Opponent? who? China, or your ter**sm troop fighting for capitals? be clear who your true enemy is. China wins, everyone win, including ordinary ppl in the west. Your living cost will go comfortably low with China victory.
I believe the lack of cannon is based on similar logic to the F-4 Phantom. It was initially a naval interceptor, meant to shoot at Soviet bombers before they could launch an anti-ship missile at the carrier. Adding a cannon would be pointless, because if a Phantom had to maneuver for a gun kill it would allow the enemy to get inside firing range and the carrier would be damaged or sunk depending on the number of missiles in that volley. China's focus seems to be targeting non-stealthy aircraft like AWACS and fuel tankers, so the shots are taken without getting close to escort aircraft.
@@desperatetogetsomehoes Except that didn't happen. Slow Phantoms doing bomber escort were caught in high speed ambushes. Then MiGs were lured by Phantoms flying in bomber formation and got clapped. Instead of bombers with Phantom escorts, they were full Phantom combat patrols.
They developed it just in time to watch the US Navy to move to stealth refueling drones and networked F-35s to replace or supplement AWACS. Always a step behind.
@@desperatetogetsomehoes That was mostly for USAF Phantoms trying to engage MiGs in close combat due to the rather archaic rules-of-engagement at the time, where IFF (identify friend or foe) had to be done visually, which practically negated the advantages of long range missiles. Note that in Vietnam, the US Navy Phantoms were far more successful in air combat despite their own F-4's never being upgraded with guns, unlike their Air Force counterparts. It's also a fact that in the last 60 years, the number of air-to-air gun kills on modern conflict zones can be counted on one's fingers, whereas the majority of kills were made with misiles.
Current operational models of J-20 do not use Russian engines, instead they use the domestic WS-10c engines with serrated exhaust nozzles. The WS-15, in addition of having a higher thrust, also has thrust vectoring capabilities.
You know, as a cutting edge weapon, stealth aircraft do seem like an autocannon would be pointless. But I wonder, if the technology will go full circle in the future, where two opposing stealth fighters can detect each other at such close range that it devolves into an old school dogfight
I mean, while it would be funny, the technology for extremely maneuverable, albeit very short ranged missiles has existed since the 70s, and while a gun requires the nose to be on target, a missile doesn't with helmet mounted sights, technology that existed since the 70s.
Autocannons are definitely not an outdated feature, they are very versitile and are a great failsave in case of running out of other munitions in A2G and A2A combat.
The fact that China let J20 fully take the spot light in air shows means they are quite confident that they have got the next generation fighter ready.
@@liiou4445 China actually backup their barks with bites, they even managed to produce the VN20 in numbers and export them, which everyone thought was just crazy barking from China, it is not wise to just write them off
@@liiou4445 Well they allow the public to get almost arms length to the J-20 on a static display. During some airshows, they parked them out for public to almost touch. Airshows where the US military even had representatives too. I think that's what the original comment was about.
The J-20 does in fact have retractable Luneburg lenses. They're located on the underside of the plane, in an elongated hexagonal compartment next to one of the missile detection IR sensors.
Hard to see the compartment not compromising stealth. Not that the oddly-angled canards, ventral vertical surfaces, and exposed engine nozzles don’t compromise that enough.
@@bluemarlin8138 You don't understand its function. The compartment is used only during non-combat missions to deny the enemy from getting good radar cross-sections of the plane. During combat missions the compartment is retracted and covered with RAM tape. Furthermore, he cannards are "oddly-angled" in order to not be symmetrical with other surfaces of plane, that makes the cannards much less visible to radar than if they weren't "oddly-angled". Lastly, regarding the engine nozzles, the WS-10 and WS-15 are serrated nozzles.
@@bluemarlin8138 It's not a compartment, it's literally the whole lens retracting. The one in the video is not the retractable version. The new version is completely flush when retracted. Also, are we going to talk about the massive exposed engine on the F-35? And canards were going to be used on the F-35 until they found that the front weight was not good for carrier ops.
Three things to support J20s ferry Range: 1.Canards help in saving fuel while take off (take off uses 30 pct of fuel normally) by producing more lift and that fuel can be used to ferry the aircraft farther 2. Space left from removing gun/ammo compatment, and Bump/DSI intake as well as other parts being used as extra fuel tanks 3. Curved back side near engings curved wings to reduce drag as well as to crfeate more lift
there is a clear advantage of delta/canard design towards maneuverability and range... that's why most european designs use this configuration - Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen
Canards do not affect the range of the plane. Having a shorter or longer takeoff run isn’t going to have an effect how much fuel you have left once you’re in the air because acceleration stays the same whether or not there are canards.
Yes if you took his opinion on Su-57 where he grasp straws by referencing most outdated information on the jet such as RCS figure before it was even produced.
I believe J-20 will not participate itself very much in the physical combat, but instead act as a C&C anchor for multiple companion drones who will do the actual fighting/shooting/bombing. Something like a mobile FOB. China already possesses the largest drone fleet in the world, as well as the largest number of different types of operational drones, with more and more surfacing every year. Automated UCAV's like the FH-97A, CH-7, etc. I'm certain USAF is also headed in the same direction with the F-35 acting as an anchor for the likes of XQ-58.
Although the title might sounds implying J-20 is bad, the whole video actually conveys a much more imformative and objective content than most biasd video on the Internet !👍 And we should never take one aircraft out of the whole system (for example, J-20 can play as a data center while leaving J-16s carrying lots of missiles and J-10s for visual range fight) as long as it plays its own parts well , it's fair to say it's a good aircraft.
@@cinnamon3578 imo J20 is a long range BVR interceptor using its stealth quality, launch their PL15, PL21 >100km then supercruise RTB..... also J35/31 is coming very soon....
J20s are equiped with ETOS and EODAS that F22s don't have. J20s actually have the upper hand against F22s. F35s are more of an even match for J20s. F22s are outdated.
I believe the J-20 isn't actually a copycat, but an improvement on an abandoned Soviet/Russian design known as the MiG-1.44 Flatpack, the Engines and Canard layout come from that, while the F-22 and F-35 data leaks of 2009, make up the rest.
If you notice the designs of US Air Force NGAD and US NAVY's F/A XX have been China J20 without or with tail fins, canards and etc...However, we need the NGAD like Yesterday. It would have been nice to have the F23 black widow 2 now....PS JS20 is now a two seater with better super cruise engines now...Have we lost the sixth generation fighter contest like the race of the China H20 and US B21 Raider...H20 was flying already...
@@rgloria40 That is an extremely stupid statement. There was no race between the H-20 and B-21, for one the race was won by the US 26 years ago with the B-2, and two the B-21 is undoubtedly leagues ahead of the H-20. We haven't lost the sixth generation fighter contest for one due to the fact NGAD is the closest sixth generation fighter to production and service, and two because it is almost a certainty that NGAD will be more technologically advanced and would have the upper hand in the majority of engagements.
@@johnbean9797 Free feel to be the one to be over tax .....for project that should have adhere to a schedule and overbudget as well as hiring unqualified people...
A J-20 equipped with 2 WS-15 engine have just flown last week If speculated thrusts are accurate, this will make the J-20 the aircraft with the best super-cruise capability among all 5th gen fighters
All of china's military is "prepared for war" but lack the military competence to do so. What do i mean? The U.S. has veterans that have served in wars, China doesn't. The knowledge, training, and on the ground experience cannot be replicated. The US is far better prepared on that front. Imma say the US has a acceptable and respectful 93% win chance against China though not without heavy losses.
@@thelouster5815 Missiles and drone swarms flying everywhere. The side with the inferior planes would be getting shot down before they even see the enemy. Dogfights would be scarce and would only happen as a last-resort when all other options have been exhausted.
When the Indian government said they had been able to identify the aircraft, two important things to note it was in a patrol configuration so external fuel tanks and we weren’t able to track it effectively.
The Indian air-force detected & tracked the J-20 over Bainang... If you extrapolate the distance between the nearest IAF base to the county... you'll realize that either the J-20's stealth capabilities aren't as good as they're being touted to be... Or the IAF has deployed exceptional radars which are more than capable of tracking current 5th gen stealth tech...
@@SiberianStarjust say you didnt watch the video next time because shitty stealth or india having super duper radars are definitely not the only possibilities, theyre not even likely to be the reason at all.
cant speak for every country but the US is doing similar with their "loyal wingman" program. The US military has plenty of flaws but just look at Desert Storm to see how they've long been pioneers in network centric warfare.
Perhaps the lack of a cannon also suggests that they think their Fox-2s will be good enough that they cannon is just extra weight, vibration, gun gas, and complexity they don't need? On the other hand, we've seen western stealth aircraft sneak within literally 300 meters of a target and gun them to save missile ammunition, so it's possible that guns can save missiles during a seal clubbing situation.
cannon on a 5gen fighter🤣🤣🤣 . modern warfare fight start at 400+km away or the range of your anti air missile 2nd reason it dont need a cannon it can easily out run F22 or F35 render your cannon a dead weight
@@jetli740 ... according to chinese statistics? Sure. When they are known to overstate their capabilities of their equipment, much like russia does. And the US, by contrast. Will if anything. UNDERSTATE, it's capabilities.
@@Destroyer_V0 lol technically no country would really reveal their military equipment true capacity. Usa the worse one by overstate their true capacity or completely denied it existence like the sr71 blackbird. other example is F35 or f22 it Radar cross-section the size of a bee. Using logic mean it cannot be detected by any radar right? but....... example why iT BullSH1T the F-117 R.C.S is 0.003 (f22 is 0.001) but the F-117 got shoot down by Serbian army using S-125 surface-to-air missile in 1999. ( yeah that s125 is very old ) it not hard to connect the dot.
Small correction here for combat radius... US combat radii is determined by the effective distance an aircraft can perform a set mission. This includes time on station, several turns on full afterburner, weapons employment, and the return trip. All US aircraft have their ranges calculated as such. Russian and Chinese Radii are calculated by 1/2 ferry range. Or, the theoretical maximum flight distance in a vacuum, divided by 2. It's unrealistic and disingenuous to compare these numbers with practical ones for the F-22 and F-35B. For context, the USAF lists the F-16 as having "more than 2,000 miles" of ferry range. On the other hand, the combat radius is listed as around 300 nmi for different missions on a similar playing field as the F-35. A quick caveat for the F-16, it is likely the ferry range is calculated with three drop tanks while the combat radius is with only two. Please note the F-35 has double the combat radius as the F-16 (compared to F-35A). This makes me more likely to believe the J-20 has similar flight duration/range as an F-16 in ferry conditions (3 drop tanks, no weapons). Which is impressive, but certainly short of the F-22 or F-35.
A small hint for those trying to figure out why J20 is "mighty dragon". Try finding the Chinese names of JF17, J10 and J20, produced by the same company and are like i3, i5 and i7 of jet fighters. I'm seriously puzzled why Intel names all their processors something "lake" as well. Yeah maybe English translation is to be blamed 66.6%. As of the canards compromising stealth myth, I'm not aware moving elevators from back to the front makes a world of difference. Regarding the F35 copy claim, one liner debunk - look at the timeline. In fact if you can understand Chinese, the CCTV has a pretty elaborative doco series about the company and how J10 was produced. They're not shy telling the US helped. Not by leaking information but by showing them modern industrial practices and computer aided design. The J9 project later died but the tech know-hows and the team lived to make things far greater. And if you take a close look at J10 you will soon know where J20 is from. For those holding strong faith yellow monkeys can't invent, I have not much to say but, enjoy your bubble and try not to see the writings on the wall.
@windrose5988 sure it a rip of the f35 or f22 but the cannard how that work? plz stop be ignorance. if you put a cannard on the f35 or f22 every thing relate to flycontrol have to be replace .
