Uh ,Oh, Looks like China Has a New 5th gen. Fighter Jet!


#1

China has a New 5th Gen. Fighter!

Look out World!!! China is closer than previously thought to producing a 5th Gen. fighter jet capable of rivaling the F-22 Raptor and F-35 JSF. This revelation makes the U.S. Government’s decision to cancel further orders of F-22 Raptors in favor of inferior and allegedly cheaper F-35’s seem shortsighted.

Defense experts believe nothing in production or on the horizon is capable of surpassing the F-22, but the slower single engine, less stealthy F-35 is another matter. Many nations participating in the JSF program were counting on the F-35 as a way to provide superior air capability against any potential threats, but with Russia and China quickly developing their own 5th generation aircraft, the value of the F-35 is in question.

The F-35 has been plagued by cost overruns and delays as well. The current price tag of the F-35 is around $150 million dollars each, up from the original estimates of $55 million dollars per unit. The far superior F-22 is being produced at around $360 million per unit, mainly because production has been capped at 180 planes, and the cost of R&D is being spread out over far fewer planes. If production of F-22’s were to be resumed it is believed the planes could be produced for about $220 million per unit.

The F-35 was a much more enticing platform when it meant that a F-22 could be traded for three or four F-35’s, but now that F-35’s are being produced for around $150 million when F-22’s could be produced for less than double the amount, the F-35 isn’t the low cost alternative it once was. The desire for the F-35 is further lessened by the appearance of new aircraft like the Chinese J-20/J-xx and the Russian Su-50…

Link has pics: China has a New 5th Gen. Fighter! - conantheamerican[URL=“https://www.conantheamerican/news/chinahasanew5thgenfighter”]


#2

Your link doesn’t work.

There is no such thing as a Su-50, did you mean T-50, the 5th gen fighter currently in development? Or the Su-47 Berkut? I’m not sure that one is 5th gen though, it’s just a demonstrator of different technologies for future fighters at the moment. And then there’s also MiG’s ‘light multifunctional front aircraft’ project but it hasn’t gone as far as the T-50 yet.

Also, about the costs, it always seems that Western airplanes cost much much more than Russian ones of the same class. $150 million per F-35? The T-50 is going to cost less than $100 million when it goes into mass production, and it’s meant to be on level with the F-22.

Oh and about the Chinese one, whatever it is it’ll probably end up being an inferior copy of American/Russian technology as it usually happens. They’ve been buying fighter engines from us not long ago. A Russian news site says this about the plane: [quote=http://lenta.ru/news/2010/12/28/j20]According to Defense Update the nose of the Chinese plane (the pilot’s seat, nosecone, and air intake) are a repeat of the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor. At the same time the tail end of the plane (horizontal supports, keels, location of the engine nozzles) remind of the tail end of the Sukhoi T-50.[/quote]


#3

At least he is posting on regular forums unlike the last guy who came here and only posted his blog posts.

Looks like an interesting development… They mostly copy stuff and not so much development… America should have continued the development of the raptor, instead of capping the limit.


#4

I’m not betting that China is even close. I’m far from convinced that even Russia is close to a service model with supercruise capability.


#5

Why not? The T-50 does have supercruise and already multiple test models have been built and flights conducted. Whether it enters service as fast as Putin said (below) probably depends on the annual budget, which is tied to how oil prices will fluctuate in the next few years, but they managed to not lessen the military budget even during the crisis. So I don’t think we’re far off. Hopefully it won’t be like the Bulava SLBM which is only since 2010 passing testing consistently, it was already meant to be deployed.

Russia draws back veil of secrecy with peek at future fighter | Russia | RIA Novosti

[quote=Putin]
“The first Russian fifth-generation fighters will be put into service with the Air Force in 2013, and large-scale procurements will start in 2015,” Putin said.[/quote]

As for China, according to US intelligence: “We’re anticipating China to have a fifth-generation fighter … operational right around 2018,” Wayne Ulman of the National Air and Space Intelligence Center testified on Thursday" (New Chinese fighter jet expected by 2018: U.S. intelligence | Reuters)


#6

The equipping strategy that both the USAF and USN used starting in the 70s - a relatively expensive top-end bird plus a higher volume, relatively less expensive, slightly lower performance bird - has worked rather well for three decades. The Navy F-14 and USAF F-15 were the top-end birds that could out-fly any opponent. The Navy F-18 was less nimble, but could take on the attack role (F-18s configured as fighters could escort F-18s carrying bombs and/or air-ground missiles, and defenders learned which was which the hard way). The USAF F-16 was less nimble, but its single engine (the same engine used by the F-15, BTW) reduced cost and maintenance. Despite their lower performance, the F-18 and F-16 have done very well.

The strategy has worked well, and the F-22//F-35 pair were supposed to be a new generation of that strategy, but a Congress wanting to funnel $$ away from the military into social programs - the Ds’ MO since FDR - stopped the F-22 well short of the necessary critical mass. I think the F-14s have been or are being retired, but I suppose the Hornets, Eagles and Fighting Falcons can soldier on. They still work, but the threat environment - air-air and surface-air - into which they’d be flying is 30-35 years beyond what they were designed for, even with version upgrades. And as for Congress, they aren’t putting their asses on the line in 30-35 year-old airframe designs, and Congress has become a threat to our pilots!


#7

I have to disagree on a couple of points.

I don’t think the high-low mix worked as well for the Navy, and that’s part of why the F-14 was retired (a few years ago; theoretically, Iran might still have some of its F-14s, but they haven’t had access to proper spare parts since the fall of the Shah). The F-14 was an air-to-air specialist, and arguably the worst of the Big Four of the '80s and '90s (F-14, F-15, F-16, and F-18) in dogfight performance (it’s long range missile capability is another story, although largely unproven in combat from what I know). The Air Force at least developed the more versatile F-15E fighter-bomber version, but they only did mods for the F-14, and it passed out of the picture. In any case, it could be argued that they needed thorough-going dual-role capability for Navy planes, because they had to squeeze as much capability onto a carrier as they could.

