China's development of stealth fighter takes U.S. by surprise

[chimpymustgo]

Source: Los Angeles Times

By Ken Dilanian, Los Angeles Times
January 7, 2011


A few weeks ago, grainy photos surfaced online showing what several prominent defense analysts said appeared to be a prototype of a Chinese stealth fighter jet that could compete with the best of America's warplanes, years ahead of U.S. predictions. Days later, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet disclosed that a long-awaited Chinese anti-ship missile, designed to sink an American aircraft carrier, was nearly operational.

As Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates heads to China this weekend, analysts are expressing concern about Chinese military advances, which appear to have taken the U.S. by surprise. The Pentagon had predicted that China wouldn't have a stealth fighter for a decade or more and Defense officials had given no previous indication the anti-ship missile, which had long been tracked by the U.S., was close to fruition.

The assertions came as Gates on Thursday outlined plans to cut $78 billion in projected growth from the Pentagon's budget over the next five years and cut the number of troops on active duty.

Gates is expected to meet stiff resistance from contractors and military officials who have long been accustomed to annual budget increases and development of new hardware systems in response to warnings of new foreign threats.

"We have been pretty consistent in underestimating the delivery … of Chinese technology and weapons systems," Vice Adm. David J. "Jack" Dorsett, deputy chief of naval operations for information dominance, told reporters Wednesday. "They enter operational capability quicker than we frequently project."

-edit-

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-china-military-20110107,0,3324067.story?om_rid=MMBIx0&om_mid=_BNJxIvB8XEExMK


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-china-military-20110107,0,3324067.story?om_rid=MMBIx0&om_mid=_BNJxIvB8XEExMK

[Autumn]

1. Sure, a surprise.

Do we have a new boogie man in time to stop any military cuts?

[SkyDaddy7]

9. EXACTLY...That could have been a card board cut out!

How they can determine it to be as good as our air craft from a picture is PURE BULL SHIT!

Who knows we could have put that pic on the internet. After all what does China spend on its military...10% of what we do? Of course they do steal a lot of our hard work! LOL!!

[WhiteTara]

2. well, * gave them the plane at the very beginning

of his reign for a couple of weeks or something to check it out. They gave the plane back in the end though.

[SpiralHawk]

4. "Smirk." - xCommander AWOL (R)

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

3. No, it wasn't a surprise. They're just saying it was a surprise.

[Marblehead]

5. well duh

they have all of our tech, we outsourced it to them. Probable a piece of crap, like all the stuff that come from china. Wal mart might sell them soon....in the jet fighter section

[naaman fletcher]

6. nah, they leaked it on purpose

to make sure that the budget for our own new planes is not cut.

[harun]

10. China's defense industry leaked the picture to get more funding

and now our defense industry is using it for the same thing.

[TatonkaJames]

7. Like My Dad Says....

They're all a bunch of amateurs and always will be.
We are going backwards in everything for the greed of the wealthy.
We have no more statesmen, we have money managers in positions that
politicians should be. From the local level to the executive branch, they only think
about making $$, not peace, not making life better, just money.

[yesphan]

8. A new arms race !!

I guess I should buy some stock in Gen. Dynamics, Lockheed, etc......

[faz]

36. So who would be the new USSR in the race?

hahaha

[denverbill]

11. Looks OK, but it's probably made out of lead and melamine.

Seriously, anyone who is surprised about this is a complete idiot. When you outsource all our production to China, guess what? They learn how to build shit. We'll probably be buying our stealth fighters from China next, since it will be cheaper than building our own.

[Citizen Worker]

12. I can hear it now. Generals will be crying and moaning all over the land that the Chinese and their

stealth fighter are a threat to the land of the free and home of the brave. We'll soon be told that there are reports of several hundred such aircraft and we must pull out all of the stops and design and build a new plane to counter the threat. Remember the stealth bomber at $2 billion a pop? We ain't seen nothing yet.

[Billy Burnett]

13. Naw. They'll say that this is proof that we better have China build our new stealth.

That will be how we reduce the defense budget.