@@Fauzanarief-n7iChina has gotten a lot with regards to US industrial and US military tech from Israel. Israel’s a back door to US industrial/military technology for China and Russia. Yanks still haven’t out two and two together. God damn idiots lol
@@jetli740 Lol canards make it 100% not a product of theft. You are being delusional, given the known history here. It's just all the radar absorbent material and 40 years of testing stealth to figure out what will work and what wont that the CCP ripped off. Oh well, tofu dreg chinese copy pasta will still get dropped
"For those holding strong faith yellow monkeys can't invent", you really going to act like the J-20 wasn't fast forwarded by the CCP's espionage. Crying racism for getting called out on facts infers your own racist assumption
*It is over-hyped as combat aircraft and SEVERLY UNDERRATED as technical and organisational achievement*. 40 years ago US built YF-23. At the same time, 40 years ago China, albeit nuclear power on level of today's North Korea was still industrial and technological backwater, just starting market reforms. Fielding J-20 is comparatively much larger achievement for China, than for USA is to jump between F-22 and F-35 or B-2 and B-21. 40 years ago development of fly-by-wire for Eurofighter by Germany was one painful excercise. Even if it is low observable F-15 equivalent - it is astonishing achievement for China on as it would be for every other nation; one that few can approach. China now has to built doctrine and support system around it, including pilot trianing (results of excercise with Thailand aren't encouraging).
The J-20 isn't made for dogfighting per se. Its lethality lies in the PL21 BVR missiles that have a crazy range of 300km, so it's likely to play the role of the aerial long-range sniper picking off high value targets from concealment. In a pinch, however, it can call upon its supermaneuverability to bring its high off-boresight capable PL15 missiles to bear in self-defense. The last I heard, both missiles are very highly regarded. The newer twin-seat J20B is reportedly able to control multiple drones, allowing it to act as an instant force multiplier.
Chinese AA missiles are good, although there are obvious flaws with launching a missile from 300 km away. Usually you don't take the maximum range of the missile as its kill zone. For example PL-21 cannot be stored internally, which isn't good for stealth aircraft.
There was a time not long ago when U.S. fighters were the only ones with smooth, seamless skins. Now China has produced the J-20 with smoother surfaces than U.S. fighters (look closely). That alone indicates how advanced the J-20 is.
@@lolasdm6959Not sure what you base not needing a autocannon on but with good stealth aircraft it's hard to keep weapons grade lock from what I've read and seen in sims and also the aircrafts having electronic warfare and jamming capabilities. Since autocannons are immune from everything a stealth aircraft has and uses as advantages. Having a autocannon seems like something I'd very much rather have and not need it, even if its never used. Than need an autocannon and not have one.
You also don't need to be completely invisible to the radar. Being low-observable can still make the difference in a war where there's probably lots of radar pollution coming from every direction. Against basically anything other than an F-22 or F-35 it may be decisive.
@@Superpo0oper2020 ah yes comrade Vatnik, that 1 whole F-35 that was involved in an accident is truly representative of the nearly 1000 planes built thus far.
You're just jealous because there is already a thousand F-35s working for the allies, technology that your china can't even replicate even a little.@@Superpo0oper2020
But since possibility of dog fighting has lowered on modern age, pilots can avoid canards for manuverablity and without compromising stealth it can shoot down its targets with long range BVR.
This is the enigma of the Chinese military, we have not seen them in major conflict since the 70s. There is nothing we can scale them to, nothing to scale them with. Chinas capabilities are hard to assess in a unclassified view
Err. Korean war happened after Chinese civil war finished(if you don't count current day china Taiwan as ongoing unfinished civil war still). That was a pretty major conflict.. and we all know what happened. It was China's coming out party, they defended nk with nothing but poverty, brains and guts, no tech, no air force or navy even. Not even enough food or clothing.
The F22 is 13 years to 18 years old. Hadn't had an update whatsoever since. Think about a Ferrari from the late 2000s to 2010s compared with a new modern EV vehicle from China like the Nio, BYD, Xpeng, etc etc etc..
J-20 is primarily designed as a stealth assassin. It’s more of a stealth interceptor than fighter. Targeting enemy high value target like bomber awac, transport or tanker.
@@foodselyeah it’s a fight jet, how else are you supposed to design a fighter jet? All fighter jets have similar characteristics due to there are only so much you can do differently before compromising aerodynamic and firepower capabilities.
I'm a bit hesitant to believe its combat range is so large. Even if it is larger, which makes sense for the reasons you've described... being a third again more than the Su-57 Fictional seems like... a lot more.
@@netsimam how is it different from traditional design which has a much larger tail wing? It seems people are always missing that out? Is that something I am missing?
@@Ilovecruise don't quote me on this, but traditional tail elevators/stabilizers usually produce negative lift for cruising speeds (due to a combination of trimming the pitching moment and the need to keep the aircraft stable in pitch), they exist mostly to maneuver the plane rather than as another lifting surface. Meanwhile canards can be (not always) used as an extra lifting surface and elevators at the same time, at the cost of worse radar cross section (and before the age of Fly by Wire, too unstable); the Swedes highly prioritize short landing and take off, hence why their fighters are usually in delta-canard configuration.
I am not an aircraft expert, but I think that the J-20 is probably still inferior (maybe not far off) to the advanced US fighter jets. After all China is still in the catch-up phase in terms of military development. But at the rate they are going, China will eventually catch up and be on-par with the US or even surpass them in due time. It doesn't matter how great (or not) the J20 is, because the real concern should be the fast-closing gap between them and the US. Today they may not be the king of the sky, but in the near future they could well be. Even so, there is no need to worry because China isn't interested in conquering the world.
Conquering the world? Probably not. Becoming the #1 superpower? Absolutely. That is something I feel is worth worrying about, especially if they decide to export their methods of governance to other nations as the USA has a tendency to do.
@@r.u.s.e3586 MAGA Americans, Russian, and the Chinese are very similar in thinking. I'm inclined to believe they're successfully exporting their governance model here. Both groups are filled with con-men and are insanely corrupt and all of them openly lie and/or stamp out dissidents. The difference so far is is that China operates with the belief that lying, cheat, and stealing are okay. I don't mean internationally as in spying or tech theft but to their own too. It's literally ingrained in their culture. I'm of the opinion that China's biggest threat is its inability to deal with that. We've already seen Russia's performance... I hate to imagine what we (in the US) are going to look like in the future.
@redoubtwithoutdoubt9945 come on you guys are serious of this. Russia and China? Let me think which is better. This is a difficult decision someone help me. Not you.
@@arthas640 Well..I just didn't want to mock too hard.. There was like one going submarine in SCS..another disappearing like MH370 in USA.. Another got brought down by a chicken in Syria.. Another jumped down in Japan.. Yet another went nosing on Japanese runway.. Also another decided to disappear into submarine mode at Uk, and Russians were hunting for it.. The list goes on.. LOL 🤣😂🤣🤣
I hope that we can ultimately resolve our differences without killing eachother. I'd rather admire these aircraft for what they are than revile them for what they do.
J-20 is actually a dedicated interceptor based on the Delta Wing and canard hybrid design, it fills the role of F-104, F-106 and F-4 Phantom. Climb up high as fast as it could, shoot the missiles and return home quickly. It's primary adversary is the TU-95 and SU-34.
They didn't design this aircraft to shoot down Russian bombers, they designed it to shoot down American AWACS and sink American ships in a hypothetical war for Taiwan. Whether it can actually achieve that remains to be seen, I doubt it has the edge over American 5th gen (and 6th gen in the near future) aircraft, but that is no doubt the mission the Chinese want it to accomplish
@@kanestalin7246possibly early in the design stages when China was more of a competitor to Russia than the US, or they think that China is more likely to engage Russia in eastern Siberia than the US over the pacific?
@@benbowland Russia and China have territorial disputes along the Northern border and during the Sino Indian border clashes, Russia aid India. That's why China views Russia as the main threat instead of US.
Great video overall, but the autocannon doesn't matter for air combat anymore, especially with a stealth aircraft. Its only purpose now would be for ground attack.
people still seem to think its 1940. Even in Vietnam when guns were found to still be useful that was mainly due to some failures with air to air missiles that were rather quickly fixed. Especially with stealth planes all the added weight and radar issues a gun would create just arent worth it when in a head to head engagement 9/10 planes are going to be downed from beyond visual range, they're not going to be dog fighting at super sonic speeds like it's the bloody blitz.
There has been some very in depth analysis of the RSC for the J20. The J20 is low observable particularly from 15 degrees off a straight forward orientation. However, the rear stabilizers are monolithic. This among other design features have diminished it’s stealthiness. The RCS albeit better than the SU57, is no where close to U.S. 5th gen fighters. This is why I consider the J20 and SU57 gen 4.5.
Regardless of its actual capability, I believe in giving credit where credit is due. The J-20 is a beautiful airplane. If it is half as capable as it is pretty, they’ve got a real winner. If China ever manages to get their engines and materials development in line with their intellectual property theft, the United States is in trouble.
Many may concern the front canards may spoil the general stealth design, but IMO the canards are made with the material that’s“a piece of glass” from radars’ view. This is because unlike wings, there’s no fuel tanks or other non-stealth device inside canards, so making canard transparent to radars is a good strategy for Chengdu
Thats not how radars work, its about surface perpendicular to the wave direction. Canards provide area to bounce back radar waves. It is likely they use software to compensate by directing canards less favourably for aerodynamics but reduces radar returns compared to normal canards.
The j20 is not a fighter jet used to gain air superiority, it is only used to cooperate with early warning aircraft to strike important targets such as radar and command centers, just like a blade. Air superiority aircraft and close range combat use FC31 (the j35 circulating on the Chinese internet) and other fourth generation aircraft. According to analysis, the FC31 is a fighter jet that fully responds to air combat and gains air superiority. However, it has not been officially released and was only discovered in the background of promotional videos, which may be under testing and adjustment.
The argument of bringing up stolen design as a weakness seems silly to me. It’s not like researching pre-existing plans and designs would mean absence of understanding of the engineering and science of said designs. They aren’t just mindlessly copying homework. Rather they stole the courses textbooks and notes of the best student in the class. So any gaps in institutional knowledge would be easier to identify, easier to study and so easier to remedy. China did exactly this to develop nukes, despite USSR being reluctant to help in the effort. China made an effort to figure out what USSR wasn’t telling them and then fill in the blanks on their own. Very hard to imagine them doing anything less than that with any designs they steal from US. You don’t just reverse-engineer the design itself. You also reverse-engineer the institutional knowledge it implies.
Okay but they spent decades figuring out modern turbojets. Respect for whichever scientist/lab got it right, but they had the homework done for them and actually lacked the understanding. Which isn't surprising, some engineering/materials science classes in the US aren't even open to non-US citizens. There's allegations that Chinese academics are pressured to have scientific paper mills to artificially inflate China's perceived scientific development. Some notes are indecipherable if you don't know what the writer knew.
@@ChucksSEADnDEADThe CCP exaggerates China’s economic numbers and population, so it’s not much of a stretch to imagine them inflating their scientific development.
Yeah, « copying » is the logical choice; who the hell is giving out brownie points for coming up with an original design from the ground up in a war? The AK-47 is clearly derivative and taking the best aspects of the M1 Garand and STG-44, the two most effective service rifles of WWII, in its action and its design philosophy respectively, plus some innovations of its own, and the AK family has gone on to be one of the most successful combat rifles in history. It’s what Newton called standing on the shoulder of giants.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD decade or 2 does it matter, if you sucess in the end, china build jet since the 50s they not new in the game, a copy the plane to build a different jet just dont work. it just like i ask you to repair a tesla with a wv golf manual
@@jetli740 It does matter. It signifies a gap. If you're so good at copying homework, why should it take 20 years? It means that everyone else will keep leaping forward. Success in a vacuum is great. But now F-35s will have a new engine enter development. So by the time J-20s are fully fitted with the proper engines, the US will have NGAD and more powerful F-35s. Success isn't enough to win. You have to succeed over others.
