Latest news regarding China's next generation fighter projects

[S10]

In no particular order, by huzhigeng:

没有所有的项目都给南边吧？四代南边有。北边也给了。海四肯定要竞争，虽然说601在研制歼15上有更多的经验。但是611从来都是争强好胜。611从来都是吃着碗里。看着锅里。。同时还想着外卖。

CAC didn't get all the projects. SAC also got its own 4th gen. Navy's 4th gen will be a competition between the two. Eventhough SAC has more experience with J-15, CAC will be looking to take their pie.

两所都有方案。还没有正式PK。。。只能说北边更有优势。北四方案改一下基本就能上舰。而南四的话。呵呵。。气动布局要大改。。还有。海军对以后的海四要求是隐身条件下的超音速巡航。超音速机动性。另说一句。海四肯定是重型。

Both design institutes have their proposals (for navy's 4th gen), but competition hasn't start yet. SAC's convention design has more advantage in this area, since it requires little modification. CAC's design require significan altercation. Navy has requirement for stealth and supercruise, as well as supersonic manoevurability. One more thing, navy's 4th gen will be a heavy fighter.

文章还是不错的，，相当客观。歼20载弹量确实极为优秀。歼20也并不大。和T50，F22都是一个量级的。比苏27要小。歼20的电子设备招标也基本结束。。性能还不错。如果六七年后服役的话，电子设备基本上相当于现在的F35的电子水平，比现在的F22 要好。还有一点。歼20的机头相控阵雷达是四代机之中最大的。。

Decent and objective article. J-20's paylod is quite good compared to its size. It's roughly about the size of T-50 and F-22, smaller than Su-27. Competition for avionics is basically done. If it enters service in about 6 or 7 years, its avionics will be roughly on par with F-35 today. And the dimension of its radar will be the largest among all 4th gen (including F-22, F-35 and T-50).

北四航电比南四要低一个档次，有点差距。。。南四的航电是全程竞标，设备都是国内顶尖中的顶尖。载弹量怎么说呢。北四通用性要好一些。。

SAC's avionics will be slightly inferior to CAC's. CAC's avionics were chosen from a competitive process. In terms of payload, SAC's design has more flexibility.

07年招标是南边鸭式边条翼和北边的三翼面的招标。和现在的北四常规布局是不同的项目

2007's competition was between canard design of CAC and tri-wing design of SAC. It is different from current conventional layout project ongoing at SAC at the moment.

我说的招标结束是分系统产品已经测试结束，就等上2003和2004了，一起集成测试。

Competition for J-20's sub-systems is already over. We're waiting to intergrate and test them on 03 and 04 prototypes.

全状态的南四和F22相比。各有所长。电子设备比现在的F22要好一些。4S当中。有两项要更突出。当然隐身性能和F22还是有点差距的。

When completed, we estimate J-20 will have better avionics than current F-22. Among the 4S requirement, two will likely exceed it. Of course, F-22 will still be better in terms of stealth.

歼20的设计思路就是满足隐身的条件下，突出超机动性和超音速巡航性能。这点和老宋的论文一致。

J-20's design philosophy is to meet stealth requirement, while emphasizing on manovurability and supercruise, similar to Mr. Song's (designer of J-10) article.

既使中国的发动机和美帝水平一样。还是会用YA子的。。

Even if our turbofan engines are on the same level as Americans, we're still likely to use canards in our design.

WS15本来就是全向矢量。毛子的也是。只有美帝的F22才是二元矢量。二元和三元矢量各有优缺点。。。就看哪个更适合自己的国情。所以不要指望什么歼20的屁股装上二元矢量的了。

WS-15 engine will be equipped with 3D TVC. Russians will do the same thing with their engines. Only Americans will use 2D TVC. Each has its pros and cons, depending on what's more suitable for the user, so don't expect F-22 style nozzle on J-20.

南四和北四后面都会量产服役的。配合使用。四代是一个体系。。都是其中的节点而以。。

CAC and SAC's projects will both be produced, and used in conjunction. All 4th gen are part of our future air combat network.

北四原计划确实是不装矢量的国产发动机。不过现在也有装矢量发动机的计划。

Originally, SAC did not plan to install TVC on their project, but now the plan has changed.

你们不要指望歼20装反舰导弹，不可能的事，也没必要。歼20的做战目标就是纯空优，20的标配就是6+2。。空优机就是空优机。

Don't expect J-20 to carry anti-ship missiles. It's both impossible and unneccessary. J-20's sole focus is air superiority, carrying 6 medium range and 2 short range air-to-air missiles.

 

[houshanghai]

well,^^

so chinese 5th gen carrier fighter will also use WS15 like J20 or SAC J1x .

 

[Aramsogo]

HuiTong talks about a J-19 from SAC. Is this the 4th gen that will fly by end of 2011/early 2012??

Also, talk of the XAC JH-7B is not dead. Any status on that??

 

[Chinese Century]

great news

 

[Akasa]

Better avionics than the F-22? Barely any information regarding the F-22's avionics are published. And that would be excessive optimism; China's AESA radars are at its infancy stage compared to that of the US.

