Photos and analysis of China's J-20 fighter as it nears first flight

[LowObservable]

QuadroFX is talking on Key Mil Forum as though he now thinks it is real.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Ahem:

Just sayin'.

 

[Trident]

It's fake because it's a lashup. The point of a 3D model is for checking perspective in one's image lashup. I'd have thought that would be obvious.

Ok, that would bring us back to the problem of obtaining enough matching source images to create multiple fakes from different angles though. Honestly, by now about the only alternate possibility I can personally see other than it being real is that it's a mock up.

Here's the most recent one that provides a clear view of the rumoured ventral strakes, BTW:

EDIT: That IS a nice image you posted, but even there the noise pattern on the X-35 looks different to the rest of the image and gives it away.

EDIT #2: Yeah, I suppose a film prop would qualify as a mock up in a way. Great minds think alike, idiots seldom differ

 

[sferrin]

I'm on the fence now. I've seen pics in other places. . . It would be interesting if real. I wonder if that would change Russia's attitude with selling China advanced weaponry and I wonder what this aircraft would be using in the engine department.

 

[Dreamfighter]

I almost hope it is real if only to keep the F-22 line open or incentivize it's replacement.

As I'm loosing more and more my scepticism with each new picture showing up of the J-20, I fear it is no hoax but reality...

Luckily F-22 is - at this moment - still in production, and hopefully one will have the idea and decisive power to reverse the decision of shutting down the line... Unless a successor is planned or will be very soon, or there really is a surprise like a YF-24 or something flying at Groom...
I wonder how much Gates/DoD/CIA knew abouth this J-20 when deciding to end F-22 production? I can't imagine they didn't have intel about it...

Though off course we know nothing yet about possible J-20 performance and it may encouter development/performance-issues, IMHO it is already clear that this aircraft (unless someone is really pulling our legs with these pics) probably has an offensive purpose, and weither it is a striker or a fighter/missileer, will become a serious threat (militarily, strategically and politically) to the US and Allies in the next decades...

 

[Otaku]

In the image below, the height of the groundcrew is inconsistent. The guys behind the jet are much taller than those in front. Heat haze distortion, or something more sinister?

As most digital SLRs are 'Made in China' one has to question why nothing clearer has emerged. Remember the clarity of the long-range shots of PAK-FA pre-flight (at a longer range than the 'J-20').

Imho, the pic below is a definite fake.

 

[Sundog]

OMG, It's the end of America! Build more F-22s!

ROFL, you guys crack me up. Buy more diapers is more like it. Hell, maybe instead of building more Raptors, the USAF could upgrade them so they have systems on all of them that actually make them useful? This new plane from China could be operational by 2020 and maybe have systems equal to what we have in Superhornets now? OMG!

This isn't a threat to the U.S. and never has been and never will be. Hell, I read somewhere that even China has said they can't afford a lot of fighters and is trying to figure out what to do, because even the JF-17 is too expensive for what they would need, numbers wise.

Although, until any clear photos are released, or we see flight video's, I remain somewhat skeptical that these are images of the actual aircraft. It's kind of cool looking if it is and in terms of size it reminds me of the MiG-1.42/1.44. At this point, color me interested from an aviation standpoint, but not close to wetting myself from a War POV.

 

[sferrin]

OMG, It's the end of America! Build more F-22s!

ROFL, you guys crack me up. Buy more diapers is more like it. Hell, maybe instead of building more Raptors, the USAF could upgrade them so they have systems on all of them that actually make them useful? This new plane from China could be operational by 2020 and maybe have systems equal to what we have in Superhornets now? OMG!

This isn't a threat to the U.S. and never has been and never will be. Hell, I read somewhere that even China has said they can't afford a lot of fighters and is trying to figure out what to do, because even the JF-17 is too expensive for what they would need, numbers wise.