That "numbers" part may be an issue though. China doesnt have much of an aircraft or engine market, their only real defense customers almost exclusively buy cheap, low end equipment since they're mostly poor, and as a result aircraft are one of the few things China cant really get economy of scale with since they have to "sell" 99% of their aircraft domestically and while large their defense spending is still a fraction that of the US's about on par with EU's combined defense spending. Since the US sells to EU/NATO allies, British Commonwealth countries, Asian allies like Japan and South Korea, _and_ to many countries who are just afraid of Russia and/or China it creates a gigantic market for US aircraft and gives the US a much better ability to achieve economy of scale even outside of the US's gigantic domestic market. The J-20 has similar units so far as the F-22 which was only ever going to be a very limited run of planes since it cant be sold to anyone outside of the USAF, not even the worlds 2nd largest air force: the US Navy. The J-20 is absolutely dwarfed by F-35s so far at a rate of nearly 5 to 1.
May not be as advanced as western jets but any advantage from what you had before is better than nothing. The way larger range is an advantage because you don't need the extreme resources for a carrier group or bases closer to your targets. Sure you can use air refueling but that takes time to refuel and are vulnerable. And if you are engaged and low on fuel you are also at a disadvantage. And using afterburners use a lot of fuel. If the Chinese can put out a better engine then it'll boost their capabilities a little more. May still be behind western aircraft but like I said. Any improvement is better than nothing. China is making huge advancements in a short time. You can criticize all you want about stealing and copying because in the end they achieved enough to make it happen. And it's not always who has the better toys win.
Indeed, also worth noting the Chinese geopolitical situation puts their likely flashpoints quite close to home, which has effected their design choices.
True, but planes like the F-35 also have the advantage of numbers and thanks to economy of scale they're likely cheaper too. There's nearly 5 F-35s flying for ever 1 J-20 right now and the price tag of the F-35 keeps dropping putting it within reach for more and more countries, and making it easier for countries to buy more of them. The J-20 meanwhile only has 1 customer and even if they were willing to sell it to other countries most people dont seem interested in buying Chinese warplanes compared to European and American equivalents which makes it all the harder for China to gain the numerical edge, and means it's easier for the US to dump larger amounts of money into R&D. That supposed/likely theft of technology that happened with the Joint Strike Fighter program also has made countries more paranoid about security, especially seeing as we seem to be heading into a new cold war, making future copying of tech more difficult which combined with increased R&D spending by the US means it's going to make it harder for China to catch up in the future and harder to innovate domestically. The PLA is getting larger and larger budgets as the PRCs economy continues to grow, and if we continue into a new cold war that's all the more likely to happen, but it's alos possible that similar to the USSR in the 40s, 50s, and 60s once scared out of complacency the US may only accelerate the technological divide.
True, and a new Cold War this time around would be a mess. Not sure how capable the rest of the worlds countries trade will compensate that buying power deficit from the US if that ever happened. At the same time, the US hasn’t positioned itself very wisely to manufacture internally like it had in the past….another Cold War doesn’t look too promising for anyone, anywhere. The US military complex might be the only winner ATM between both countries?
Last year, J20 intercepted F35 in East China Sea without been detected by F35. F35 didn't even know J20 was behind it until it got painted, then ran off.
@@Fightback2023 The only news I can find is that they met, not that the F-35 couldn't detect the J-20, that's why I'm asking for a source. It seem's very unlikely mainly due to the J-20 being less stealthy than an F-35 that's all. As well as the F-35 having 360 degree IR sensors that would've picked it up from behind.
The lack of automatic cannons may be to make room for larger fuel tanks, and the extra cruising range must come from somewhere. Moreover, the J20's role in China's air force strategy means that it is almost impossible to encounter a dogfight.
overhyped, Indians say they spotted the J20 with their Su30MKI. But Indians also shot down their own helicopter because they thought its Pakistani fighter, so there might be a slight chance they spotted some Airbus in the sky and thought they saw J20.
0:35 Wasn’t the first fully operational combat unit of stealth fighter aircraft the IAF with the F-35i in December 2017? I do believe that the IAF had also reported using their F-35i in combat by the end of May 2018.
I agree with many of your points, the J-20 should not be underestimated. There is data from the Taiwanese that indicates the J-20s RCS is something like 0.05m2. So better than the Su-57, but not as good as the F-22 or the F-35. However, I think there is one aspect you may not have considered. With the long range of the J-20 and its small wings in a delta configuration giving it less maneuverability may mean its not meant as an air superiority fighter at all. It may instead be meant more as an interceptor. Perhaps to sneak in and knock out American AWACs and other important ISR assets.
thats where you might be wrong, the J20 is actually slightly lighter than the F22 and now with the WS15, has more thrust. meaning it will be at least as manoeuvrable. Canard designs are also exceptionally manoeuvrable at subsonic speeds.
@@hughmungus2760 the J-20 is indeed claimed to be slightly lighter than the F-22. However, the claim that the WS-15 has more thrust than the F119 is suspect at best. Obviously we don't know the real thrust figures for either engine, unless you have access to US and Chinese classified data. The open source data indicates that the F119 has more dry thrust than the WS-15, 26,000 lbs to a claimed 23,000 lbs roughly. So it definitely has less dry thrust. With afterburner the WS-15 is claimed to have between 36,000 and 40,000 lbs of thrust, while the F119 is just listed as having "greater than 35,000 lbs of thrust." So the WS-15 MAY have more thrust in afterburner than the F119, but it has less thrust without burner than the F119. So the J-20 with the WS-15 MAY have a better thrust to weight ratio than the F-22. Of course maneuverability is about more than just thrust to weight ratio. It's also about control surfaces, overall weight, wing size, wing configuration and a number of other factors. A delta with canards can be very maneuverable, on the right aircraft. A small lightweight fighter like the Gripen or the Rafale can have very good maneuverability. The J-20 is not small, or lightweight. Its slightly lighter than the F-22, but nowhere near as light as the Rafale or the Gripen. It's empty weight is more than the Rafale's max takeoff weight. It has a lot of mass that has to be moved through turns and not as much wing area to support it as the F-22 has, canards or no. Larger delta winged aircraft are just inherently less maneuverable than smaller ones, and less maneuverable than an equivalent sized aircraft with a more conventional planform. It's also a long aircraft, relative to its width, not a compact one like the Rafale, or even the F-22. This is also bad for maneuverability, as it means it will have a larger moment of inertia at the ends of the aircraft and be more difficult to rotate on its axis and point the nose where the pilot wants. Thrust vectoring will help, but I'd be surprised if it has the kind of maneuverability the F-22 has. It just doesn't seem to be designed as an air superiority fighter. I could be wrong though I suppose.
Yes, F-35 definitely has the “first look, first shoot, first kill” in beyond visual range BVR. But in a dogfight or within visual range WVR combat its 50/50 or which pilot is better trained or who first makes a mistake. And F-35 is no couch potato. It can definitely dogfight as it is maneuverable enough. It has similar if not better thrust-to-weight ratios and wing loading as compared with other 4th gen platforms. With a high angle of attack AoA F-35 can replicate thrust vectoring control TVC maneuvers without even having TVC. Especially F-35C with its bigger wings it can do the same tight turns Su-57 and F-22 do. F-35A can do the same but at the cost of higher Gs. Consequently, in a 1 vs 1 match, if either J-20 or Su-57 manages to survive in BVR would mean F-35’s pilot already made its first mistake.
@@johnsilver9338 there are certain advantages a twin engine high thrust/weight aircraft has over single engine designs. Most notably the ability to supercuise and fly higher thus get better milage. Strategically speaking the J20 and SU57 would be better at accomplishing interception tasks and combat air patrol against 4th gen fighters because of their longer range, longer loiter time, larger missile payload, and faster tactical response time. The only real advantage the F35 might have is that is might be more stealthy from the front.
@@hughmungus2760 Nope, J-20 can only carry 4 x PL-15 and 2 x PL-10, while Su-57 only carries 4 x K-77M & 2 x R-74. While both F-22 and F-35A/F-35C Block IV can carry 6 x AMRAAMs and 2 x AIM-9X. Also F-35A/F-35C has around 750nmi combat radius and that is already carrying 2 x AMRAAMs & 2 x 2000lb GBUs. It can reach 800nmi+ in A2A config. While F-22 can achieve 1000nmi and more depending on altitude, loadout, and speed. On the other hand 4th gen platforms including F-18s, Typhoon, and Rafale would need external tanks to reach comparable ranges. For comparison, F-35A with 29,000 lb empty weight; 460 sq ft wing area; 1 x 43,000 - 50,000 lbf wet thrust; 18,250 lb internal fuel; and 4 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 1.08 - 1.25 T/W ratio and around 86.8 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. With 6 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 1.06 - 1.23 T/W ratio and around 88.3 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. F-35C with 34,580 lb empty weight; 668 sq ft wing area; 1 x 43,000 - 50,000 lbf wet thrust; 19,750 lb internal fuel; and 4 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 0.93 - 1.08 T/W ratio and around 69.2 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. With 6 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 0.92 - 1.06 T/W ratio and around 70.3 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet with 32,000 lb empty weight; 500 sq ft wing area; 2 x 22,000 lbf wet thrust; 14,400 lb internal fuel; 3 x 480 gal external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament of 4 x AMRAAMs & 2 x AIM-9X has around 0.92 T/W and around 95.9 lb/sq ft wing Loading at 50% fuel. Gripen E with 17,640 lb empty weight; 1 x 22,000 lbf wet thrust; 7,500 lb internal fuel; 2 x 450 gal 1 x 300 gal external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament has around 0.75 T/W and around 87.3 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. Rafale C with 21,720 lb empty weight; 2 x 17,000 lbf wet thrust; 10,360 lb internal fuel; 3 x 2000 L external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament has around 0.93 T/W and around 74.4 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. Typhoon with 24,250 lb empty weight; 2 x 20,000 lbf wet thrust; 11,000 lb internal fuel; 3 x 2000 L external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament has around 1.03 T/W and around 71.4 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. So F-35 definitely has a good enough T/W ratio and wing loading especially if it gets the Block IV engine core upgrades. Also downside of dual engines means more parts to maintain and more parts that can malfunction. Additionally, a single engine has a lower thermal signature compared to having two heat sources. So it is undoubtedly better for stealth. Lastly, going fast reaching supersonic and more is also inconsistent with stealth as it makes one a bigger brighter infrared target. Hence why it is not required for F-35 and B-21 Raider, since F-35 has its DAS and AIM-260 JATM with its tri-mode seeker including infrared guidance.
i have a question is there a pak da video coming or the h-20? and speaking of it is shown with winglets and doesnt that hurt it RCS well it wouldnt have a good one anyway considering the su57 but just asking for myself
I have now conflicting information; I've heard from one angle that Chinese airforce pilots are trained a lot on how to dogfight only to hear from this video that the J-20 doesn't have an autocannon.
Dogfighting training is still very common, pilots need to maintain the ability to handle high G’s and learn the techniques they may need, while also learning other methods. F-35’s are always buzzing around practicing this too, despite it being - if anything - a secondary role.
There are dedicated short range missile with Helmet-mounted display and sliding missile launcher for dogfight. It seems China just do not believe dog fight with autocannon, or they trust their long range missile and do not believe 2 short range missile is not enough.
If the Chinese J-20 ends up becoming a legitimate factor and possible threat in the skies, and the Russian SU-57 is outperformed by it, I can imagine ‘Made in China’ will no longer be seen as a mark of debatable quality, but rather ‘Made in Russia’ will take its place.
already is. China's already starting to poach contracts that were previously filled by Russian military giants in the "cheap crap for 3rd rate militaries" niche since everyone is starting to look at their supposedly rugged, dependable, Russian.
