J-20B (FC-20B) news

[ghauri05]

With the exception of F-86 saber "ALL PAF FIGHTER JET WERE MULTI-ROLE" with the exception of PAF naval air arm
All those jet are not for their western border/Pakistan, they spread 2 fronts western/northern borders, look brother if you have the J-20 single mission jet ( J-20) which is extremely expansive (110-150 million $$$$$$$) and use only single purpose (Air superiority) and J-31 is true multi-role 5th gen jet and relatively CHEAP as compare to J-20 (80-100 million $$$$$) which will be converted into full air superiority jet if needed with extra capability to conduct CAS, ground attack and Naval strike


Which every country? there are only 3 countries who operated S-400 and Future operator is is also 3, first they want to induct as many as S-400 into Russian SAM networks, and do your research before you posting bro

can u compare the load capability of J-20 and J-31 in A2A combat???

 

[Ultima Thule]

can u compare the load capability of J-20 and J-31 in A2A combat???

current capability of both fighter is same J-20 (4 BVR, +2 short range AAMS=6), J-31 (4 BVR, 2 sort range AMMS=6) but in future J-20 will carry 6 BVR and 2 short range AMMS=8

 

[ghauri05]

current capability of both fighter is same J-20 (4 BVR, +2 short range AAMS=6), J-31 (4 BVR, 2 sort range AMMS=6) but in future J-20 will carry 6 BVR and 2 short range AMMS=8

ok..then that's quite comparable...in that case i will agree with J-31
but what about the range...J-31 accordibg to 1 video i saw, has range of 1250 Km..that's roughly equal to that of Thunder 1300km....can we launch strike missions with this range???

 

[Ultima Thule]

ok..then that's quite comparable...in that case i will agree with J-31
but what about the range...J-31 accordibg to 1 video i saw, has range of 1250 Km..that's roughly equal to that of Thunder 1300km....can we launch strike missions with this range???

so what our enemy is sitting in out next door not 3000- 4000 km away so range isn't issue, so what your point

 

[khanasifm]

ok..then that's quite comparable...in that case i will agree with J-31
but what about the range...J-31 accordibg to 1 video i saw, has range of 1250 Km..that's roughly equal to that of Thunder 1300km....can we launch strike missions with this range???

Range based on internal fuel only vs external tanks on jf

 

[Ultima Thule]

can we launch strike missions with this range???

We already have stand of weapon capabilities in the for of
RAAD

H-2

H-4

 

[ghauri05]

so what our enemy is sitting in out next door not 3000- 4000 km away so range isn't issue, so what your point

My point is if we really want to hurt india,we need to hit its center..and for that we need deep strike fighters..This current range will never allow us to do such a mission

We already have stand of weapon capabilities in the for of
RAAD
View attachment 436558
H-2
View attachment 436559
H-4
View attachment 436560

can u share the maximum distance of indian air or military base from pak border...along the border...bcoz H-2 and H-4 have 60 and 120 km ranges..how effective these will be???

 

[Ultima Thule]

My point is if we really want to hurt india,we need to hit its center..and for that we need deep strike fighters..This current range will never allow us to do such a mission

No need for such jets, we have alternate for these purpose we have stand off weapon capabilities in the form of RAAD, BABUR, H-2, H-4 and various BM for that purpose

can u share the maximum distance of indian air or military base from pak border...along the border...bcoz H-2 and H-4 have 60 and 120 km ranges..how effective these will be???

its general purpose bomb unit, its extremely effcetive against all kind of targets in marching enemy lines

 

[ghauri05]

No need for such jets, we have alternate for these purpose we have stand off weapon capabilities in the form of RAAD, BABUR, H-2, H-4 and various BM for that purpose

I think only Raad can be used to hit air bases of india as it has ranges of 300 and 550km repectively..the H-series will be used hit incoming army

 

[ghazi768]

Tell me 1 scenario,where PAF with current strength can launch an offensive against IAF???They have good SAM systems plus 250+ air superiority fighters

'air superiority fighters', that is nothing but a buzzword. It was relevant in times when only few jet fighters had good ranged radars and could carry BVR missiles. Now many do carry good radars and in terms of BVR situational awareness and who shoot first is important as well.

And what is a 'good' SAM system?

 

[ghauri05]

'air superiority fighters', that is nothing but a buzzword. It was relevant in times when only few jet fighters had good ranged radars and could carry BVR missiles. Now many do carry good radars and in terms of BVR situational awareness and who shoot first is important as well.

And what is a 'good' SAM system?

You may be right that 2 different planes can be comparable today bcoz of avionics used...but u surely understand that these heave fighters which are huge in number...do increase enemy's probability of winning..with each fighter carrying more missiles that any of our individual plane....and as i mentioned we have to deal with huge numbers...so the only solution is to shoot them asap...we will get no time to play games with them

Any SAM which can detect n intercept the intruding plane can be regarded as good SAM..point is we have very few...n enemy has also got a lot of them..again they will increase the probability of their survival against any offensive mission launched by us.

 

[ghazi768]

You may be right that 2 different planes can be comparable today bcoz of avionics used...but u surely understand that these heave fighters which are huge in number...do increase enemy's probability of winning..

You give the impression as if you think that heavy fighters are better because they are heavy. I think we have very different perspectives. If all avionics are removed, which one do you thing will have advantage, light or heavy?

Probability of winning depends on many factors other than luck. Your ability of keep flying in numbers, keep your bases operational, and whether you are able to degrade/neutralise opponent's ability to keep flying in numbers or keep their bases operational.

with each fighter carrying more missiles that any of our individual plane....and as i mentioned we have to deal with huge numbers...so the only solution is to shoot them asap...we will get no time to play games with them

Pardon me, 'huge numbers argument' in itself is neither a great analysis not a good analytical skill. Important thing to analyse is.. if those 'huge number' are actually huge and this greatly depends upon platforms being analysed and ratios at or above which such numbers will actually become 'huge'.

Numbers of missiles becomes a factor if you can shoot first.. some actually argue heavily against carrying a lot of missiles for various reasons. But well, if you ended up getting shot at, what will you do?
Will you keep flying to get the launch parameters to fire them? some or all
Or you will decide to take evasive action? which by the way means that you will certainly jettison all of them including any drop tanks.. evasive actions at 5g or low are tiny, puny actions at best.