The F-18 is arguably more agile than both the F-14 and F-15, and only took a back seat (and not a great one) to the F-16 in this regard. It isn’t far from the F-15 in thrust-to-weight ratio, and ahead of the other two. The F-14 was fourth out of four in both catagories. It got more powerful engines that would have made it more competitive with the T-W ratio of the early F-16s, but the F-16s were upgraded, too.

One other note about the F-16: Even though it was origianally conceived as a cheap dogfighter, it ended up scoring better in tactical bombing contests than existing dedicated ground attack planes, including the F-111, which was nobody’s slouch (although even with upgrades, I don’t think the F-16 could ever match the F-111’s night/adverse weather capability).


#8

Wanna know why the United States will lose every single Air Combat Fight? For Every 1 Fighter that out tech’s the enemy, the are 500 fighters to take that one on. In War numbers DO matter. Pathetic US Military Air Force. If North Korea only JUST has 4000 MIG 21’s. That Outnumbers the entire US air force. And thats just ONE plane that the Koreans have. The Basic Purpose of a plane is Combat and Delivering the Load In war. Everything else you can kiss good bye.


#9

4000? I doubt that very much, and the DPRK would not be able to maintain that number in fighting condition.

Also, that’s a second-generation fighter, we’re talking about fifth-gen here… it was a good plane for its time, but against F-22s the MiG-21 will be about as effective as biplanes from WWI…


#10

In WWII the Allies defeated the Germans in sheer numbers of tanks. German Tanks were superior than the allies and the only way they could actually defeat the enemy was to have constant waves of mass-produced tanks. With one on one with most tanks, the Germans had the armor advantage.


#11

But the other side wouldn’t have some shortage of planes compared to the DPRK in a war. There’s the ROK air force and whatever the US decides to project into the area, plus I’d bet the US could destroy a large part of the DPRKs air force before they take off. The differences in German and Allied tanks are not as severe as those between a second-gen and fourth or fifth-gen fighter, the Soviet Union had the best medium tank (T-34), and the heavy IS series was not bad.


#12

The Chinese and Russians won’t let the US interfere with the Koreans. The Russians don’t and Chinese Don’t want NATO and the West getting closer to the borders as they are already. The US is already fighting a global front war and is trying to gain control of the middle east. Jimmy Carter himself claimed that the Middle East is of US influence and that if any outside force interferes, military force will be used.


#13

If they are so inclined, the Chinese and the Russians can’t stop them. Unfortunately, our current president is such a wimp (or worse, an America-hater), and will let them have their own way in everything.


#14

[quote=“Volk, post:2, topic:28758”]
Your link doesn’t work.

There is no such thing as a Su-50, did you mean T-50, the 5th gen fighter currently in development? Or the Su-47 Berkut? I’m not sure that one is 5th gen though, it’s just a demonstrator of different technologies for future fighters at the moment. And then there’s also MiG’s ‘light multifunctional front aircraft’ project but it hasn’t gone as far as the T-50 yet.

Also, about the costs, it always seems that Western airplanes cost much much more than Russian ones of the same class. $150 million per F-35? The T-50 is going to cost less than $100 million when it goes into mass production, and it’s meant to be on level with the F-22.

Oh and about the Chinese one, whatever it is it’ll probably end up being an inferior copy of American/Russian technology as it usually happens. They’ve been buying fighter engines from us not long ago. A Russian news site says this about the plane:
[/quote] I fixed the link. I am not sure about the designation for the Russian jet, seeing as how they change when going from prototype to pre-production. I believe they are the same plane. By looking at the pic of the plane, it does look like the F-22 and the (T-50?) had a baby.

I really meant to question the value of buying more F-35’s when it looks like other countries are close to offering jets on par with it. As far as Chinese engineering goes, this appears to be a knockoff. I believe the current rumor is that Russia is supplying the engines for this plane, but If they are Chinese, then they will probably work great the first to times they start then crap out. :slight_smile:


#15

Regardless of President, the US is in no position, fighting other nations war is a history of the United States and is looked down upon the world. Another War with Korea will again taint the already awful reputation of the USA. The Korean war is a KOREAN conflict, not an AMERICAN one. Staying out of other worlds affairs is key. Ever since the end of WWII, The US has been in some sort of American Military Conflict. What does this say about American Imperialism today? It says alot, especially the increasing control of the middle east.


#16

It just really warms my heart that our beloved leader cares so much about our national security that one of his first acts in office was to order the cancellation of our high end fighters, because we don’t need them anymore…

What a maroon!


#17

The “reputation” of the US with other nations means little. What means something is that we keep our own integrity. Guess who all the nations who are constantly criticizing the US come running to when the big bully attacks them? It’s the US. They resent us because of our power, but they also trust us to get them out of the hole they’ve dug themselves into.


#18

I can agree with America staying out of other countries conflicts** unless **they are our allies and we have a treaty to come to their aid in times of war or conflict. If it comes down to NK starting up the Korean conflict again I believe that Russia nor China will support them even if the US comes to the aid of SK. NK is digging its own grave and I doubt that China or Russia wants to fight the US in an all out war becasue a midget nutcase has lost his mind.


#19

I agree. The F-22 was awesome and is well worth the cost. But of course he is willing to let us fall behinds becasue he believes that it cost to much. You can’t put a price tag on American Freedom/Safety.


#20

“You can make a throne of bayonets, but you can’t sit on it for long.”