Thank you. So many videos just give the F-35 a wank, singing its praise over every other fighter and not giving adversarial nations the respect they deserve.
Just because the f-35 is superior in every way, that doesn't make the j20 not extremely dangerous. Overconfidence and complacency are the first steps on a short path to destruction. In light of this, I say we quadruple the order for the f-35. You know, just in case.
J-20 prototype is approved in 2008 using F-35's technology stolen from US in 2009. These technologies then studied, digested and applied to J-20, manufactured and assemblied within 1 year and completed at the end of 2010 and made its first flight 11.Jan 2011. It make sense to me. Does it make sense to you?
I will add for you that I suspect that Putin was not really intending to cause a conventional war with Ukraine on February 23 2022. I believe he was thinking that he was going to just depose the current government and very quickly install a government friendly to him. Drive quickly within an hour or two, maybe a day, Zelenskyy probably goes and lives somewhere like Austria or wherever, Russia doesn´t have to do that much, maybe even some of the ethnic Russian soldiers in the Ukrainian army even stand down completely. That didn´t work obviously, when Zelenskyy risked his own life to stand his ground, the attempt completely failed. Also, Putin´s intelligence briefings and other information is given to him by people who have an incentive to lie to him and make his government look better and Putin´s enemies weaker, to make all these arguments in favour of Russia´s government narrative as strong and evidenced as possible. They are guilty of lying to him, but Putin is guilty of creating such a hostile environment for telling the truth and allowing corruption at the highest levels of Russia´s government to fester so much. Putin´s annexation also has a lot to do with how Russia´s army was losing personnel and Russian law only allowed the use of conscript soldiers within territory that in Russian law was Russian. Ergo, easy answer, annex them directly into Russia. That creates all kinds of headaches for other political issues, but if he ends the special military operation in his own words, he has to also probably end many of the restrictions on freedom of speech and other limits, currency controls, whatever, and allows for the damage his army already took unto that point to be exposed and for him to be implicated in it. If he fought on, maybe the West got bored and he could grind down things like the Ukrainian supply of SAM missiles allowing Russian air superiority or for other things to degrade resolve and whatever, in his own grandiose and arrogant beliefs. Putin is not a fascist. He cannot mobilize society en masse to his side. He can get them to be very apathetic to such tremendous horrors, but he cannot get them to be highly motivated. This is a big contrast to the USSR days where you could get way more mobilization, where basically everyone turned out for elections. Putin in 2018 gets maybe 68% turnout, and of them 77% of them voted for him, and his own party did worse in 2021, just about 50% in favour of his party United Russia and about 50% turnout, which would be absolutely pathetic by Soviet standards. And that´s with corruption, bribery, electoral fraud, suppression of competent opposition, and all sorts of authoritarian laws Putin uses. He and his cronies have hollowed out Russia into a thin shell. Russia´s shell can survive relatively long given that it did industrialize, even at the cost of millions of lives, and he is rich in hydrocarbon wealth, and Russia does have a core of a few genuine achievements like Peter III´s modernization attempt, authors like Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy (who was a pacifist), and revolutionaries who genuinely believed in their cause like Lenin, the memory of which has survived through the world which saw the Soviets as the alternative to control by the Americans, French, British, Portuguese, Japanese, and Spanish, in conflicts that were far more grey and grey in morality than Ukraine´s war against Russia´s occupation is today. Russia also has a large population, bigger than the vast majority of the world, at 146 million people, a huge landmass and railway system allowing for logistics within Russia at least to make some sense and for Russia to store most of their industrial, agricultural, and resource power and populations securely away from most Ukrainian countermeasures whereas the majority of countries have less land than Greece and fewer people than Czechia, and even without conscripts they can scrounge up hundreds of thousands of soldiers even through voluntary contracts. But it is not unlimited and Ukraine´s ability to convert to a total war system, their ability to take casualties and if anything that makes them more unwilling to give in given that they nearly unanimously believe in their cause, and their more democratic and accountable system, for all its many flaws of corruption and weak government in decades past, is probably going to tip the balance.
I speculate that the J-20 shares a weakness with the F-35: The logistics chain. Aircraft require many replacement parts, and a shortage of things like microchips, specialty materials, and so forth could cripple an air force. For the USA, their chain is spread out, drawing parts from many different nations. The good in this is that the US and their partners will maintain good relations so their birds can fly. However, an intercepted link in the chain, such as Chinese subs paying a visit to freighters, could be problematic. (Assuming that they can escape "the box" unnoticed) China is good at IP theft, but their territorial facilities for making high technology aren't quite as good. Further, their logistics are closer to home. That is good for China for assembling things and preventing issues during transit of goods, but it also means that everything is in fewer warehouses more of the time. Should a conflict occur, such as against Taiwan, China's storehouses might have to collect on fire insurance.
@andrewlim7751 Exactly what I thought as soon as I read this guy's comment... It has been proven.. The F-35 has endless issues that are very costly, and affect performance significantly...
You should keep in mind, china is nuclear armed... Nobody will target anything inside the country. Unless you wanna provoke a nuclear conflict... China will retaliate by targeting the US mainland.. which would bring us very close to nuclear war... I don't think Americans are that dense to attack China's mainland..
With that being said... You should also keep in mind, china is currently leading the world in scientific research... Both quality wise, and quantity wise...
@@andrewlim7751 I heavily criticize many aspects of the F35, but you cannot accurately compare the more extensive and open record of the F35 (used by 9 different countries), to the J-20 which China only operates in limited circumstances under more secretive measures.
Better to overestimate your opponents capability and find out you're wrong rather than underestimating them and finding out you're wrong.
Yup. That is precisely how we got the F-15
Indeed. This is what's called 料敌从宽
赞同，很多中国人也应该有这样的心理
smart❤
Opponent? who? China, or your ter**sm troop fighting for capitals? be clear who your true enemy is. China wins, everyone win, including ordinary ppl in the west. Your living cost will go comfortably low with China victory.
I believe the lack of cannon is based on similar logic to the F-4 Phantom. It was initially a naval interceptor, meant to shoot at Soviet bombers before they could launch an anti-ship missile at the carrier. Adding a cannon would be pointless, because if a Phantom had to maneuver for a gun kill it would allow the enemy to get inside firing range and the carrier would be damaged or sunk depending on the number of missiles in that volley.
China's focus seems to be targeting non-stealthy aircraft like AWACS and fuel tankers, so the shots are taken without getting close to escort aircraft.
什么年代了，还用机炮
And what happened to the Phantoms? They got lured in close ranges and got their cheeks absolutely clapped
@@desperatetogetsomehoes Except that didn't happen. Slow Phantoms doing bomber escort were caught in high speed ambushes.
Then MiGs were lured by Phantoms flying in bomber formation and got clapped. Instead of bombers with Phantom escorts, they were full Phantom combat patrols.
They developed it just in time to watch the US Navy to move to stealth refueling drones and networked F-35s to replace or supplement AWACS. Always a step behind.
@@desperatetogetsomehoes That was mostly for USAF Phantoms trying to engage MiGs in close combat due to the rather archaic rules-of-engagement at the time, where IFF (identify friend or foe) had to be done visually, which practically negated the advantages of long range missiles. Note that in Vietnam, the US Navy Phantoms were far more successful in air combat despite their own F-4's never being upgraded with guns, unlike their Air Force counterparts. It's also a fact that in the last 60 years, the number of air-to-air gun kills on modern conflict zones can be counted on one's fingers, whereas the majority of kills were made with misiles.
Current operational models of J-20 do not use Russian engines, instead they use the domestic WS-10c engines with serrated exhaust nozzles. The WS-15, in addition of having a higher thrust, also has thrust vectoring capabilities.
with WS15 higher thrust, J20 can achieve higher Mach number during supercruise and get to TO faster than anyone
I understand new production runs will have the WS-15 engines now, until the WS-20 engines become ready
@@MrScrunchee WS15 is the endgame engine for J20..... WS20 is for Y20 strategic airlifters
@@fatdoi003 not what I heard. As both you and I don't know what the Chinese govt will do, we will just have to wait and see.
@@MrScrunchee well you can just do a simple search ws-20 and see all the images are for Y-20.... it's a high bypass turbofan engine
You know, as a cutting edge weapon, stealth aircraft do seem like an autocannon would be pointless. But I wonder, if the technology will go full circle in the future, where two opposing stealth fighters can detect each other at such close range that it devolves into an old school dogfight
The aircraft would be too fast to optically track them.
I mean, while it would be funny, the technology for extremely maneuverable, albeit very short ranged missiles has existed since the 70s, and while a gun requires the nose to be on target, a missile doesn't with helmet mounted sights, technology that existed since the 70s.
Short-range missiles will still be more maneuverable and precise than an autocannon.
Autocannons are definitely not an outdated feature, they are very versitile and are a great failsave in case of running out of other munitions in A2G and A2A combat.
@@jll5446aim9x?
The fact that China let J20 fully take the spot light in air shows means they are quite confident that they have got the next generation fighter ready.
This logic doesn't apply to countries that are trying to catch up. Look at Russia for proof
@@liiou4445 China actually backup their barks with bites, they even managed to produce the VN20 in numbers and export them, which everyone thought was just crazy barking from China, it is not wise to just write them off
@@liiou4445 Well they allow the public to get almost arms length to the J-20 on a static display. During some airshows, they parked them out for public to almost touch. Airshows where the US military even had representatives too.
I think that's what the original comment was about.
@esphaeraspraestans4212 it's all fake. please stop the China threat propaganda.
@@liiou4445俄罗斯怎么能跟中国比？事实上拿美国和中国比还是比较合理
The J-20 does in fact have retractable Luneburg lenses. They're located on the underside of the plane, in an elongated hexagonal compartment next to one of the missile detection IR sensors.
Hard to see the compartment not compromising stealth. Not that the oddly-angled canards, ventral vertical surfaces, and exposed engine nozzles don’t compromise that enough.
@@bluemarlin8138 You don't understand its function. The compartment is used only during non-combat missions to deny the enemy from getting good radar cross-sections of the plane. During combat missions the compartment is retracted and covered with RAM tape. Furthermore, he cannards are "oddly-angled" in order to not be symmetrical with other surfaces of plane, that makes the cannards much less visible to radar than if they weren't "oddly-angled". Lastly, regarding the engine nozzles, the WS-10 and WS-15 are serrated nozzles.
@@bluemarlin8138 Your conventional surfaces will compromise stealth around the place with bigger sensors that can detect longer distances.
You can clearly see the Luneberg lens at 10:23 of this video.
@@bluemarlin8138 It's not a compartment, it's literally the whole lens retracting. The one in the video is not the retractable version. The new version is completely flush when retracted.
Also, are we going to talk about the massive exposed engine on the F-35? And canards were going to be used on the F-35 until they found that the front weight was not good for carrier ops.
Three things to support J20s ferry Range:
1.Canards help in saving fuel while take off (take off uses 30 pct of fuel normally) by producing more lift and that fuel can be used to ferry the aircraft farther
2. Space left from removing gun/ammo compatment, and Bump/DSI intake as well as other parts being used as extra fuel tanks
3. Curved back side near engings curved wings to reduce drag as well as to crfeate more lift
there is a clear advantage of delta/canard design towards maneuverability and range... that's why most european designs use this configuration - Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen
Canards do not affect the range of the plane. Having a shorter or longer takeoff run isn’t going to have an effect how much fuel you have left once you’re in the air because acceleration stays the same whether or not there are canards.
@@collander7766no, the more lift, the higher your takeoff weight which mean you can carry more fuel.