[benEzra]

19. We already have a superior plane, we just decided to build F-35's and more F-18's instead.

In retrospect, picking the F-35 over the F-22 for the Air Force mission may not have been the best decision, since the less-capable F-35 may end up being just as expensive (or more) given the current production delays and overruns. I guess we'll see.

[BOG PERSON]

14. well DUH

it's a STEALTH fighter, it's supposed to surprise people.

[tootrueleft]

15. Looks more 'stealthy' like a raptor than full on stealth fighter i.e. a 117 nighthawk

[benEzra]

17. The Raptor is actually more stealthy than the Nighthawk...

the Nighthawk is so angular and faceted because the computers and algorithms of the 1980's had trouble calculating radar cross sections for complex curved shapes, but could handle flat surfaces. The F-22's RCS is reportedly as low as that of the B-2 Spirit, which IIRC it was designed to be able to escort without giving it away.

The F-35 is pretty good from the front and sides, but is much more reflective than the F-22 from the rear.

[Bigmack]

16. This is evidence of a brilliant plan...

by the Chinese.

They spend R&D money to develop some hot new item, maybe build a few. The US responds by the usual overreaction and pours money - that we borrow from them - into a counter-measure.

They just sit back and watch us spend ourselves to death while our cities decay and we become the best-armed third world nation on earth.

[azul]

20. Yes, military bankrupts us. Or, even worse, China

then turns in the IOU's and repossesses the US military wholesale. They did fund their construction, after all.

[David__77]

22. That's what the US tricked the Soviets into doing with "Star Wars."

If the Soviets had not responded with needless hysteria, they would have had fewer problems.

[benEzra]

18. Yeah, Gates said they wouldn't have anything close to a 5th-gen fighter

in significant numbers before 2020 or 2025, as I recall. This certainly changes that forecast.

There is an interesting discussion of this aircraft on the Ares blog over at Aviation Week, and the consensus seems to be that it demonstrates that China has, in fact, made great leaps in aeronautical knowledge, undoubtedly with our help. It has diverterless intakes like our F-35, advanced low-observable shaping from the front and sides that is *not* derived from any single Western aircraft, etc. It is not an F-22 copy; any resemblance comes from the fact that they were designed along the same principles, and to my knowledge the West hasn't tried a stealth canard design. The J-20 isn't very stealthy from the rear yet, but neither is the F-35, and the J-20's axisymmetric nozzles may be just the flight-testing engines anyway (stealthier F-22 style nozzles and aft fuselage shaping could be added later after the rest of the airframe is validated).

A number of observers have pointed out that the engines and intakes appear to be sized for supercruise at high altitude, and given the large size of the aircraft, you're looking at a long range platform, certainly appropriate for China's defensive needs. It probably isn't intended to dogfight F-22's up close, but rather to conduct long range strike missions against heavily defended AWACS, carrier groups, and ground targets.

China still has a lot to learn about avionics and engines, but they just designed and built the fastest supercomputer in the world using some indigenously-designed key components, so I can't imagine that building an AESA radar or good sensor suite will be beyond them for long. And given that they are one of the premier industrial capabilities on the planet right now and are currently building advanced rocket motors for the Long March 6 series boosters, I doubt engines will be a problem long-term either.

This plane doesn't outclass an F-22, but it certainly has the potential to outclass anything else the USA (or more importantly Tiawan) has in service now. Even an F/A-18E/F would be hard pressed to escape a J-20 that jumped it from two miles higher and 700 knots faster with first-look advantage, and the J-20's strike payload could be comparable to our once-proposed F-22B.

It appears the J-20 may make its first actual flight early next week, weather permitting. I'm interested in how this progresses.

[Bigmack]

21. You obviously know your aviation hardware....

The real questions are:

Can we afford to stay in this race? How much will staying in the race cost?

Does this aircraft represent a threat to the US? Or just to Taiwan and Japan and our other allies?

How do we respond to a comparable advance in the Chinese Navy?

I personally am thinking we can't afford it, and we may have to pull our horns in a looooong way.

