFD, been on some runs, went to a training where I was grouped with some fresh from the academy FFs. I am sure they could tie every knot blindfolded but in a paper attack on a Christmas Tree fire, they parked me under power lines and sent me through the garage. No way I said, but I was an Indian, they were Chiefs, and the Instructor was mad. Knowing the results of the latest Red Flag is not the same as knowing why it was set up so. So unless Maverick and 宮廷弄臣 are going to joust in a box away from all other assets it is all talk. *sorry if a ramble, children started spongebobbing every time I started a thought. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2016-08-12 18:23 |
| #15 Quantity has a quality effect. Best aircraft in the world do not matter if not properly deployed and in sufficient numbers. Me263 as an example |
| Posted by: Bertie Brown1046 2016-08-12 16:57 |
| #14 "It's about a network and that's what gives us an asymmetrical advantage, so that why when I hear about an F-35 versus a J-20, it’s almost an irrelevant question. Our computer wizards will beat their computer wizards, right? Why do we even need pilots then? (/sarc) |
| Posted by: magpie 2016-08-12 16:39 |
| #13 ..equipment hasn't been the only thing they've copied. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2016-08-12 16:20 |
| #12 Best plane in the world generally requires a pretty good pilot with lots of training and practice. Do Chinese pilots get lots of training and practice? |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2016-08-12 13:24 |
| #11 If the next war is fought on paper, we will totally kick ass! |
| Posted by: SteveS 2016-08-12 11:14 |
| #10 Pfft. No one knows. |
| Posted by: Tarzan Slailet2796 2016-08-12 09:23 |
| #9 "It's about a network and that's what gives us an asymmetrical advantage, so that why when I hear about an F-35 versus a J-20, it’s almost an irrelevant question. All this says to me is multiple points of failure. How long will it take to find the weak link in the chain and exploit it? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2016-08-12 09:18 |
| #8 and weeks for the Chinese to steal. Posted by Bobby Or was it simply purchased through some sort of philanthropic foundation connection ? |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2016-08-12 08:50 |
| #7 ...what makes you think they haven't already? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2016-08-12 08:50 |
| #6 The Chinese are going to have to make a really huuuge donation to the Clinton Foundation to get that information. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2016-08-12 08:48 |
| #5 technology that took decades for the United States to master and weeks for the Chinese to steal. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2016-08-12 08:43 |
| #4 ...which one? A or B or the unacknowledged Chinese knockoff? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2016-08-12 08:17 |
| #3 F-35 flying yet? |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2016-08-12 03:15 |
| #2 Or one of Newsc's millenials. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2016-08-12 01:49 |
| #1 all the technical capabilities in the world don't matter if your decision maker is either a gutless risk adverse beta male, or is a drugged up zombie that is functionally brain dead. |
| Posted by: Nguard 2016-08-12 00:49 |