@@lagrangewei could very well be true, but that’s irrelevant because that’s not what OP said. They said it used less fuel.
@@collander7766 "by producing more lift and that fuel can be used to ferry the aircraft farther" this is what op said
0:46 you didn't had the need to hit us with the hardest J-20 intro/edit.
That sound... jeez
Unfortunately it looks like the real deal unlike the Su57
Yes if you took his opinion on Su-57 where he grasp straws by referencing most outdated information on the jet such as RCS figure before it was even produced.
@@agramarten I would beat the SU-57 in a fight.
@@agramarten Mate, he took Sukhoi's own data. Also, Russia's barely made any.
Except it's engines suck...a lot.
@@anzaca1 which he already said are getting replaced this year...
I believe J-20 will not participate itself very much in the physical combat, but instead act as a C&C anchor for multiple companion drones who will do the actual fighting/shooting/bombing. Something like a mobile FOB.
China already possesses the largest drone fleet in the world, as well as the largest number of different types of operational drones, with more and more surfacing every year. Automated UCAV's like the FH-97A, CH-7, etc.
I'm certain USAF is also headed in the same direction with the F-35 acting as an anchor for the likes of XQ-58.
Although the title might sounds implying J-20 is bad, the whole video actually conveys a much more imformative and objective content than most biasd video on the Internet !👍
And we should never take one aircraft out of the whole system (for example, J-20 can play as a data center while leaving J-16s carrying lots of missiles and J-10s for visual range fight) as long as it plays its own parts well , it's fair to say it's a good aircraft.
and soon J20 will be the only 2 seater 5th gen fighter that can do EWS and drone warfare
@@fatdoi003They also have that vigorous dragon plane and various SU-30s. I think J-20 isn't for dogfighting other aircraft
@@cinnamon3578 imo J20 is a long range BVR interceptor using its stealth quality, launch their PL15, PL21 >100km then supercruise RTB.....
also J35/31 is coming very soon....
found the tankie@@fatdoi003
You're really doing a great job, look forward to seeing this channel grow
J20s are equiped with ETOS and EODAS that F22s don't have. J20s actually have the upper hand against F22s. F35s are more of an even match for J20s. F22s are outdated.
I believe the J-20 isn't actually a copycat, but an improvement on an abandoned Soviet/Russian design known as the MiG-1.44 Flatpack, the Engines and Canard layout come from that, while the F-22 and F-35 data leaks of 2009, make up the rest.
I think the J-10 might be inspired by the Israeli prototype IAI Lavi and the MiG1.44 but the J-20 seems like a good progression from the J-10
If you notice the designs of US Air Force NGAD and US NAVY's F/A XX have been China J20 without or with tail fins, canards and etc...However, we need the NGAD like Yesterday. It would have been nice to have the F23 black widow 2 now....PS JS20 is now a two seater with better super cruise engines now...Have we lost the sixth generation fighter contest like the race of the China H20 and US B21 Raider...H20 was flying already...
@@paperitgel98no it is not, there is J9 way before lavi. and j10 and lavi isn't in the same weight class.
@@rgloria40 That is an extremely stupid statement. There was no race between the H-20 and B-21, for one the race was won by the US 26 years ago with the B-2, and two the B-21 is undoubtedly leagues ahead of the H-20. We haven't lost the sixth generation fighter contest for one due to the fact NGAD is the closest sixth generation fighter to production and service, and two because it is almost a certainty that NGAD will be more technologically advanced and would have the upper hand in the majority of engagements.
@@johnbean9797 Free feel to be the one to be over tax .....for project that should have adhere to a schedule and overbudget as well as hiring unqualified people...
Such a badass looking fighter
It looks like a brick.
@@billrich9722 if the j20 is a brick then the f35 is a fucking semi truck
@@PedroNesto24 Hey, to each their own.
Semi trucks are fucking sick, though.
I love the peterbilt 389
@@billrich9722tell me you wont be scared to see someone throwing a brick at you at mach 2
A J-20 equipped with 2 WS-15 engine have just flown last week
If speculated thrusts are accurate, this will make the J-20 the aircraft with the best super-cruise capability among all 5th gen fighters
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Lol
China has a terrible track record with engines, im sure they will very quickly close that gap but not yet
Well, you did say, "If".
@@Utubesuperstar realiability is different from performance.
If you read Sun Tsu you would know that the side that thinks its so intelligent and much better than their enemy is the side that is about to lose
I mean the US and China both seem pretty overly optimistic about how we’d fare facing off against each other.
Course maybe that means we’d both lose.
@@LWGanucheau thats true what you said. But we will both lose for a different reason and we both know what I mean
你还懂《孙子兵法》？但是西方国家好像不懂：骄兵必败。
As a Chinese, I hope J20 is the best fighter in the world, because it's designed to protect me. But I really don't to find out if it's the best.
Let’s hope combat with China doesn’t happen so we never have to find out how good or bad there forces are.
All of china's military is "prepared for war" but lack the military competence to do so. What do i mean? The U.S. has veterans that have served in wars, China doesn't. The knowledge, training, and on the ground experience cannot be replicated. The US is far better prepared on that front. Imma say the US has a acceptable and respectful 93% win chance against China though not without heavy losses.
I lowkey want to just to see how 5th gen aerial combat would look.
@@thelouster5815 Missiles and drone swarms flying everywhere. The side with the inferior planes would be getting shot down before they even see the enemy. Dogfights would be scarce and would only happen as a last-resort when all other options have been exhausted.
@@thelouster5815 It would look pretty fucking boring.
那样最好
When the Indian government said they had been able to identify the aircraft, two important things to note it was in a patrol configuration so external fuel tanks and we weren’t able to track it effectively.
The Indian air-force detected & tracked the J-20 over Bainang... If you extrapolate the distance between the nearest IAF base to the county... you'll realize that either the J-20's stealth capabilities aren't as good as they're being touted to be... Or the IAF has deployed exceptional radars which are more than capable of tracking current 5th gen stealth tech...
Why do you Indians never speak through the brain? Also found J20?? Your media hype is brainwashing you@@SiberianStar
@@SiberianStarjust say you didnt watch the video next time because shitty stealth or india having super duper radars are definitely not the only possibilities, theyre not even likely to be the reason at all.
The J20 will operate within the Chinese A2AD environment. The adversary should not forget how that combination will work.
cant speak for every country but the US is doing similar with their "loyal wingman" program. The US military has plenty of flaws but just look at Desert Storm to see how they've long been pioneers in network centric warfare.
Thank you for not being biased. Many people look down on J20 and my country, you made a great analysis
Perhaps the lack of a cannon also suggests that they think their Fox-2s will be good enough that they cannon is just extra weight, vibration, gun gas, and complexity they don't need?
On the other hand, we've seen western stealth aircraft sneak within literally 300 meters of a target and gun them to save missile ammunition, so it's possible that guns can save missiles during a seal clubbing situation.
cannon on a 5gen fighter🤣🤣🤣 . modern warfare fight start at 400+km away or the range of your anti air missile
2nd reason it dont need a cannon it can easily out run F22 or F35 render your cannon a dead weight
@@jetli740Reread the comment, because that's not what they were fucking saying.
@@jetli740 ... according to chinese statistics?
Sure. When they are known to overstate their capabilities of their equipment, much like russia does.
And the US, by contrast. Will if anything. UNDERSTATE, it's capabilities.
@@Destroyer_V0 lol technically no country would really reveal their military equipment true capacity. Usa the worse one by overstate their true capacity or completely denied it existence like the sr71 blackbird. other example is F35 or f22 it Radar cross-section the size of a bee. Using logic mean
it cannot be detected by any radar right?
but.......
example why iT BullSH1T the F-117 R.C.S is 0.003 (f22 is 0.001) but the F-117 got shoot down by Serbian army using S-125 surface-to-air missile in 1999. ( yeah that s125 is very old )
it not hard to connect the dot.
Really? in the last 20 yrs has any aircraft been shot down by guns? Even the balloon was shotdown by 9x
The fact that china able to build 5th gen fighter own its own is remarkable,we indian are nowhere near to China scientific advacement
Small correction here for combat radius... US combat radii is determined by the effective distance an aircraft can perform a set mission. This includes time on station, several turns on full afterburner, weapons employment, and the return trip. All US aircraft have their ranges calculated as such. Russian and Chinese Radii are calculated by 1/2 ferry range. Or, the theoretical maximum flight distance in a vacuum, divided by 2. It's unrealistic and disingenuous to compare these numbers with practical ones for the F-22 and F-35B.
For context, the USAF lists the F-16 as having "more than 2,000 miles" of ferry range. On the other hand, the combat radius is listed as around 300 nmi for different missions on a similar playing field as the F-35. A quick caveat for the F-16, it is likely the ferry range is calculated with three drop tanks while the combat radius is with only two. Please note the F-35 has double the combat radius as the F-16 (compared to F-35A). This makes me more likely to believe the J-20 has similar flight duration/range as an F-16 in ferry conditions (3 drop tanks, no weapons). Which is impressive, but certainly short of the F-22 or F-35.
What's your source on Russian and Chinese radii range being 1/2 ferry range?
A small hint for those trying to figure out why J20 is "mighty dragon". Try finding the Chinese names of JF17, J10 and J20, produced by the same company and are like i3, i5 and i7 of jet fighters. I'm seriously puzzled why Intel names all their processors something "lake" as well. Yeah maybe English translation is to be blamed 66.6%.
As of the canards compromising stealth myth, I'm not aware moving elevators from back to the front makes a world of difference.
Regarding the F35 copy claim, one liner debunk - look at the timeline.
In fact if you can understand Chinese, the CCTV has a pretty elaborative doco series about the company and how J10 was produced. They're not shy telling the US helped. Not by leaking information but by showing them modern industrial practices and computer aided design. The J9 project later died but the tech know-hows and the team lived to make things far greater. And if you take a close look at J10 you will soon know where J20 is from.
For those holding strong faith yellow monkeys can't invent, I have not much to say but, enjoy your bubble and try not to see the writings on the wall.
J-10 is based from lavi fighter israel, china re wre buying the design
@windrose5988 sure it a rip of the f35 or f22 but the cannard how that work? plz stop be ignorance.
if you put a cannard on the f35 or f22 every thing relate to flycontrol have to be replace .
@@Fauzanarief-n7iChina has gotten a lot with regards to US industrial and US military tech from Israel. Israel’s a back door to US industrial/military technology for China and Russia.
Yanks still haven’t out two and two together. God damn idiots lol
@@jetli740 Lol canards make it 100% not a product of theft. You are being delusional, given the known history here. It's just all the radar absorbent material and 40 years of testing stealth to figure out what will work and what wont that the CCP ripped off. Oh well, tofu dreg chinese copy pasta will still get dropped
"For those holding strong faith yellow monkeys can't invent", you really going to act like the J-20 wasn't fast forwarded by the CCP's espionage. Crying racism for getting called out on facts infers your own racist assumption
I hope your channel explodes, you deserve million times more subscribers! The level of quality is amazing, good job!
You’re too kind, and your words have more impact than you may think - thank you!
@@KabodaOfficial ❤️❤️
That opening with the Tie Fighter scream was awesome xD
*It is over-hyped as combat aircraft and SEVERLY UNDERRATED as technical and organisational achievement*. 40 years ago US built YF-23. At the same time, 40 years ago China, albeit nuclear power on level of today's North Korea was still industrial and technological backwater, just starting market reforms. Fielding J-20 is comparatively much larger achievement for China, than for USA is to jump between F-22 and F-35 or B-2 and B-21. 40 years ago development of fly-by-wire for Eurofighter by Germany was one painful excercise. Even if it is low observable F-15 equivalent - it is astonishing achievement for China on as it would be for every other nation; one that few can approach. China now has to built doctrine and support system around it, including pilot trianing (results of excercise with Thailand aren't encouraging).