[benEzra]

26. Thoughts...

Can we afford to stay in this race? How much will staying in the race cost?

It's not really a "race", IMO. Even if we decide to stick with the 1970's-designed F-15E's until they all fall out of the sky from metal fatigue (which has already happened to some of our F-15C's), China will build advanced aircraft and spacecraft whether we do or not. And if we (say) cancel the F-22 and F-35 and plan to spend all our money keeping antique airplanes flying (which is in itself horrendously expensive) instead of replacing them with newer and easier-to-maintain aircraft, we're still spending the money, we're just spending foolishly, IMO.

I do believe we could prioritize our military funding much better. The thing is, if we hadn't sunk $3 trillion (or whatever) into the Iraq war---money we're still spending---we wouldn't be nickle-and-dimeing essential projects to the extent we are. And I don't see us getting out of Afghanistan for years, either.

Unfortunately, Iraq/Afghanistan have shifted a whole lot of our military funding and R&D priorities into counterinsurgency and war-of-attrition type operations, to the detriment of technology development and the long-term strategic view. That is one mistake that China will not make, IMO.

Does this aircraft represent a threat to the US? Or just to Taiwan and Japan and our other allies?

It doesn't have the range to hit the United States (even Hawaii) directly, no. China does have systems they can threaten us with if they choose---long-range ICBM's with city-buster warheads, for example---and they can always threaten to dump their dollars/U.S. Treasury investments onto the market and destroy our economy---but no, the J-10 doesn't threaten any state, although with tanker support they could certainly strike U.S. military bases anywhere in east Asia.

What it does do (or will once it is fielded, anyway) is to make any U.S. military involvement in Asian affairs much more risky for U.S. forces. If China chose to annex Taiwan by force, for example, a sizable J-10 force would make it *very* risky for U.S. AWACs aircraft and refueling tankers to operate anywhere close to the region, and the J-10 with anti-ship missiles could pose a threat to U.S. warships as well (though China has also just developed, and is starting to field, a medium-range anti-ship ballistic missile that poses even more of a near-term threat to U.S. ships).

I think you will see Japan and Taiwan start to realize that the U.S. is less of a credible protector for them than we used to be, so you may see those countries start taking their own defense a bit more seriously.

How do we respond to a comparable advance in the Chinese Navy?

I think the Chinese navy is much further from regional parity with the U.S. than their air force is. China is working hard to develop quiet nuclear subs, but we are way ahead of them in that regard. The U.S. has neglected its aviation assets much more than it has neglected its submarine assets over the past couple of decades, IMO.

I personally am thinking we can't afford it, and we may have to pull our horns in a looooong way.

Again, China is going to build what they're going to build, whether we do or not. I do think that if we're going to buy new planes, they should be 5th-gen designs and not warmed-over 1970's designs.

The real root of the problem, IMO, is that our procurement process is practically broken. Look at our tanker fiasco---some of our current KC-135's are so old that some of the grandchildren of the original pilots are probably flying them now, and yet the Air Force isn't much closer to buying replacements than they were five years ago, due to repeated incompetence in managing the procurement effort---and these are planes based on off-the-shelf civilian airliners. If the F-22 production line is shut down, it will make things even worse (IMO), since the USAF will either have to design a brand new plane to replace it, or go with the less-capable F-35 which may end up costing just as much as the F-22 would have. It's a mess, and one I hope gets cleaned up soon.

[benEzra]

30. Oops, I said J-10 a couple of times; I meant J-20. (n/t)

[Art_from_Ark]

31. Japan starting to take its defense a little more seriously

Are you implying that this little island country (140,000 sq mi), officially pacifist with few enemies in the world but nonetheless ranks No. 2 in the world in defense spending, isn't taking its own defense seriously enough? :crazy:

[benEzra]

32. Where do you get the #2 figure for Japan?

From Wikipedia, I see this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_budget_of_Japan

