China’s J-20 Enters Stealth Fray

[Above] 05-May 2012: Since the time of this original writing last year, a second Chengdu J-20 aircraft has appeared designated '2002' as part of a continued PRC flight test program. Pilot-tube on "2002" has been relocated.  [Above] Aircraft "2001" Note pilot-tube location versus aircraft "2002." 

[Below] New photos of the J-20 weapon bay(s). Again valuable airframe real-estate in fighters better used for fuel. An additional door aka American F-22 style for IR missile. It appears the missile can be moved out into the air stream and the door re-closed (before firing). This is necessary for the missile seeker head to have a view of the target before release. All stealth fighters must overcome blocked seeker heads.

[Below] In addition, yet another PRC stealth fighter has appeared in early Sept 2012, the Shenyang J-31. It appears to leverage ideas from American F-35 and F-22A and perhaps the Russian T-50. As more photos emerge a better assessment will be possible. However, even with the appearance, this new aircraft - all Chengdu J-20 and Shenyang J-31 observations and analysis detailed in this writing - will still apply.

[Above] Shenyang J-31. [Below] Chengdu J-20.

(05-Jan, 2011) China’s J-20 "fifth-generation stealth fighter” finally makes an appearance. The aircraft is black, large, has a one-piece canopy, canards, conventional exhaust nozzles, and a shiny nose tip similar to the American F-35 (also under development). New images have surfaced of the aircraft in flight. J-20 and appears heavily influenced / dependent on the Russian Mikoyan MiG 1.42 / 1.44 / MFI of the late 1990s. We're inclined to concur with new observations that J-20 is "a mishmash" of older U.S. and Russian designs.

The best article on J-20 we've seen to-date, graciously brought to our attention by our readers.

Borrowing ideas from elsewhere to influence the design of particular said aircraft is nothing new, but whether J-20 represents any (generational or otherwise) leap in PLAAF capability - remains an open question.

The American/Pro-American defense lobby is sure to interpret the J-20 as a severe threat to the US and regional security posture and call to restart the F-22 production line. We are inclined to reject these threat assessments due to the sobering nature of factors detailed (and hyperlinked) further down the body of this writing.

Note wing shape, particularly the trailing edge angle. J-20 similarity to MiG 1.42 / 1.44 / MFI [below] is obvious.

[Above] MiG. [Below] J-20.

[[Above] Note J-20s not-so-stealthy under-wing bulged control surface actuator housings (two on each wing). Russian T-50 is similar. Note American F-22A [below] with additional rear stabilator actuators as well. How a high altitude flight regime effects exposure of these types of bulged-shapes to hostile radar(s) is unknown.

The Northrop B-2 bomber [below] has no flight-control-related protuberances. Neither did YF-23.

As a separate matter, we've supported offering an export version of F-22 for foreign sale, again for the same reasons outlined in the body of text below.

Direct or indirect Russian assistance on J-20 is unclear due to the “J-11b incident” (international intellectual copyright violation-abrogation by the Chinese State of the Russian Su-27 ‘Flanker’ fighter jet) that surely has had an impact on Sino-Russian relations. The PRC is proceeding with both J-11b and J-15 programs.

To be honest, we were caught off guard by the appearance of J-20. The PRC appears to be resolute at conducting (real or perceived) force modernization – at all possible speed. We would still caution the reader that the design and development of combat aircraft - in particular remains - not a trivial affair – even for nations with long histories of aviation design, development, and technology breakthrough. China will not be immune from any of an array of conflicting and uneven program-platform requirements, design, propulsion, and developmental issues – both seen and unforeseen.

As of yet, we have not been overly impressed with stealth fighters for the reasons described here. When combined with available historical evidence (including the "unseen" attacker) - stealth fighter (fighter) technology does not stand up to (inductive/deductive) critical analysis, particularly against a modern multi-sensor aerial opponent with DFRM and helmet-sighting (unobstructed fields of view for missile seeker heads ) – for which no stealth fighter in existence today - has been tested, evaluated, or pitted against - in any authentic manner. 

Assurances from stealth fighter proponents that under actual combat conditions the merge ("the dogfight") can be avoided because of stealth advantages - is pure nonsense. Here is yet another reason why.

The emphasis on radio-spectrum-airfoils (stealth) for fighters and for reduced drag - can force:

• Internal weapon bays / carriage restrictions.
• Reduced space for internal fuel.
• Which force increased aircraft size / or the use of external tanks.
• All bad for "the element of surprise" Stealths hallmark feature.

[Below] Lockheed's F-35 (JSF). [Above] Note vertical tails of J-20.

How stealth fighters using only radar (only radar) - overcome the paradox of defeating the same electromagnetic radio-energy they need to detect targets, and for their own communication/coordination / identification-friend-or-foe (and in weather) - has not been addressed in any serious way. In wartime, these issues will emerge – too late for stealth-fighter-aircrews already strapped in their cockpits.

[Above ] J-20 [Below] The MiG-1.44.

[Above] MiG-1.44 [Below] The J-20.

Global aircraft development trends are nothing new. In the early 1950s, most fighter/interceptors aircraft were designed only to use air-to-air missiles. Guns at the time were seen as totally unneeded. Later this would be recognized as an ill-advised miscalculation by the global design community. Guns were (re)fitted sometimes hastily so - to all later aircraft.

[Below] Lockheed's F-35 JSF. Note similar DSI intake design on J-20 to aircraft like F-35. Note J-20 shiny nose tip.

We would simply say that: other than opposing stealth fighters having trouble detecting each other, (the Russian PAK-FA and the American F-35 seem to be aware of the problem by retaining a thermal IRST station), the only real strategic effect of stealth fighter programs is that vast national resources are exhausted on them - rather than elsewhere. Stealth technology is locked in a running pitched battle with sensor technology - a battle the Stealth fighter cannot win.

Some might be underestimating the thirst by the Chinese leadership for international prestige - regardless of any real or perceived aircraft capability?

As some in the Washington defense establishment weighs in on (or just as likely - says nothing of substance?) on the implications of a PRC J-20 class aircraft, the US-Navy is likely viewing the 'forced retirement' of the F-14D Tomcat with new / invigorated concern? Tomcat variant “D” (or further enhanced versions) with her AIM-54 system, would by definition, have dramatically altered the scope of the discussion on whatever threat(s) the Chinese could (hypothetically or otherwise) impose on USN battle groups, now and in the future.

[Below] The authenticity of this chart is unknown. The aircraft circled in green appears to be J-20. Of perhaps greater interest - we count no less than seven (7) examples of the Russian Flanker-series aircraft. In addition, the aircraft depicted just below J-20 is a previously unknown type. Could there soon be unauthorized (not authorized by Russia) Flanker-class proliferation by the Chinese J-11b into South Asia?

Your thoughts?

#china, #military, #stealth, #weapon

- All media found here is for scholarship and research purposes and protected under U.S. Internet ‘Fair Use’ Law -