Very good points!
China build ship and planes before WWII, they are not as backward as people think.
The J-20 isn't made for dogfighting per se. Its lethality lies in the PL21 BVR missiles that have a crazy range of 300km, so it's likely to play the role of the aerial long-range sniper picking off high value targets from concealment. In a pinch, however, it can call upon its supermaneuverability to bring its high off-boresight capable PL15 missiles to bear in self-defense. The last I heard, both missiles are very highly regarded.
The newer twin-seat J20B is reportedly able to control multiple drones, allowing it to act as an instant force multiplier.
Chinese AA missiles are good, although there are obvious flaws with launching a missile from 300 km away. Usually you don't take the maximum range of the missile as its kill zone. For example PL-21 cannot be stored internally, which isn't good for stealth aircraft.
Keep providing quality content
There was a time not long ago when U.S. fighters were the only ones with smooth, seamless skins.
Now China has produced the J-20 with smoother surfaces than U.S. fighters (look closely).
That alone indicates how advanced the J-20 is.
wow, thank you for providing such a analytical vedio, and good job with trying to be objective! this is much needed
The lack of an auto-cannon seems like a good decision frankly. You are not more maneuverable than a missile.
... What does that have to do with the efficacy of a gun?
You may outmaneuver the plane that's hunting you with a gun. You are a lot less likely to outmaneuver a missile.@@billrich9722
@@billrich9722 you don't need it
@@lolasdm6959 You only need something if you intend to use it.
This is America. We intend to use the gun.
@@lolasdm6959Not sure what you base not needing a autocannon on but with good stealth aircraft it's hard to keep weapons grade lock from what I've read and seen in sims and also the aircrafts having electronic warfare and jamming capabilities.
Since autocannons are immune from everything a stealth aircraft has and uses as advantages. Having a autocannon seems like something I'd very much rather have and not need it, even if its never used. Than need an autocannon and not have one.
Love the quote at the beginning, more people should take heed.
You also don't need to be completely invisible to the radar. Being low-observable can still make the difference in a war where there's probably lots of radar pollution coming from every direction. Against basically anything other than an F-22 or F-35 it may be decisive.
F35 is a very good submarine.
Only China can liberate the world.
@@Superpo0oper2020so is the moskva 😂
@@Superpo0oper2020 ah yes comrade Vatnik, that 1 whole F-35 that was involved in an accident is truly representative of the nearly 1000 planes built thus far.
You're just jealous because there is already a thousand F-35s working for the allies, technology that your china can't even replicate even a little.@@Superpo0oper2020
The most visually pleasing 5th gen aircraft.
But since possibility of dog fighting has lowered on modern age, pilots can avoid canards for manuverablity and without compromising stealth it can shoot down its targets with long range BVR.
This is the enigma of the Chinese military, we have not seen them in major conflict since the 70s. There is nothing we can scale them to, nothing to scale them with. Chinas capabilities are hard to assess in a unclassified view
Err. Korean war happened after Chinese civil war finished(if you don't count current day china Taiwan as ongoing unfinished civil war still). That was a pretty major conflict.. and we all know what happened. It was China's coming out party, they defended nk with nothing but poverty, brains and guts, no tech, no air force or navy even. Not even enough food or clothing.
The J-20 looks more like the VX-23 from Project Wingman than the F-22 Raptor from the real world
It's more along the other way around but correct. The J-20 and the VX-23 look extremely similar.
With the same same tech too
You could probably apply that logic to the f-22
The F22 is 13 years to 18 years old. Hadn't had an update whatsoever since. Think about a Ferrari from the late 2000s to 2010s compared with a new modern EV vehicle from China like the Nio, BYD, Xpeng, etc etc etc..
I guess that's why the F-35 is selling like hot cakes compared to the F-22, still, it's better than anything Russian by miles
J-20 is primarily designed as a stealth assassin. It’s more of a stealth interceptor than fighter. Targeting enemy high value target like bomber awac, transport or tanker.
J-31 will take the place as a real stealth fighter.
Funny to see how every design more closely resembles the F-22
@@foodselyeah it’s a fight jet, how else are you supposed to design a fighter jet? All fighter jets have similar characteristics due to there are only so much you can do differently before compromising aerodynamic and firepower capabilities.
Early reports on chinese literature explicitly states it's an air superiority fighter
@@foodsel airframe is the last aspect to judge a jet
Nobody knows how well it works but damn that's a handsome design
Just found this channel,as an aviation buff I love it! Excellent work!
i hate to say it but regardless of it it is good or bad, it does look good appearance wise
It looks like a brick.
Damn, your videos are really improving with each one. Good work!
Thank you, it means a lot!
你这个视频是多少年前的？？？我笑了！继续贬损吧！继续活在梦里！
Future of warfare is the ability to spot enemy and hit it from super far away using hypersonic projectiles Planes take a lesser role
I'm a bit hesitant to believe its combat range is so large. Even if it is larger, which makes sense for the reasons you've described... being a third again more than the Su-57 Fictional seems like... a lot more.
The Su-57 is wide like the US planes. Soviet interceptors had long ranges too.
J20 has a lift coefficient of close to 2+, and it’s much slimmer compared to F-22 and Su-57.
@@Ilovecruisebecause of those huge wings and canards
@@netsimam how is it different from traditional design which has a much larger tail wing? It seems people are always missing that out? Is that something I am missing?
@@Ilovecruise don't quote me on this, but traditional tail elevators/stabilizers usually produce negative lift for cruising speeds (due to a combination of trimming the pitching moment and the need to keep the aircraft stable in pitch), they exist mostly to maneuver the plane rather than as another lifting surface.
Meanwhile canards can be (not always) used as an extra lifting surface and elevators at the same time, at the cost of worse radar cross section (and before the age of Fly by Wire, too unstable); the Swedes highly prioritize short landing and take off, hence why their fighters are usually in delta-canard configuration.
Funny how on youtube it's always "China also did this thing at some point" like it's a legend. Finally there's a dedicated explanation
"Why do fighter jets have dogfights?"
"Because I have super maneuver!"
"wrong!"
"Because you're stupid."😂
What in the fuck are you talking about?
I am not an aircraft expert, but I think that the J-20 is probably still inferior (maybe not far off) to the advanced US fighter jets. After all China is still in the catch-up phase in terms of military development. But at the rate they are going, China will eventually catch up and be on-par with the US or even surpass them in due time. It doesn't matter how great (or not) the J20 is, because the real concern should be the fast-closing gap between them and the US. Today they may not be the king of the sky, but in the near future they could well be. Even so, there is no need to worry because China isn't interested in conquering the world.
Conquering the world? Probably not. Becoming the #1 superpower? Absolutely. That is something I feel is worth worrying about, especially if they decide to export their methods of governance to other nations as the USA has a tendency to do.
Not the world, just East Asia...
@@r.u.s.e3586 MAGA Americans, Russian, and the Chinese are very similar in thinking. I'm inclined to believe they're successfully exporting their governance model here. Both groups are filled with con-men and are insanely corrupt and all of them openly lie and/or stamp out dissidents. The difference so far is is that China operates with the belief that lying, cheat, and stealing are okay. I don't mean internationally as in spying or tech theft but to their own too. It's literally ingrained in their culture. I'm of the opinion that China's biggest threat is its inability to deal with that. We've already seen Russia's performance... I hate to imagine what we (in the US) are going to look like in the future.
It may be bigger than a Felon, but damn does it look ten times cooler.
Made in China😂😂😂😂
@@JohnDoe-g7r better than the Sov- oh sorry, Russia.
Both China and Russia jets are junk. One cannot fly and one exaggeration. Made in China😂😂😂😂😂😂🐼fat Xi.
@redoubtwithoutdoubt9945 are you guys really serious of this crab
@redoubtwithoutdoubt9945 come on you guys are serious of this. Russia and China? Let me think which is better. This is a difficult decision someone help me. Not you.
F-35 is so stealth..when they go missing.. it's really hard to find them..
ah yes, that whole 1 plane of the nearly 1000 built. Truly a crippling failure.
@@arthas640 Well..I just didn't want to mock too hard..
There was like one going submarine in SCS..another disappearing like MH370 in USA..
Another got brought down by a chicken in Syria..
Another jumped down in Japan..
Yet another went nosing on Japanese runway..
Also another decided to disappear into submarine mode at Uk, and Russians were hunting for it..
The list goes on.. LOL 🤣😂🤣🤣
It’s a LITTLE bit overhyped, but it seems like a pretty solid jet. It is better than the Su-57 from most metrics that we have seen.
To be fair, that bar for being better than the Su-57 is really low in the first place
@@ImBigFloppa If the F-22 is Usain Bolt then the Su-57 is a man with no legs and the J-20 is his twin brother with a pair of prosthetics.
186 f22 vs 800 j20. 😂
I hope that we can ultimately resolve our differences without killing eachother. I'd rather admire these aircraft for what they are than revile them for what they do.
J-20 is actually a dedicated interceptor based on the Delta Wing and canard hybrid design, it fills the role of F-104, F-106 and F-4 Phantom. Climb up high as fast as it could, shoot the missiles and return home quickly. It's primary adversary is the TU-95 and SU-34.
They didn't design this aircraft to shoot down Russian bombers, they designed it to shoot down American AWACS and sink American ships in a hypothetical war for Taiwan. Whether it can actually achieve that remains to be seen, I doubt it has the edge over American 5th gen (and 6th gen in the near future) aircraft, but that is no doubt the mission the Chinese want it to accomplish
Why would the tu-95 and su-34 be it's adversaries?
@@kanestalin7246possibly early in the design stages when China was more of a competitor to Russia than the US, or they think that China is more likely to engage Russia in eastern Siberia than the US over the pacific?
So J-20 basically is a Chinese stealth version of MiG-31
@@benbowland Russia and China have territorial disputes along the Northern border and during the Sino Indian border clashes, Russia aid India. That's why China views Russia as the main threat instead of US.
It's already worying, they've got more than 10 of them.
unlike russia lol
actually 200+
It's already 200+
年产量100-200架
I don't think lack of cannon is shortcoming since F35 only got internal cannon on A type
Sounds a lot like saying you did it because you saw somebody else do it.
@@billrich9722 That's usual in military.
Great video overall, but the autocannon doesn't matter for air combat anymore, especially with a stealth aircraft. Its only purpose now would be for ground attack.
people still seem to think its 1940. Even in Vietnam when guns were found to still be useful that was mainly due to some failures with air to air missiles that were rather quickly fixed. Especially with stealth planes all the added weight and radar issues a gun would create just arent worth it when in a head to head engagement 9/10 planes are going to be downed from beyond visual range, they're not going to be dog fighting at super sonic speeds like it's the bloody blitz.
There has been some very in depth analysis of the RSC for the J20. The J20 is low observable particularly from 15 degrees off a straight forward orientation. However, the rear stabilizers are monolithic. This among other design features have diminished it’s stealthiness. The RCS albeit better than the SU57, is no where close to U.S. 5th gen fighters. This is why I consider the J20 and SU57 gen 4.5.
Regardless of its actual capability, I believe in giving credit where credit is due.
The J-20 is a beautiful airplane. If it is half as capable as it is pretty, they’ve got a real winner.
If China ever manages to get their engines and materials development in line with their intellectual property theft, the United States is in trouble.
Many may concern the front canards may spoil the general stealth design, but IMO the canards are made with the material that’s“a piece of glass” from radars’ view. This is because unlike wings, there’s no fuel tanks or other non-stealth device inside canards, so making canard transparent to radars is a good strategy for Chengdu
I can imagine the canard is under a lot of stress during higher G maneuvers, so i should think it’s impossible to use just composite materials
Tell me you don't understand what radar is without telling me exactly that 😂
silicon oxide is optical opaque at standard radar freq @@HailAzathoth
Thats not how radars work, its about surface perpendicular to the wave direction. Canards provide area to bounce back radar waves. It is likely they use software to compensate by directing canards less favourably for aerodynamics but reduces radar returns compared to normal canards.