Even during the Cold War arms race of the 1980s, the Defense budget was accorded a relatively low priority in Japan. According to Japanese security policy, maintaining a military establishment is only one method—and by no means the best method—to achieve national security. Diplomacy, economic aid and development, and a close relationship with the United States under the terms of the 1960 security treaty are all considered more important. For FY 1986 through FY 1990, defense's share of the general budget was around 6.5 %, compared with approximately 28 % for the United States. In 1987 Japan ranked sixth in the world in total defense expenditures behind the Soviet Union, the United States, France, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany), and Britain. By 1989 it ranked third after the United States and the Soviet Union, mainly because of the increased value of the yen. In FY 1991, defense accounted for 6.2 % of the budget. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Japan was ranked fourth in world in 2004-2005, spending $42.1 billion; according to The World Factbook, CIA, Japan was fifth, spending $44.7 billion (the ranking is different because of the CIA's radically higher estimate of spending by the People's Republic of China). <1>
...
According to the Ministry of Defense of Japan, the 2008 defense budget was ¥4.74 trillion, down by 0.8% from the ¥4.78 trillion recorded in 2007.<1> This slight decline came despite attempts by the governing LDP to enhance the status of national defense by upgrading the Defense Agency to the Ministry of Defense, effective January 9, 2007.<2>

And don't forget that a significant fraction of the current Japanese defense budget goes toward supporting U.S. troops and infrastructure in the region, rather than the JDF.

Japan has historically, at least as long as I've been observing, built its defensive strategy on the hope of letting the USA do the hard stuff. In recent years, they appear to have reevaluated that position somewhat.

I'm not saying that Japan is looking for a war with China; far from it. Were one to occur, they have far more to lose than China does. I am merely pointing out that in the future, the scenario of the USA riding in on a big white horse and protecting everybody from whatever contingency is looking less and less credible, and the advent of the J-20 and the DF-21D ASBM sharply accelerate that decline in credibility of U.S. deterrent in the region, IMO. Our Asian allies, including Japan, are realizing (if they haven't already) that if a serious regional conflict breaks out, they will most likely be on their own.

[Art_from_Ark]

33. A few years ago, Japan was #2

At any rate, being No. 5 still means that they are spending a heck of a lot on military expenditures. And the fraction of the budget that goes toward supporting US troops is largely the result of the Ampo Treaty of 1960, and later revisions and amendments, in which the US essentially spelled out what it wanted to Japan to do (The signing of the Ampo Treaty of 1960, by the way, cost one Japanese politician his life, when he was assaulted by a sword-wielding attacker who was vehemently opposed to Japanese reliance on the US for military support).

Also, the US-imposed Constitution of 1947 (sometimes called the MacArthur Constitution) mandates that Japan's military can only be used for defense.

The US has essentially put Japan in the position you have described

[benEzra]

34. Oh, I agree...

Also, the US-imposed Constitution of 1947 (sometimes called the MacArthur Constitution) mandates that Japan's military can only be used for defense.

The US has essentially put Japan in the position you have described

Oh, I agree. And Japan has (perhaps due to U.S. pressure) seemed to interpret that as "Japan's military cannot be capable of being used for offense", which resulted in artificial limitations on its defensive capability as well.

FWIW, I still don't see an era where Japan was second in the world in defense spending. From the article I linked, the closest they ever came was 3rd (in '89), due to a brief rise in the yen against other currencies and the collapse of the Soviet Union, but they seem to hover around 4th to 7th place in most years. On a per-capita basis, they are well behind Sweden, Australia, and Norway.