And I don't get how SAC has inferior avionics. Don't both get their avionics from Nanjing?

 

[S10]

Better avionics than the F-22? Barely any information regarding the F-22's avionics are published. And that would be excessive optimism; China's AESA radars are at its infancy stage compared to that of the US.

And I don't get how SAC has inferior avionics. Don't both get their avionics from Nanjing?

F-22's avionics were developed in the 1990's, including its mission computer. In technological years, we have advanced a long way. Think about processors and MFD today compared to mid 1990's and you'll have an idea. It's not blind optimism, but stating the obvious. The first operational fighter AESA is already being tested on J-10B, and a more advanced one is already in the works. Huzhigeng stated the size of the radar, nothing about capability.

SAC and CAC both have their own sub-contractors for their components, spread out across the country. It has been explained pretty thoroughly already, so read better. Where the hell did you get the idea all avionics come from Nanjing?

 

[gambit]

F-22's avionics were developed in the 1990's, including its mission computer. In technological years, we have advanced a long way. Think about processors and MFD today compared to mid 1990's and you'll have an idea. It's not blind optimism, but stating the obvious. The first operational fighter AESA is already being tested on J-10B, and a more advanced one is already in the works. Huzhigeng stated the size of the radar, nothing about capability.

SAC and CAC both have their own sub-contractors for their components, spread out across the country. It has been explained pretty thoroughly already, so read better. Where the hell did you get the idea all avionics come from Nanjing?

That does not mean its avionics are inadequate for the job. News for you as someone who was in avionics, in and out of the aircraft and in and out of the military, ANY war machine that depends on electronics will be at least five years behind the civilian sector. This is deliberate. It is to let the technology mature over the long term. Let the civilians discover any flaws and correct them. In the 1980s the F-111 with its twenty years old avionics gave the Soviets headaches. When the F-16 debut its 10 yrs old analog computer did the flying. China want to give the J-20 and cousins the latest and supposedly 'greatest' from the civilian world? I say go for it.

 

[S10]

That does not mean its avionics are inadequate for the job. News for you as someone who was in avionics, in and out of the aircraft and in and out of the military, ANY war machine that depends on electronics will be at least five years behind the civilian sector. This is deliberate. It is to let the technology mature over the long term. Let the civilians discover any flaws and correct them. In the 1980s the F-111 with its twenty years old avionics gave the Soviets headaches. When the F-16 debut its 10 yrs old analog computer did the flying. China want to give the J-20 and cousins the latest and supposedly 'greatest' from the civilian world? I say go for it.

Did you not read the information I posted? The bidding process for J-20's avionics just finalized. Which means when the plane reaches IOC in 2018, the avionics technology should be quite mature by then. China is following the same norm. AFT competition started in 1991 and first production model F-22 was delivered in 2003, while J-20 was chosen in 2007 and first production model is meant for 2018? That is a huge time gap, and great strides had been made during those times in electronics and computer development.

 

[fakein]

Better avionics than the F-22? Barely any information regarding the F-22's avionics are published. And that would be excessive optimism; China's AESA radars are at its infancy stage compared to that of the US.

And I don't get how SAC has inferior avionics. Don't both get their avionics from Nanjing?

I would think the main reason for SAC's 5gen to equip inferior avionics is COST. War is more about whether you can sustain the cost or damage than how advanced your weapons are. Inferior as they are, these avionics might possibly be produced faster and more cost-efficiently. In other words, quantity counts more than quality in some specific cases, especially when it has evolved into war of attrition or protracted war.

In another perspective, wars are antagonism between two systems. So both advanced and less advanced weapons are just part of the system to serve different objectives and carry out suitable missions. Reliance on some weapons, or in the extreme case, on a single weapon is too opportunistic and risky for national defence.

 

[gambit]

Did you not read the information I posted? The bidding process for J-20's avionics just finalized. Which means when the plane reaches IOC in 2018, the avionics technology should be quite mature by then. China is following the same norm. AFT competition started in 1991 and first production model F-22 was delivered in 2003, while J-20 was chosen in 2007 and first production model is meant for 2018? That is a huge time gap, and great strides had been made during those times in electronics and computer development.

People in this type of debate seems to think that just because time passed it must mean the technology installed must be 'superior' as well. That is not necessarily the case. When the F-16 transitioned over to digital, that did not mean the basic flight control parameters expanded. No, the F-16's g-limit remain the same, the rudder still deflects the same rate and degree when the gun was fired, and so on. The digital components for the flight control systems made the FLCS computer more compact, durable, and easier to maintain off the flightline, whether at the base or sent back to the manufacturer. Same for the rest of the avionics package regarding radar, comm/nav, and ECM. Those who do not have relevant experience and/or technical details usually make the general comment about time elapsed between different aircraft and let the readers' imagination take over. So just because the J-20 is newer than the F-22, that does not mean the J-20's avionics package is superior in anyway.