When shot down by F-35 or F-22, then over-hyped. When shot down a F-35 or F-22, then underrated.
The j20 is not a fighter jet used to gain air superiority, it is only used to cooperate with early warning aircraft to strike important targets such as radar and command centers, just like a blade. Air superiority aircraft and close range combat use FC31 (the j35 circulating on the Chinese internet) and other fourth generation aircraft. According to analysis, the FC31 is a fighter jet that fully responds to air combat and gains air superiority. However, it has not been officially released and was only discovered in the background of promotional videos, which may be under testing and adjustment.
Great video, as always. Thanks!
My pleasure!
The argument of bringing up stolen design as a weakness seems silly to me. It’s not like researching pre-existing plans and designs would mean absence of understanding of the engineering and science of said designs. They aren’t just mindlessly copying homework. Rather they stole the courses textbooks and notes of the best student in the class.
So any gaps in institutional knowledge would be easier to identify, easier to study and so easier to remedy. China did exactly this to develop nukes, despite USSR being reluctant to help in the effort. China made an effort to figure out what USSR wasn’t telling them and then fill in the blanks on their own. Very hard to imagine them doing anything less than that with any designs they steal from US.
You don’t just reverse-engineer the design itself. You also reverse-engineer the institutional knowledge it implies.
Okay but they spent decades figuring out modern turbojets. Respect for whichever scientist/lab got it right, but they had the homework done for them and actually lacked the understanding. Which isn't surprising, some engineering/materials science classes in the US aren't even open to non-US citizens.
There's allegations that Chinese academics are pressured to have scientific paper mills to artificially inflate China's perceived scientific development.
Some notes are indecipherable if you don't know what the writer knew.
@@ChucksSEADnDEADThe CCP exaggerates China’s economic numbers and population, so it’s not much of a stretch to imagine them inflating their scientific development.
Yeah, « copying » is the logical choice; who the hell is giving out brownie points for coming up with an original design from the ground up in a war? The AK-47 is clearly derivative and taking the best aspects of the M1 Garand and STG-44, the two most effective service rifles of WWII, in its action and its design philosophy respectively, plus some innovations of its own, and the AK family has gone on to be one of the most successful combat rifles in history. It’s what Newton called standing on the shoulder of giants.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD decade or 2 does it matter, if you sucess in the end,
china build jet since the 50s they not new in the game, a copy the plane to build a different jet just dont work.
it just like i ask you to repair a tesla with a wv golf manual
@@jetli740 It does matter. It signifies a gap. If you're so good at copying homework, why should it take 20 years?
It means that everyone else will keep leaping forward. Success in a vacuum is great. But now F-35s will have a new engine enter development. So by the time J-20s are fully fitted with the proper engines, the US will have NGAD and more powerful F-35s. Success isn't enough to win. You have to succeed over others.
one of the few comment sections with insightful discussion instead of "hurr durr china j 20 cheap copy plastic"
it doesnt have to be a 10/10 fighter jet, 7/10 with huges numbers it definitely is big threat to everyone.
That "numbers" part may be an issue though. China doesnt have much of an aircraft or engine market, their only real defense customers almost exclusively buy cheap, low end equipment since they're mostly poor, and as a result aircraft are one of the few things China cant really get economy of scale with since they have to "sell" 99% of their aircraft domestically and while large their defense spending is still a fraction that of the US's about on par with EU's combined defense spending. Since the US sells to EU/NATO allies, British Commonwealth countries, Asian allies like Japan and South Korea, _and_ to many countries who are just afraid of Russia and/or China it creates a gigantic market for US aircraft and gives the US a much better ability to achieve economy of scale even outside of the US's gigantic domestic market. The J-20 has similar units so far as the F-22 which was only ever going to be a very limited run of planes since it cant be sold to anyone outside of the USAF, not even the worlds 2nd largest air force: the US Navy. The J-20 is absolutely dwarfed by F-35s so far at a rate of nearly 5 to 1.
May not be as advanced as western jets but any advantage from what you had before is better than nothing.
The way larger range is an advantage because you don't need the extreme resources for a carrier group or bases closer to your targets. Sure you can use air refueling but that takes time to refuel and are vulnerable. And if you are engaged and low on fuel you are also at a disadvantage. And using afterburners use a lot of fuel.
If the Chinese can put out a better engine then it'll boost their capabilities a little more. May still be behind western aircraft but like I said. Any improvement is better than nothing.
China is making huge advancements in a short time. You can criticize all you want about stealing and copying because in the end they achieved enough to make it happen. And it's not always who has the better toys win.
Indeed, also worth noting the Chinese geopolitical situation puts their likely flashpoints quite close to home, which has effected their design choices.
True, but planes like the F-35 also have the advantage of numbers and thanks to economy of scale they're likely cheaper too. There's nearly 5 F-35s flying for ever 1 J-20 right now and the price tag of the F-35 keeps dropping putting it within reach for more and more countries, and making it easier for countries to buy more of them. The J-20 meanwhile only has 1 customer and even if they were willing to sell it to other countries most people dont seem interested in buying Chinese warplanes compared to European and American equivalents which makes it all the harder for China to gain the numerical edge, and means it's easier for the US to dump larger amounts of money into R&D. That supposed/likely theft of technology that happened with the Joint Strike Fighter program also has made countries more paranoid about security, especially seeing as we seem to be heading into a new cold war, making future copying of tech more difficult which combined with increased R&D spending by the US means it's going to make it harder for China to catch up in the future and harder to innovate domestically. The PLA is getting larger and larger budgets as the PRCs economy continues to grow, and if we continue into a new cold war that's all the more likely to happen, but it's alos possible that similar to the USSR in the 40s, 50s, and 60s once scared out of complacency the US may only accelerate the technological divide.
True, and a new Cold War this time around would be a mess. Not sure how capable the rest of the worlds countries trade will compensate that buying power deficit from the US if that ever happened. At the same time, the US hasn’t positioned itself very wisely to manufacture internally like it had in the past….another Cold War doesn’t look too promising for anyone, anywhere. The US military complex might be the only winner ATM between both countries?
As for Chinese copying or using stolen data I have no doubt, they stole the planes for the C17 Globemaster and made the Y-20.
Not C17, IL-76 Soviet heavy-lift
can you make analysis for korean KF-21? tech looks promising as gen 4.5
That’s a good idea, I’ll add it to the list!
@@KabodaOfficial and TFX fighter of Turk Azeris and Pakistan
just found this channel, amazing content keep it up
Glad you enjoy it!
Great video, really high quality content! :D
Glad you think so!
The author mentioned India, this observation is very interesting!
I like to mock this thing coz the name "Mighty Dragon" screams insecurity.
If they called it just "Dragon" I would take it more seriously
@@kaichodesuwawhat’s the name in mandarin then?
Yeah😂 You have a good point. But it does sound better in Chinese
@@henryith5226it’s a short two syllable word in Mandarin, shorter and sounds better than the English translation
@@henryith5226龙 龙在中国是图腾 而且东方的龙与西方的龙样貌也并不一样
@@henryith5226 猛龙
War thunder players be making bank when they sell F-35 documents to the Chinese
Last year, J20 intercepted F35 in East China Sea without been detected by F35. F35 didn't even know J20 was behind it until it got painted, then ran off.
Do you have a source, as I can't find anything about this specific scenario?
@@KabodaOfficial it was on the news, even the US Navy commander talked about it in an interview.
@@Fightback2023 The only news I can find is that they met, not that the F-35 couldn't detect the J-20, that's why I'm asking for a source. It seem's very unlikely mainly due to the J-20 being less stealthy than an F-35 that's all. As well as the F-35 having 360 degree IR sensors that would've picked it up from behind.
@@KabodaOfficialno, I remember this news. The F35 wasn't on stealth mode. It was on that mode where they strap all the things onto the wings.
@@KabodaOfficial Somebody in the comment section said it happened. That means it must have happened. No need to look for sources.
Nimeni nu vrea să creadă că... China este The ONE....
The lack of automatic cannons may be to make room for larger fuel tanks, and the extra cruising range must come from somewhere.
Moreover, the J20's role in China's air force strategy means that it is almost impossible to encounter a dogfight.
The J 20 will probably be the first opponent for the F 35 in combat with another stealth fighter.
overhyped, Indians say they spotted the J20 with their Su30MKI. But Indians also shot down their own helicopter because they thought its Pakistani fighter, so there might be a slight chance they spotted some Airbus in the sky and thought they saw J20.
0:35 Wasn’t the first fully operational combat unit of stealth fighter aircraft the IAF with the F-35i in December 2017? I do believe that the IAF had also reported using their F-35i in combat by the end of May 2018.
well, if US is noting taking any invading actions towards China, u better believe J-20 is underrated
I agree with many of your points, the J-20 should not be underestimated. There is data from the Taiwanese that indicates the J-20s RCS is something like 0.05m2. So better than the Su-57, but not as good as the F-22 or the F-35. However, I think there is one aspect you may not have considered. With the long range of the J-20 and its small wings in a delta configuration giving it less maneuverability may mean its not meant as an air superiority fighter at all. It may instead be meant more as an interceptor. Perhaps to sneak in and knock out American AWACs and other important ISR assets.
thats where you might be wrong, the J20 is actually slightly lighter than the F22 and now with the WS15, has more thrust. meaning it will be at least as manoeuvrable.
Canard designs are also exceptionally manoeuvrable at subsonic speeds.
@@hughmungus2760 the J-20 is indeed claimed to be slightly lighter than the F-22. However, the claim that the WS-15 has more thrust than the F119 is suspect at best. Obviously we don't know the real thrust figures for either engine, unless you have access to US and Chinese classified data. The open source data indicates that the F119 has more dry thrust than the WS-15, 26,000 lbs to a claimed 23,000 lbs roughly. So it definitely has less dry thrust. With afterburner the WS-15 is claimed to have between 36,000 and 40,000 lbs of thrust, while the F119 is just listed as having "greater than 35,000 lbs of thrust." So the WS-15 MAY have more thrust in afterburner than the F119, but it has less thrust without burner than the F119. So the J-20 with the WS-15 MAY have a better thrust to weight ratio than the F-22. Of course maneuverability is about more than just thrust to weight ratio. It's also about control surfaces, overall weight, wing size, wing configuration and a number of other factors. A delta with canards can be very maneuverable, on the right aircraft. A small lightweight fighter like the Gripen or the Rafale can have very good maneuverability. The J-20 is not small, or lightweight. Its slightly lighter than the F-22, but nowhere near as light as the Rafale or the Gripen. It's empty weight is more than the Rafale's max takeoff weight. It has a lot of mass that has to be moved through turns and not as much wing area to support it as the F-22 has, canards or no. Larger delta winged aircraft are just inherently less maneuverable than smaller ones, and less maneuverable than an equivalent sized aircraft with a more conventional planform. It's also a long aircraft, relative to its width, not a compact one like the Rafale, or even the F-22. This is also bad for maneuverability, as it means it will have a larger moment of inertia at the ends of the aircraft and be more difficult to rotate on its axis and point the nose where the pilot wants. Thrust vectoring will help, but I'd be surprised if it has the kind of maneuverability the F-22 has. It just doesn't seem to be designed as an air superiority fighter. I could be wrong though I suppose.