Although, until any clear photos are released, or we see flight video's, I remain somewhat skeptical that these are images of the actual aircraft. It's kind of cool looking if it is and in terms of size it reminds me of the MiG-1.42/1.44. At this point, color me interested from an aviation standpoint, but not close to wetting myself from a War POV.

All anybody is saying is that if it's real it can't just be ignored. No need to be a dick about it.

 

[Sundog]

OMG, It's the end of America! Build more F-22s!

ROFL, you guys crack me up. Buy more diapers is more like it. Hell, maybe instead of building more Raptors, the USAF could upgrade them so they have systems on all of them that actually make them useful? This new plane from China could be operational by 2020 and maybe have systems equal to what we have in Superhornets now? OMG!

This isn't a threat to the U.S. and never has been and never will be. Hell, I read somewhere that even China has said they can't afford a lot of fighters and is trying to figure out what to do, because even the JF-17 is too expensive for what they would need, numbers wise.

Although, until any clear photos are released, or we see flight video's, I remain somewhat skeptical that these are images of the actual aircraft. It's kind of cool looking if it is and in terms of size it reminds me of the MiG-1.42/1.44. At this point, color me interested from an aviation standpoint, but not close to wetting myself from a War POV.

All anybody is saying is that if it's real it can't just be ignored. No need to be a dick about it.

it's not that, it's just I've heard all this B.S. so many times before it really gets tiring. The USAF, no doubt, has plenty of info about this aircraft and the PAK-FA and I'm sure they're quite familiar with what it's performance will be. There isn't another country around that can match our engine technology, except maybe in Europe, and none that match our electronic capabilites, except in some instances, Israel. I would say the greatest threat we probably face is from cheap EM pulse weapons.

 

[LowObservable]

I wouldn't be quite so dismissive. A decade ago, China was just flying the J-10. Before that, the only fighters of indigenous design were the J-8, which looked like a late-1950s MiG, and the JH-7 Jaguar-on-steroids. That's pretty rapid progress.

 

[erkokite]

On the Black Horizon forum somebody has supplied the NATO reporting name for the J-20: Firefang. On the www.defence.pk forum somebody claims that the fin star insignia I've questioned are genuine, there's even artwork showing a close-up of the fin with white 01 number: time will tell if it's true.
A number of forum members there claim that the actual designation is J-13 and J-14, the former related to a 4.5 gen strike fighter, the latter to a 5 gen interceptor.
Chinese Military Aviation have these shots of the nose and cockpit mockup of the J-20, or whatever you call it:

I thought NATO designations were only two syllables. Fishbed, Flatpack, Fitter, etc...

 

[LowObservable]

It's possible that we're getting confused by the use of J-XX (J+two unknown digits) being read as J-roman 20...

 

[Firefly 2]

On the Black Horizon forum somebody has supplied the NATO reporting name for the J-20: Firefang. On the www.defence.pk forum somebody claims that the fin star insignia I've questioned are genuine, there's even artwork showing a close-up of the fin with white 01 number: time will tell if it's true.
A number of forum members there claim that the actual designation is J-13 and J-14, the former related to a 4.5 gen strike fighter, the latter to a 5 gen interceptor.
Chinese Military Aviation have these shots of the nose and cockpit mockup of the J-20, or whatever you call it:

I thought NATO designations were only two syllables. Fishbed, Flatpack, Fitter, etc...

Propeller-driven fixed-wing aircraft (bombers, cargo aircraft, and fighters) were given one syllable names, while jet-powered fixed-wing aircraft receive two syllable names. So I say the codename Firefang doesn't make any sense unless there is a new rule regarding 5th gen fighters.

But, I was pondering the possible reality of a Chinese indigenous 5th generation fighter. Production of the J10 is estimated at a 100 aircraft or less, according to some sources (such as globalsecurity). The reason for this would be the acquisition of more capable Su-30 fighters.
I guess that if the reality of this aircraft is confirmed ( which I doubt) it would be another reason for the limited J10 run: something superior was on the way and needed resources.
It's a longshot, and based on nothing solid, I admit as much. I wouldn't post it if I didn't feel like it made some sense.

