Chinese stealth fighter to be operational by 2018 - Polidicks

[QUOTE]The U.S. believes that China's radar-evading fighter jet will be operational in six years, a Pentagon official said Friday. China is expected to have sufficient numbers of its J-20 fighter and enough pilots trained to conduct missions with the stealthy jet by 2018 but not any earlier, according to David Helvey, acting deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia and Asia Pacific affairs. Chinese officials have said they expect the J-20 to be operational between 2017 and 2019. Helvey spoke about the Defense Department's annual report to Congress regarding China's military developments. Analysts believe that the J-20 will have the radar-evading capability of fifth-generation fighters produced by the United States, like the F-22 and F-35. The report cited the J-20 as an example of China's emphasis on military modernization programs. In March, China announced an estimated 11% jump in its military budget, to roughly $106 billion. The actual figure, which is probably much larger, is difficult to estimate due to the non-transparent nature of China's budget. For example, Helvey said, the published military budget does not include several major categories of expenditures such as foreign weapons purchases, nuclear force modernization and research and development. The Defense Department estimates that in 2011, China's total military-related spending ranged between $120 billion and $180 billion. While the report says China's main focus is deterring conflict with Taiwan, the U.S. again made bold statements on the cyberthreat posed by China, accusing the nation of cyberattacks and economic espionage. "Chinese attempts to collect U.S. technological and economic information will continue at a high level and will represent a growing and persistent threat to U.S. economic security," the report said. Various sections of the report also mentioned the larger role China is playing around the globe with non-traditional security missions like humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations, non-combatant evacuation operations, military medical assistance missions and U.N. peacekeeping missions. "For the first time in its history, the (People's Liberation Army) is going places and doing things and is at the incipient stages of taking on an expeditionary mindset," said David Finkelstein, who directs the China studies program at CNA, a nonprofit research institute in Alexandria, Virginia. Finkelstein pointed to the navy's ongoing anti-piracy operation in the Gulf of Aden as a prime example. "While some might call into question how operationally significant the mission is, no one should question the significance of the political decision made back in 2008 to take on the mission," he said. "Given China's growing set of national security interests and its expanding international footprint, this trend should come as no surprise, and the report points this out." The themes surrounding a growing Chinese military were similar to those mentioned in previous reports. The most striking difference this year was the length of the report, coming in at half the size of previous versions. The Pentagon says it consolidated the document to keep with agency-wide guidance on how to handle congressional reports, but one analyst sees the move as policy-motivated. "The Chinese have complained bitterly about this report from its inception," Chinese military expert Richard Fisher said. "It is the most useful and comprehensive statement by any government on this planet about the capabilities and intentions of China's military. That is why the Chinese government screams so loud every time it's published. But they are going to be really happy that the U.S. government cut its length in half." Fisher says the Obama administration is using the report as a way of appeasing the Chinese. "Early in 2009, the Obama administration made a very direct and consistent effort to make nice with China and to make nice with the PLA," Fisher said. "And very early on, it seized on the opportunity to use this report as a way of signaling to the PLA that we want to make nice." Finkelstein disagreed. "The format, tone and minimal use of jargon in this year's report makes it, in my view, very effective in conveying to the Congress and the general public a basic understanding of what the PLA is trying to accomplish," he said. [img]http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/19/t1larg.j20.afp.gi.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/18/report-chinese-stealth-fighter-to-be-operational-by-2018/?hpt=hp_t3[/url]

And then the plastic wing breaks off mid-flight.

Oh no, 2018, whatever shall we do until then?

It's fine, the oxygen masks they were will have lead or some shit in em and the pilots will just pass out mid flight.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36012576]It's fine, the oxygen masks they were will have lead or some shit in em and [B]the pilots will just pass out mid flight[/B].[/QUOTE] Like the American ones?

enemy stealth bomber inbound xD

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;36012582]Like the American ones?[/QUOTE] To be fair passing out during combat maneuvers is pretty easy.

Any other photos of it?

[QUOTE=FuDy;36012697]Any other photos of it?[/QUOTE] Here's the other ten they built, parked in a row [img]http://www.urbanrealm.com/images/news/news_2385.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Reds;36012516]Oh no, 2018, whatever shall we do until then?[/QUOTE] spend eight trillion dollars building a thousand better ones.

We should develop a missile that locks onto the sound of a jet engine, obviously you'd have to be pretty close and launch it in the general direction of where the enemy jets were, but there's no real defence against a weird as shit missile like that. Could just make it TV guided until it can get a lock on the source. Problem China? Too noisy China?

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36012789]We should develop a missile that locks onto the sound of a jet engine, obviously you'd have to be pretty close and launch it in the general direction of where the enemy jets were, but there's no real defence against a weird as shit missile like that. Could just make it TV guided until it can get a lock on the source. Problem China? Too noisy China?[/QUOTE] Wouldn't the missile just lock on to itself? They sort of make lots of noise.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36012789]We should develop a missile that locks onto the sound of a jet engine, obviously you'd have to be pretty close and launch it in the general direction of where the enemy jets were, but there's no real defence against a weird as shit missile like that. Could just make it TV guided until it can get a lock on the source. Problem China? Too noisy China?[/QUOTE] do you realize that if the jet traveled at speed of sound or higher the missile could never catch up, then?