I found this list for 2009; Japan was 7th last year:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Rank........Country.........Military expenditure, 2009..% of GDP, 2008
1...........United States........663,255,000,000................4.3%
2...........China.................98,800,000,000................2.0%
3...........United Kingdom........69,271,000,000................2.5%
4...........France................67,316,000,000................2.3%
5...........Russian Federation....61,000,000,000................3.5%
6...........Germany...............48,022,000,000................1.3%
7...........Japan.................46,859,000,000................0.9%
8...........Saudi Arabia..........39,257,000,000................8.2%
9...........Italy.................37,427,000,000................1.7%
10..........India.................36,600,000,000................2.6%

On a per-capita basis, Japan appears to be 25th:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures_per_capita

Country................Year.........USD
United Arab Emirates...2009........2,653
United States..........2009........2,141
Israel.................2009........1,882
Saudi Arabia...........2009........1,524
Kuwait.................2009........1,289
Norway.................2009........1,245
Greece.................2009........1,230
France.................2009..........977
United Kingdom.........2009..........940
Bahrain................2009..........911.5
Australia..............2009..........893
Brunei.................2009..........866
Luxembourg.............2009..........809
Denmark................2009..........804
Netherlands............2009..........759
Finland................2009..........702
Sweden.................2009..........657
Italy..................2009..........593
Canada.................2009..........560
Switzerland............2009..........526
Germany................2009..........558
Belgium................2009..........525
South Korea............2009..........493
Russia.................2009..........430
Japan..................2009..........401
Spain..................2009..........398
Poland.................2009..........285
Turkey.................2009..........244
Georgia................2009..........151
Brazil.................2009..........142
South Africa...........2009...........78.7
China..................2009...........74.7
Argentina..............2009...........65
Mexico.................2009...........48.9
India..................2009...........30.7
Pakistan...............2009...........28.3

[boppers]

25. The only have to make one.

Maybe two, in case one crashes.

Significant numbers never actually have to be built, as with nuclear weapons, the demonstration ability is often more powerful than actual use.

[benEzra]

27. Well, not so much with fighters; that's mostly true of strategic assets.

Fighters are only a credible threat if they actually exist in-theater in significant numbers. A single J-10 cannot impose an unacceptable cost on U.S. intervention in, say, China-Taiwan affairs. A single Dong Feng 31 ICBM can. The USA might be willing to lose an AWACs or a KC-135 to save Taiwan, but there is no way we would risk the nuking of U.S. cities to save Taipei, if it came to that.

And China will build a fleet of J-20's, unless they come up with an even better design. China has never been much for publicity stunts; they designed the J-20 because they plan to produce them, IMO.

[David__77]

23. Hopefully China's rise will restrain the US's geopolitical moves.

The breakup of the single superpower order will certainly be welcomed by most of the world. In the long run, it is good for the people of the US as well.

[Crowman1979]

24. You know what is the best way to stop a chinese stealth fighter?

STOP BUYING THEIR PRODUCTS!

[NuclearDem]

28. Come on guys, surely it's just a coincidence!

"The assertions came as Gates on Thursday outlined plans to cut $78 billion in projected growth from the Pentagon's budget over the next five years and cut the number of troops on active duty."

Oh wait, no it's not.

[benEzra]

29. The Chinese announcement actually makes Gates look bad.

He had previously said that China would be incapable of fielding a 5th-gen fighter in significant numbers before 2020 or 2025 or somesuch. Obviously that forecast was way off.

[xor]

35. How do they know it's really a stealth fighter and not just a pretty little mock up

meant to throw people off? Even if it was as advanced as said, how many do the Chinese plan on building? Unless China starts building huge quantities of them, I'm not seeing the threat here.

[benEzra]

39. Because it was doing high-speed taxi tests last week with its nose in the air.

It's definitely a flying prototype, and its shape demonstrates a very mature understanding of low-observable shaping and supersonic aerodynamics. First flight is expected some time this week, weather permitting.

And it wouldn't take vast numbers to present a real problem for Taiwan or Japan, or us if we ever tried to come to the aid of, say, Taiwan in a regional conflict. Even a small fleet of J-20's would put our regional bases at risk of a deep strike, and would make it very risky to put AWACS and refueling aircraft as close to the region as we normally would. It may not be as good as an F-22, but a production version will likely outclass anything else we, the Japanese, or Taiwan have by a very wide margin.

[faz]

37. Economic power = military power

Billionaires always want new toys. That's why some of them go bankrupt eventually.

[Unvanguard]

38. So? n/t

[Rex]

41. If that is actually true, then I have no respect for US military leaders.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.