Of course the J-20's avionics and sensor suite is much better than that of the F-22. One was designed in the late 80s while the other just entered service.
Wrong. There is no 'of course' about this. The claim is utter nonsense and ignorance based.
Let us take the ADA programming language, for example.
Boeing flies with ADA. There are newer languages, but does that automatically mean: newer = better? Absolutely not.
For the end user, in this case it is the pilot, the base technology of the avionics suite is -- and must be -- transparent to him. For the pilot, what make an avionics suite 'better' than the others, assuming he has access to alternatives and was able to make objective comparisons, are two equally important items:
FEATURES and
EXECUTION.
Each feature must be transparent in execution, meaning no lag, must be precise, and must end cleanly.
So let us take the HUD, for example.
The J-20 have a HUD. Everyone knows it stands for 'Heads Up Display'. But for those of us who are end users, which none of you guys are of the device, the original conceptual label was 'Eyes Up Display'. The initials HUD are just more speech friendly.
As a side note about linguistics, the original label was 'Light Oscillation by Stimulated Emissions of Radiation' or LOSER. No one liked that acronym so LASER was used instead. Look it up, if you doubt.
Anyway...
The overall mission of the HUD are as followed in no order of importance and priority:
-
Reduced pilot workload. My mental workload is reduced when vital flight and aircraft data are properly aligned and referenced to outside the cockpit.
-
Increased flight precision. Can I fly the aircraft and my sortie with reduced fuel and time?
-
Direct visualization of performances. How many layers of interpretations must any data -- aircraft and mission -- travels before reaching the HUD, therefore, me?
-
Increased flight safety. Can I execute maneuvers without jeopardizing aircraft boundaries?
At the end user level, the base technology of those four items are essentially irrelevant. Yes, the base technology can, and often does, improve the performance of those items, but since the HUD is real estate limited, it means each feature of the HUD must fight or justify itself on the display, or in the words of HUD designers: Not one pixel can be wasted.
So if a 1980s era electronics technology can display and execute the various HUD features
vis-a-vis the four mission items above as well as the electronics technology 20 yrs newer, for the end user, there are no differences and therefore, no advantages.
So just on the HUD alone, explain how is the J-20's HUD is superior the F-15's?
The HUD is a flight visual aid. So explain to us how is the J-20's HUD symbology superior to the F-15 that would raise the bar of those four items above. Do you have any info on the projection technology that reduces mass and volume? Do you have any lag time figures? The J-20 and F-22 have widely spaced vertical stabs to facilitate high AOA maneuvers, so how is the HUD sideslip cue in the J-20 superior to the F-22?
And this is just on the HUD alone.