 

[sublight]

Why do the fanboys keep trumping up this as a threat to us? It might be a threat if China ramps up production and sells it to every Tom, Dick, and Middle East Harry. But its certainly not a threat from China. They own how many trillion dollars of our national debt? So you have to figure any conflict with us has to be a money maker to the tune of 8-10 TRILLION$ to really make it worth it.

Really, would you go and attack somebody that owes you trillions of dollars- and is paying up like a good boy?

 

[Dreamfighter]

OMG, It's the end of America! Build more F-22s!

ROFL, you guys crack me up. Buy more diapers is more like it. Hell, maybe instead of building more Raptors, the USAF could upgrade them so they have systems on all of them that actually make them useful? This new plane from China could be operational by 2020 and maybe have systems equal to what we have in Superhornets now? OMG!

This isn't a threat to the U.S. and never has been and never will be. Hell, I read somewhere that even China has said they can't afford a lot of fighters and is trying to figure out what to do, because even the JF-17 is too expensive for what they would need, numbers wise.

Although, until any clear photos are released, or we see flight video's, I remain somewhat skeptical that these are images of the actual aircraft. It's kind of cool looking if it is and in terms of size it reminds me of the MiG-1.42/1.44. At this point, color me interested from an aviation standpoint, but not close to wetting myself from a War POV.

All anybody is saying is that if it's real it can't just be ignored. No need to be a dick about it.

it's not that, it's just I've heard all this B.S. so many times before it really gets tiring. The USAF, no doubt, has plenty of info about this aircraft and the PAK-FA and I'm sure they're quite familiar with what it's performance will be. There isn't another country around that can match our engine technology, except maybe in Europe, and none that match our electronic capabilites, except in some instances, Israel. I would say the greatest threat we probably face is from cheap EM pulse weapons.

Laugh all you want, I'll take the diapers. ;D Perhaps some pilots would better get some too. Just in case some Western military/political decision-makers regard their military assets as the eternal unbeatable and underestimate potential opponents' (c)a(pa)bilities or advancement.

"Cancellation of F-22? Russian and Chinese double-engined heavy stealth fighters showing up? Don't worry 'bout that, these are much inferior to ours. And like us, they won't be able to afford their aircraft. So let's downsize and cancel some more of our projects. China's giant economy is about to collapse anyway. And after all, soon we'll have plenty of our one and only true 5th-G fighter, the omnipotent F-35." :
Weren't during the 80's the teen-fighters also considered far superior and invincible? Till the MiG-29 & Su-27 with HMS/R-73 showed up, IIRC.

To me, dismissive thinking about (military) development and expansion in Asia is comparable in a way to what people thought about German and Japanese (military) development/expansion some 70 years ago. Any possible offensive intentions were laughed away then too. China has no regime comparable to the Nazis and probably has no hostile intentions, but offensive thoughts could allways pop-up during the next decade(s), and as history proves one is better prepared for such eventualities. Better over-estimate the other one then underestimate him, IMHO.

 

[Dreamfighter]

Why do the fanboys keep trumping up this as a threat to us? It might be a threat if China ramps up production and sells it to every Tom, Dick, and Middle East Harry.

I'm not a fanboy of anything or anyone, and actually this is the sole aviation-forum I regularly check.
But I do keep an eye on what is going on in the world.

Let's assume China won't sell this or whatever 5th-G/stealth aircraft that may show up to Tom, Dick and Harry and/or they won't produce large numbers of it for it's own military. Then why go through all the trouble and expenses of designing and developping it? Just to show off?

But its certainly not a threat from China. They own how many trillion dollars of our national debt? So you have to figure any conflict with us has to be a money maker to the tune of 8-10 TRILLION$ to really make it worth it.

The world has seen conflicts/war for other reasons. Some very silly ones even.

Really, would you go and attack somebody that owes you trillions of dollars- and is paying up like a good boy?