Raytheon Company: F/A-22 Common Integrated Processor (CIP)

Developed as “the brain” of the Air Force's F/A-22 avionics system, the F/A-22 CIP packs the processing punch of two Cray supercomputers and represents a breakthrough in modern processing systems. The modular, fault-tolerant F/A-22 CIP configuration employs up to 66 PowerPC and i960-based signal and data processor modules, all interconnected for efficient sharing of computational tasks. Information is fused into a clear, concise picture of the combat situation.

The F-22's avionics is not so much about base technology advances such as new CPU or even programming but about the integration and innovation of diverse electronics products into a new avionics architecture. That is what the CIP design is for, which is about the dynamic allocation of processors and memory resources according to immediate needs. This has never been done before. Not that the i960 RISC CPU is something new. So if China is unable to develop the same innovation into whatever Chinese version of avionics architecture, any newer electronics will still make China's fighter inferior.

 

[S10]

People in this type of debate seems to think that just because time passed it must mean the technology installed must be 'superior' as well. That is not necessarily the case. When the F-16 transitioned over to digital, that did not mean the basic flight control parameters expanded. No, the F-16's g-limit remain the same, the rudder still deflects the same rate and degree when the gun was fired, and so on. The digital components for the flight control systems made the FLCS computer more compact, durable, and easier to maintain off the flightline, whether at the base or sent back to the manufacturer. Same for the rest of the avionics package regarding radar, comm/nav, and ECM. Those who do not have relevant experience and/or technical details usually make the general comment about time elapsed between different aircraft and let the readers' imagination take over. So just because the J-20 is newer than the F-22, that does not mean the J-20's avionics package is superior in anyway.

Raytheon Company: F/A-22 Common Integrated Processor (CIP)

The F-22's avionics is not so much about base technology advances such as new CPU or even programming but about the integration and innovation of diverse electronics products into a new avionics architecture. That is what the CIP design is for, which is about the dynamic allocation of processors and memory resources according to immediate needs. This has never been done before. Not that the i960 RISC CPU is something new. So if China is unable to develop the same innovation into whatever Chinese version of avionics architecture, any newer electronics will still make China's fighter inferior.

I hope you realize one of the 4S requirement in which J-20 was designed for is the process fusion and integration of information, both with its onboard and offboard sensors. However, I do not have much information on the subject, since these are highly classified and little has been revealed. The contracting company responsible for the new architecture is 中航光电 (Translation: Chinese Aviation Electro-Optical).

 

[fakein]

Better avionics than the F-22? Barely any information regarding the F-22's avionics are published. And that would be excessive optimism; China's AESA radars are at its infancy stage compared to that of the US.

And I don't get how SAC has inferior avionics. Don't both get their avionics from Nanjing?

Neither the claim of superior avionics nor that of inferior ones would be substantial according to available data. CAC and SAC might have their intelligence on western avionics so it's safe to count on them to excogitate optimum designs.

Yet some credence seems due to the insider's information.

 

[fakein]

I hope you realize one of the 4S requirement in which J-20 was designed for is the process fusion and integration of information, both with its onboard and offboard sensors. However, I do not have much information on the subject, since these are highly classified and little has been revealed. The contracting company responsible for the new architecture is 中航光电 (Translation: Chinese Aviation Electro-Optical).

I have to say such debate would be endless and futile. I would simply quit unless teasing is possible.

 

[Akasa]

F-22's avionics were developed in the 1990's, including its mission computer. In technological years, we have advanced a long way. Think about processors and MFD today compared to mid 1990's and you'll have an idea. It's not blind optimism, but stating the obvious. The first operational fighter AESA is already being tested on J-10B, and a more advanced one is already in the works. Huzhigeng stated the size of the radar, nothing about capability.

SAC and CAC both have their own sub-contractors for their components, spread out across the country. It has been explained pretty thoroughly already, so read better. Where the hell did you get the idea all avionics come from Nanjing?

PLAAF's avionics industry in this sector has barely started, while the US has been testing this kind of thing for decades now. The F-22 is 20 years older than the J-20, but it still has superior stealth, maneuverability, and possibly supercruise as well.

Nanjing provided the radar for the J-10B, and according to sources, the J-20 will use a more powerful variant of the radar on the J-10B.

 

[S10]

PLAAF's avionics industry in this sector has barely started, while the US has been testing this kind of thing for decades now. The F-22 is 20 years older than the J-20, but it still has superior stealth, maneuverability, and possibly supercruise as well.

Nanjing provided the radar for the J-10B, and according to sources, the J-20 will use a more powerful variant of the radar on the J-10B.

Barely started? China has been producing its own avionics since the mid 1960's after Sino-Soviet split. Every Chinese produced planes in PLAAF inventory were equipped with China's own avionics, except Su-27SK/UBK and Su-30MKK/MK2. Use your head before you post next time. J-20's design was aimed to provide better supercruise and manoevurability that F-22 at the cost of lower stealth requirement. This had been stated by several insiders, and yet here you are telling me how it is. I think you just gave me a chuckle.

You need to stop drinking the cool aid from whatever crap source you are viewing from. J-20's radar is a completely new system, not a variant of J-10B's radar. Its dimension alone, stated by huzhigeng, is the largest among all 4th gen aircrafts.