Yes, F-35 definitely has the “first look, first shoot, first kill” in beyond visual range BVR. But in a dogfight or within visual range WVR combat its 50/50 or which pilot is better trained or who first makes a mistake. And F-35 is no couch potato. It can definitely dogfight as it is maneuverable enough. It has similar if not better thrust-to-weight ratios and wing loading as compared with other 4th gen platforms. With a high angle of attack AoA F-35 can replicate thrust vectoring control TVC maneuvers without even having TVC. Especially F-35C with its bigger wings it can do the same tight turns Su-57 and F-22 do. F-35A can do the same but at the cost of higher Gs. Consequently, in a 1 vs 1 match, if either J-20 or Su-57 manages to survive in BVR would mean F-35’s pilot already made its first mistake.
@@johnsilver9338 there are certain advantages a twin engine high thrust/weight aircraft has over single engine designs. Most notably the ability to supercuise and fly higher thus get better milage.
Strategically speaking the J20 and SU57 would be better at accomplishing interception tasks and combat air patrol against 4th gen fighters because of their longer range, longer loiter time, larger missile payload, and faster tactical response time.
The only real advantage the F35 might have is that is might be more stealthy from the front.
@@hughmungus2760 Nope, J-20 can only carry 4 x PL-15 and 2 x PL-10, while Su-57 only carries 4 x K-77M & 2 x R-74. While both F-22 and F-35A/F-35C Block IV can carry 6 x AMRAAMs and 2 x AIM-9X. Also F-35A/F-35C has around 750nmi combat radius and that is already carrying 2 x AMRAAMs & 2 x 2000lb GBUs. It can reach 800nmi+ in A2A config. While F-22 can achieve 1000nmi and more depending on altitude, loadout, and speed. On the other hand 4th gen platforms including F-18s, Typhoon, and Rafale would need external tanks to reach comparable ranges. For comparison,
F-35A with 29,000 lb empty weight; 460 sq ft wing area; 1 x 43,000 - 50,000 lbf wet thrust; 18,250 lb internal fuel; and 4 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 1.08 - 1.25 T/W ratio and around 86.8 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. With 6 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 1.06 - 1.23 T/W ratio and around 88.3 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel.
F-35C with 34,580 lb empty weight; 668 sq ft wing area; 1 x 43,000 - 50,000 lbf wet thrust; 19,750 lb internal fuel; and 4 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 0.93 - 1.08 T/W ratio and around 69.2 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel. With 6 x AMRAAM, 2 x AIM-9X has around 0.92 - 1.06 T/W ratio and around 70.3 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel.
F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet with 32,000 lb empty weight; 500 sq ft wing area; 2 x 22,000 lbf wet thrust; 14,400 lb internal fuel; 3 x 480 gal external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament of 4 x AMRAAMs & 2 x AIM-9X has around 0.92 T/W and around 95.9 lb/sq ft wing Loading at 50% fuel.
Gripen E with 17,640 lb empty weight; 1 x 22,000 lbf wet thrust; 7,500 lb internal fuel; 2 x 450 gal 1 x 300 gal external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament has around 0.75 T/W and around 87.3 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel.
Rafale C with 21,720 lb empty weight; 2 x 17,000 lbf wet thrust; 10,360 lb internal fuel; 3 x 2000 L external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament has around 0.93 T/W and around 74.4 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel.
Typhoon with 24,250 lb empty weight; 2 x 20,000 lbf wet thrust; 11,000 lb internal fuel; 3 x 2000 L external fuel including tanks and pylons with similar armament has around 1.03 T/W and around 71.4 lb/sq ft wing loading at 50% fuel.
So F-35 definitely has a good enough T/W ratio and wing loading especially if it gets the Block IV engine core upgrades. Also downside of dual engines means more parts to maintain and more parts that can malfunction. Additionally, a single engine has a lower thermal signature compared to having two heat sources. So it is undoubtedly better for stealth. Lastly, going fast reaching supersonic and more is also inconsistent with stealth as it makes one a bigger brighter infrared target. Hence why it is not required for F-35 and B-21 Raider, since F-35 has its DAS and AIM-260 JATM with its tri-mode seeker including infrared guidance.
i have a question is there a pak da video coming or the h-20? and speaking of it is shown with winglets and doesnt that hurt it RCS well it wouldnt have a good one anyway considering the su57 but just asking for myself
有句话说的很好，所有的诋毁来源于嫉妒😂
I’m being nice about the J-20, why am I getting Chinese comments assuming I’m saying it’s bad?
I take it is meant to address some of the comments from others. Your video is quiet good and fair to me@@KabodaOfficial
I have now conflicting information; I've heard from one angle that Chinese airforce pilots are trained a lot on how to dogfight only to hear from this video that the J-20 doesn't have an autocannon.
Dogfighting training is still very common, pilots need to maintain the ability to handle high G’s and learn the techniques they may need, while also learning other methods. F-35’s are always buzzing around practicing this too, despite it being - if anything - a secondary role.
There are dedicated short range missile with Helmet-mounted display and sliding missile launcher for dogfight. It seems China just do not believe dog fight with autocannon, or they trust their long range missile and do not believe 2 short range missile is not enough.
China has plenty of planes that have autocannons. Look at the new J-15's
If the Chinese J-20 ends up becoming a legitimate factor and possible threat in the skies, and the Russian SU-57 is outperformed by it, I can imagine ‘Made in China’ will no longer be seen as a mark of debatable quality, but rather ‘Made in Russia’ will take its place.
I get what you mean but Russia doesn't make.
already is. China's already starting to poach contracts that were previously filled by Russian military giants in the "cheap crap for 3rd rate militaries" niche since everyone is starting to look at their supposedly rugged, dependable, Russian.
Look up the MIG 1.44. The J-20 is just another copy and paste aircraft with slight stealth capabilities.
I read somewhere, the development cost for the J20 was $4.4B USD, and $8.7B USD cost in espionage.
I wouldn't underestimate that J20 stealth dragon. It has hydro-electro adjustable canard front wings and is a very capable stealth machine.
I'm excited. I hope it's well researched otherwise I'm gonna spread misinformation onto others.
something can be neither good or bad when it doesn't exist.
Another great video! Please keep the awesome content coming! #slavaukraine
Thank you! Will do!
Thank you. So many videos just give the F-35 a wank, singing its praise over every other fighter and not giving adversarial nations the respect they deserve.
Just because the f-35 is superior in every way, that doesn't make the j20 not extremely dangerous. Overconfidence and complacency are the first steps on a short path to destruction.
In light of this, I say we quadruple the order for the f-35. You know, just in case.
the f35 is slower and has a habit of going missing
J-20 prototype is approved in 2008 using F-35's technology stolen from US in 2009. These technologies then studied, digested and applied to J-20, manufactured and assemblied within 1 year and completed at the end of 2010 and made its first flight 11.Jan 2011. It make sense to me. Does it make sense to you?
They also stole fake 5G from the US right?
I will add for you that I suspect that Putin was not really intending to cause a conventional war with Ukraine on February 23 2022. I believe he was thinking that he was going to just depose the current government and very quickly install a government friendly to him. Drive quickly within an hour or two, maybe a day, Zelenskyy probably goes and lives somewhere like Austria or wherever, Russia doesn´t have to do that much, maybe even some of the ethnic Russian soldiers in the Ukrainian army even stand down completely.
That didn´t work obviously, when Zelenskyy risked his own life to stand his ground, the attempt completely failed.
Also, Putin´s intelligence briefings and other information is given to him by people who have an incentive to lie to him and make his government look better and Putin´s enemies weaker, to make all these arguments in favour of Russia´s government narrative as strong and evidenced as possible. They are guilty of lying to him, but Putin is guilty of creating such a hostile environment for telling the truth and allowing corruption at the highest levels of Russia´s government to fester so much.
Putin´s annexation also has a lot to do with how Russia´s army was losing personnel and Russian law only allowed the use of conscript soldiers within territory that in Russian law was Russian. Ergo, easy answer, annex them directly into Russia. That creates all kinds of headaches for other political issues, but if he ends the special military operation in his own words, he has to also probably end many of the restrictions on freedom of speech and other limits, currency controls, whatever, and allows for the damage his army already took unto that point to be exposed and for him to be implicated in it. If he fought on, maybe the West got bored and he could grind down things like the Ukrainian supply of SAM missiles allowing Russian air superiority or for other things to degrade resolve and whatever, in his own grandiose and arrogant beliefs.
Putin is not a fascist. He cannot mobilize society en masse to his side. He can get them to be very apathetic to such tremendous horrors, but he cannot get them to be highly motivated. This is a big contrast to the USSR days where you could get way more mobilization, where basically everyone turned out for elections. Putin in 2018 gets maybe 68% turnout, and of them 77% of them voted for him, and his own party did worse in 2021, just about 50% in favour of his party United Russia and about 50% turnout, which would be absolutely pathetic by Soviet standards. And that´s with corruption, bribery, electoral fraud, suppression of competent opposition, and all sorts of authoritarian laws Putin uses.
He and his cronies have hollowed out Russia into a thin shell. Russia´s shell can survive relatively long given that it did industrialize, even at the cost of millions of lives, and he is rich in hydrocarbon wealth, and Russia does have a core of a few genuine achievements like Peter III´s modernization attempt, authors like Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy (who was a pacifist), and revolutionaries who genuinely believed in their cause like Lenin, the memory of which has survived through the world which saw the Soviets as the alternative to control by the Americans, French, British, Portuguese, Japanese, and Spanish, in conflicts that were far more grey and grey in morality than Ukraine´s war against Russia´s occupation is today. Russia also has a large population, bigger than the vast majority of the world, at 146 million people, a huge landmass and railway system allowing for logistics within Russia at least to make some sense and for Russia to store most of their industrial, agricultural, and resource power and populations securely away from most Ukrainian countermeasures whereas the majority of countries have less land than Greece and fewer people than Czechia, and even without conscripts they can scrounge up hundreds of thousands of soldiers even through voluntary contracts.
But it is not unlimited and Ukraine´s ability to convert to a total war system, their ability to take casualties and if anything that makes them more unwilling to give in given that they nearly unanimously believe in their cause, and their more democratic and accountable system, for all its many flaws of corruption and weak government in decades past, is probably going to tip the balance.
western propaganda work well on you.
@@jetli740 Spare me yours too.
What the fuck? I thought this was about the J-20 limp dragon.
The lethality is beyond amazing
I speculate that the J-20 shares a weakness with the F-35: The logistics chain. Aircraft require many replacement parts, and a shortage of things like microchips, specialty materials, and so forth could cripple an air force.
For the USA, their chain is spread out, drawing parts from many different nations. The good in this is that the US and their partners will maintain good relations so their birds can fly. However, an intercepted link in the chain, such as Chinese subs paying a visit to freighters, could be problematic. (Assuming that they can escape "the box" unnoticed)
China is good at IP theft, but their territorial facilities for making high technology aren't quite as good. Further, their logistics are closer to home. That is good for China for assembling things and preventing issues during transit of goods, but it also means that everything is in fewer warehouses more of the time. Should a conflict occur, such as against Taiwan, China's storehouses might have to collect on fire insurance.
As of date, multiple F35 were crashed but J20 still have a clean sheet.
@andrewlim7751
Exactly what I thought as soon as I read this guy's comment... It has been proven..
The F-35 has endless issues that are very costly, and affect performance significantly...
You should keep in mind, china is nuclear armed... Nobody will target anything inside the country.
Unless you wanna provoke a nuclear conflict...
China will retaliate by targeting the US mainland.. which would bring us very close to nuclear war...
I don't think Americans are that dense to attack China's mainland..
With that being said... You should also keep in mind, china is currently leading the world in scientific research...
Both quality wise, and quantity wise...
@@andrewlim7751 I heavily criticize many aspects of the F35, but you cannot accurately compare the more extensive and open record of the F35 (used by 9 different countries), to the J-20 which China only operates in limited circumstances under more secretive measures.
"The mighty large radar cross section" aka - a target.