One may want to have a stick to keep him behaving like a good boy, or to kick his ass if he wasted his pocket-money and can't pay off anymore.

 

[sublight]

It is true that conflict is not an impossibility but our two nations are deeply in bed together. They cant stop manufacturing consumer electronics no more than we can stop using them for production. Apple would go out of business if their Chinese plants shut down. If somebody invents the technology that would allow us to stop using them for manufacturing, well, then we might have a problem on our hands. Until then its all armchair ideology....

 

[TAKHISS]

Propeller-driven fixed-wing aircraft (bombers, cargo aircraft, and fighters) were given one syllable names, while jet-powered fixed-wing aircraft receive two syllable names. So I say the codename Firefang doesn't make any sense unless there is a new rule regarding 5th gen fighters.

But, I was pondering the possible reality of a Chinese indigenous 5th generation fighter. Production of the J10 is estimated at a 100 aircraft or less, according to some sources (such as globalsecurity). The reason for this would be the acquisition of more capable Su-30 fighters.
I guess that if the reality of this aircraft is confirmed ( which I doubt) it would be another reason for the limited J10 run: something superior was on the way and needed resources.
It's a longshot, and based on nothing solid, I admit as much. I wouldn't post it if I didn't feel like it made some sense.

now more than 200

 

[Matej]

Really, would you go and attack somebody that owes you trillions of dollars- and is paying up like a good boy?

No extensive imagination needed. USA will bankrupt, all the US dollars became only a pieces of paper and they will be forced to create the Amero: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amero But we should leave this wild speculations and concentrate much on the aviation rather than politics.

China needs the 5th generation fighter, capable to attack/defend the future threats. That's for sure, no matter about the scenario. If it is this thing on the runway, we will see.

 

[kaiserbill]

I wouldn't be quite so dismissive. A decade ago, China was just flying the J-10. Before that, the only fighters of indigenous design were the J-8, which looked like a late-1950s MiG, and the JH-7 Jaguar-on-steroids. That's pretty rapid progress.

Quoted for truth.

I will await other images, but I'm now not so sceptical, and so far this has followed the modus operandi of China in the recent past when revealing her new birds.......

 

[frank]

Why is Firefang so confusing & supposedly not making sense? Firefang is a 2 syllable word, so what's the issue, or am I missing something about this J-20 not meeting the criteria of a jet powered fighter?

On the Black Horizon forum somebody has supplied the NATO reporting name for the J-20: Firefang. On the www.defence.pk forum somebody claims that the fin star insignia I've questioned are genuine, there's even artwork showing a close-up of the fin with white 01 number: time will tell if it's true.
A number of forum members there claim that the actual designation is J-13 and J-14, the former related to a 4.5 gen strike fighter, the latter to a 5 gen interceptor.
Chinese Military Aviation have these shots of the nose and cockpit mockup of the J-20, or whatever you call it:

I thought NATO designations were only two syllables. Fishbed, Flatpack, Fitter, etc...

Propeller-driven fixed-wing aircraft (bombers, cargo aircraft, and fighters) were given one syllable names, while jet-powered fixed-wing aircraft receive two syllable names. So I say the codename Firefang doesn't make any sense unless there is a new rule regarding 5th gen fighters.

But, I was pondering the possible reality of a Chinese indigenous 5th generation fighter. Production of the J10 is estimated at a 100 aircraft or less, according to some sources (such as globalsecurity). The reason for this would be the acquisition of more capable Su-30 fighters.
I guess that if the reality of this aircraft is confirmed ( which I doubt) it would be another reason for the limited J10 run: something superior was on the way and needed resources.
It's a longshot, and based on nothing solid, I admit as much. I wouldn't post it if I didn't feel like it made some sense.

 

[Dreamfighter]

It is true that conflict is not an impossibility but our two nations are deeply in bed together. They cant stop manufacturing consumer electronics no more than we can stop using them for production. Apple would go out of business if their Chinese plants shut down. If somebody invents the technology that would allow us to stop using them for manufacturing, well, then we might have a problem on our hands.