[QUOTE=Lankist;36012796]Wouldn't the missile just lock on to itself? They sort of make lots of noise.[/QUOTE] Nah they both operate through different engines, so you find standardised frequencies and wavelengths of sound, and then see how they would shift through the doppler effect for the missiles flight velocity, so that should create a further noticable difference in sound. Just have it home in on the target wavelengths and frequencies once it's a certain distance away from the launching aircraft (although thanks to the doppler effect the sound of the launching aircraft should be very different from the target sound) I dunno maybe it's just an unworkable idea, you'd need to be able to hear the jet from a fair distance away to allow for the missile to actually lock the target and then adjust to hit the target and you may only have about a kilometre or so to do that, maybe two and then theres the fact that it has to somehow hear the jet over the wind rushing past the missile itself. It would essentially be sonar guided, but not in a dense medium like water so who knows if it would work. [editline]19th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;36012828]do you realize that if the jet traveled at speed of sound or higher the missile could never catch up, then?[/QUOTE] I can't imagine most aerial combat happens at over the speed of sound, but honestly I'm not an expert, was just an idea that came to me and I was just throwing it to see if there were any functional issues with it.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36012842] I can't imagine most aerial combat happens at over the speed of sound, but honestly I'm not an expert, was just an idea that came to me and I was just throwing it to see if there were any functional issues with it.[/QUOTE] There would be simply no combat. They would go "oh, silly sound guided missiles" and wouldn't pop out of supersonic speed at all, either popping their different kind of missiles or continuing to their target.

At that range they would just do what they do now and use heat seaking missiles and cannons.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36012842] I can't imagine most aerial combat happens at over the speed of sound, but honestly I'm not an expert, was just an idea that came to me and I was just throwing it to see if there were any functional issues with it.[/QUOTE] As far as I know, most missiles have a range of 60+ kilometres, so it's very possible to fly above the speed of sound, considering you aren't exactly dogfighting. I mean, unless I'm mistaken it doesn't happen now because there is no reason for it, but I'd imagine that if going above the speed of sound rendered the missiles useless, they'd start doing that.

Fair enough, derped out cause I've only had a few hours sleep and I got up at 5 AM :v:

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36012939]At that range they would just do what they do now and use heat seaking missiles and cannons.[/QUOTE] Then why bother with developing and arming something that's nothing but inferior? Sound is bad for aiming at anything but boats and submarines.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;36012995]Then why bother with developing and arming something that's nothing but inferior? Sound is bad for aiming at anything but boats and submarines.[/QUOTE] Because most stealth aircraft now diffuse the heat from the engines to throw off these missiles, that's why I was thinking about sonar.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36013041]Because most stealth aircraft now diffuse the heat from the engines to throw off these missiles, that's why I was thinking about sonar.[/QUOTE] Yeah just go think of something else. Sonar is just unusable.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36012789]We should develop a missile that locks onto the sound of a jet engine, obviously you'd have to be pretty close and launch it in the general direction of where the enemy jets were, but there's no real defence against a weird as shit missile like that. Could just make it TV guided until it can get a lock on the source. Problem China? Too noisy China?[/QUOTE] They will just drop firecrackers.

[QUOTE=zzaacckk;36013075]They will just drop firecrackers.[/QUOTE] How would that stop a missile that locks on to specific frequencies of sound produced by engines? Really, how would that work? [editline]19th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;36013073]Yeah just go think of something else. Sonar is just unusable.[/QUOTE] Yeah it just seems unfeasible now that I actually remember that the plane is moving ahead of the shock wave.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36013096]How would that stop a missile that locks on to specific frequencies of sound produced by engines? Really, how would that work? [/QUOTE] They would be tuned to the frequency of the jet engines, but they would be louder.

Or you know, you could stick with the realm of possibility and just break the sound barrier, which would probably wreck the microphones of the missile and just outrun the missile. It's frankly an unfeasible idea so there's no point in discussing it any further.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36013152]Or you know, you could stick with the realm of possibility and just break the sound barrier, which would probably wreck the microphones of the missile and just outrun the missile. It's frankly an unfeasible idea so there's no point in discussing it any further.[/QUOTE] I was just addressing [I]your[/I] question.

[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_wdCw5_0eEu4/TSfGTW7PCtI/AAAAAAAAAe8/h2IJdJoPrvY/s1600/J-20%2BJ-XX%2BChinese%2BStealth%2BFighter.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Apache249;36013165]I was just addressing [I]your[/I] question.[/QUOTE] Fair enough but I can't imagine you'd be able to get firecrackers which sound like a rapid expansion of gas to sound anything at all like sustained engines.

[QUOTE=Aide;36013166][img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_wdCw5_0eEu4/TSfGTW7PCtI/AAAAAAAAAe8/h2IJdJoPrvY/s1600/J-20%2BJ-XX%2BChinese%2BStealth%2BFighter.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Wow, looks like something out of Acecomat 3.

[QUOTE=PyroCF;36013352]Wow, looks like something out of Acecomat 3.[/QUOTE] Ace Combat 3 had some pretty rad plane designs. Here's my favourite.[IMG]http://static.hlj.com/images/hsg/hsggc8.gif[/IMG]