I agree with what you say here. The world has become a much smaller place and everything and everyone's business is linked much more closely, which seriously contributes to continuing peace / is an important factor to avoid conflict.

On the other hand, factors that can/may invoke conflict are growing too.
The worlds population is rising so much and economies in China and India (and to a lesser extent Brasil f.e.) are reaching such levels, that the world's limited resources (energy, raw materials, food, etc...) are becoming more and more wanted/valuable. That with growing self-awereness, nationalistic feelings in a population, and many other factors may become a fuse for conflict.
But indeed, just armchair thinking in a way... :-X

Back to topic?

 

[Foxglove]

On the Black Horizon forum somebody has supplied the NATO reporting name for the J-20: Firefang. On the www.defence.pk forum somebody claims that the fin star insignia I've questioned are genuine, there's even artwork showing a close-up of the fin with white 01 number: time will tell if it's true.
A number of forum members there claim that the actual designation is J-13 and J-14, the former related to a 4.5 gen strike fighter, the latter to a 5 gen interceptor.
Chinese Military Aviation have these shots of the nose and cockpit mockup of the J-20, or whatever you call it:

I thought NATO designations were only two syllables. Fishbed, Flatpack, Fitter, etc...

Propeller-driven fixed-wing aircraft (bombers, cargo aircraft, and fighters) were given one syllable names, while jet-powered fixed-wing aircraft receive two syllable names. So I say the codename Firefang doesn't make any sense unless there is a new rule regarding 5th gen fighters.

But, I was pondering the possible reality of a Chinese indigenous 5th generation fighter. Production of the J10 is estimated at a 100 aircraft or less, according to some sources (such as globalsecurity). The reason for this would be the acquisition of more capable Su-30 fighters.
I guess that if the reality of this aircraft is confirmed ( which I doubt) it would be another reason for the limited J10 run: something superior was on the way and needed resources.
It's a longshot, and based on nothing solid, I admit as much. I wouldn't post it if I didn't feel like it made some sense.

Well, Firefly, I do feel it makes sense, that's why I started this thread. You see, NATO officers, or precisely USAF analysts aren't exactly linguists, and if you check out the list of NATO reporting names, you will discover that there has been a precedent exception to the two-syllable name rule: the Yak-28P was called none other than Firebar( source: NATO reporting names for Chinese and Soviet aircraft- Vic Flintham).
You sure have the right to doubt the reality of the J-20, I myself can't make up my mind over the authenticity of the photographs presented thus far, but I'm absolutely certain that the Chinese are busy developing a 5th generation fighter, and sooner or later they'll roll it out with fanfares.

 

[Orionblamblam]

you will discover that there has been a precedent exception to the two-syllable name rule: the Yak-28P was called none other than Firebar

Errrr... "Firebar" *is* a two-syllable name.

 

[frank]

"Firefang" is too, isn't it? As was the fictional "Firefox"

you will discover that there has been a precedent exception to the two-syllable name rule: the Yak-28P was called none other than Firebar

Errrr... "Firebar" *is* a two-syllable name.

 

[Foxglove]

Why I think I can bet that Chinese aircraft industry can't currently build frameless canopy transparency of *that* size?

Greg, please note that the J-10(let alone the two-seat version) canopy, even though it's got a separate windshield, is not significantly smaller than the one we can see on the purported J-20, and they started manufacturing J-10s a good few years ago. Logically then, over those years they might have developed a one-piece, F-16/F-22-style, large canopy.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

EDIT: Then again, should we really be surprised that a first prototype (a very significant one no less) would wear non-standard markings? I suppose your first 5th generation fighter would qualify as justification for applying special insignia. Having looked around at a.net, there is something of a precedent with the PLAAF:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/China---Air/Chengdu-J-7GB/1711718/L/

What say you?

That is the "August 1" PLAAF national aerobatics team. I doubt the PLAAF would roll out a prototype in the markings of the aerobatics team.

 

[Foxglove]

you will discover that there has been a precedent exception to the two-syllable name rule: the Yak-28P was called none other than Firebar

Errrr... "Firebar" *is* a two-syllable name.

Depends how you pronounce 'fire', most dictionaries, especially British English-oriented, suggest two syllables, but I'll give you that the online syllable dictionary says one. One way or another, the Firefang reporting name is plausible.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I wouldn't be quite so dismissive. A decade ago, China was just flying the J-10. Before that, the only fighters of indigenous design were the J-8, which looked like a late-1950s MiG, and the JH-7 Jaguar-on-steroids. That's pretty rapid progress.

Well there was that little thing called the Cultural Revolution… Also the Chinese aviation industry worked on quite a few designs that never saw any service – SecretProjects.co.uk material no less.

However there seems to be a massive miscalculation from many observers about the significance of this aircraft (if real) and the PAK FA compared to the F-22 and F-35. This plane (or mock-up) like the PAK FA is just a vehicle system. We have no significant indication of any sort of advance in integrated mission systems en par with what the F-22 and F-35 programs have or are delivering. These aircraft are comparative to the YF-22, YF-23, Bird of Prey, X-32 and X-35. The US aerospace industry could be turning out 2-3 prototype flying demonstrators per annum if they were funded for it (and it wouldn’t cost too much money) but they would be as close to being a 5th generation fighter as the YF-22 was to the F-22A and so on. Designing the aircraft is the easy part compared to the mission system.

As to “Firefang”, clearly a made up name.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Errrr... "Firebar" *is* a two-syllable name.

Depends how you pronounce 'fire', most dictionaries, especially British English-oriented, suggest two syllables,

What, the same dictionaries that spell "armor" with a "u?" Pffff.

 

[Foxglove]

A nice closeup view of the J-20 cockpit mockup/simulator( source: www.defencetalk.com):

 

[Foxglove]

Looks like some fanboys were quite well-informed, given that the pic below is a few years old and taking the previous pics for authentic:

 

[saintkatanalegacy]

for some reason, I'm skeptical with the inconsistency of lighting...

too much specular light and I don't see any reason for them to paint an airframe for taxi trials

 

[quellish]

However there seems to be a massive miscalculation from many observers about the significance of this aircraft (if real) and the PAK FA compared to the F-22 and F-35. This plane (or mock-up) like the PAK FA is just a vehicle system. We have no significant indication of any sort of advance in integrated mission systems en par with what the F-22 and F-35 programs have or are delivering. These aircraft are comparative to the YF-22, YF-23, Bird of Prey, X-32 and X-35. The US aerospace industry could be turning out 2-3 prototype flying demonstrators per annum if they were funded for it (and it wouldn’t cost too much money) but they would be as close to being a 5th generation fighter as the YF-22 was to the F-22A and so on. Designing the aircraft is the easy part compared to the mission system.

The coffee I drank 6 hours ago just came out of my nose.

But these photos are interesting, and as always the journey to the truth is more fun than the reward. For me the real questions would revolve around the powerplant.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The coffee I drank 6 hours ago just came out of my nose.

I am not trying to diminish the complexity of aerospace engineering but rather I am trying to express the difference between proving that an aircraft design can fly and developing a full mission capable 5th generation combat aircraft. For example compare the difference between the X-35A and F-35A which with the right coat of paint, a bad camera and a “foggy” airfield look identical to an observer. The JSF Concept Demonstration Phase (CDP) took four years and a billion dollars to build and fly the X-35A with a lot of that cost and time spent on proving the STOVL system. The JSF System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase has taken nine years and over 25 billion dollars to fly the first mission representative F-35As. The difference is staggering.

 

[RSF]

The F-35 is not exactly the benchmark that I would be holding up as an example of good fighter program! ;D

A nation that can build the first the worlds fastest supercomputer, has matched the US in number of space launches in 2010, and now has the first operational ASBM carrier killing missile system is quite capable of building 5th gen fighters if given enough time and money (which they have).

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The F-35 is not exactly the benchmark that I would be holding up as an example of good fighter program! ;D

Please don’t waste our time with foolish muck raking. The time and cost figures I quoted were WITHOUT taking into account the comparatively minor (as a proportion of overall measure) schedule delays and cost over-runs of the project so your argument doesn’t apply.

However it’s quite clear you are one of those ‘Up with F-22, Down with F-35’ cheerleaders. So to transform this argument into one in which you have less emotional reason for trying to breakdown lets look at a similar analysis of the F-22.

For the ATF Demonstration-Validation phase Lockheed and Boeing need 700 million dollars and four years to build and fly the first YF-22A. The contract for actual F-22As (EMD Phase) was 10 billion dollars, later increased to almost 19 billion dollars, and needed 10 years to fly the first mission capable F-22A. So roughly comparable cost and schedule defences between demonstrator and mission capable aircraft for BOTH the YF-22A/F-22A and X-35/F-35.

The difference between developing and building the prototype 5th generation fighter demonstrator and the real thing based on the experience of the F-22 and F-35 is about 2.5 to 1 for schedule and 25 to 1 for cost. Congratulations to Russia (PAK FA) and perhaps sometime soon for China for building their 5th generation demonstrator they now have to do at least 25 times as much work to fly the real thing.

A nation that can build the first the worlds fastest supercomputer, has matched the US in number of space launches in 2010, and now has the first operational ASBM carrier killing missile system is quite capable of building 5th gen fighters if given enough time and money (which they have).

What about how many gold medals they won at the Olympics? Because that is about as useless a benchmark as those you have given. There is only one benchmark for building 5th generation fighters: building 5th generation fighters. How many high quality civil airliners, software-defined radios and advanced lightweight composite surfboards you may produce is not an adequate benchmark.

Besides China has an operational anti ship ballistic missile? Really… terminal guidance and everything? I doubt that. As to it being a carrier killer obviously never heard of AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defence…

 

[Firefly 2]

Propeller-driven fixed-wing aircraft (bombers, cargo aircraft, and fighters) were given one syllable names, while jet-powered fixed-wing aircraft receive two syllable names. So I say the codename Firefang doesn't make any sense unless there is a new rule regarding 5th gen fighters.

But, I was pondering the possible reality of a Chinese indigenous 5th generation fighter. Production of the J10 is estimated at a 100 aircraft or less, according to some sources (such as globalsecurity). The reason for this would be the acquisition of more capable Su-30 fighters.
I guess that if the reality of this aircraft is confirmed ( which I doubt) it would be another reason for the limited J10 run: something superior was on the way and needed resources.
It's a longshot, and based on nothing solid, I admit as much. I wouldn't post it if I didn't feel like it made some sense.

now more than 200

Source?

 

[sferrin]

Propeller-driven fixed-wing aircraft (bombers, cargo aircraft, and fighters) were given one syllable names, while jet-powered fixed-wing aircraft receive two syllable names. So I say the codename Firefang doesn't make any sense unless there is a new rule regarding 5th gen fighters.

But, I was pondering the possible reality of a Chinese indigenous 5th generation fighter. Production of the J10 is estimated at a 100 aircraft or less, according to some sources (such as globalsecurity). The reason for this would be the acquisition of more capable Su-30 fighters.
I guess that if the reality of this aircraft is confirmed ( which I doubt) it would be another reason for the limited J10 run: something superior was on the way and needed resources.
It's a longshot, and based on nothing solid, I admit as much. I wouldn't post it if I didn't feel like it made some sense.

now more than 200

Wow 200? That's about 60% the number they were turning out in F-16s every year back during the good old days.

 

[windingroad]

a witness swear the length is about 19-20m