J-20: Mighty Dragon

[@megaprojects9649]

Check out Squarespace: squarespace.com/megaprojects for 10% off on your first purchase.

[@Zach-ku6eu]

'5th generation ' which can be picked up by WWII Indian and Pakistani radar! BS #Simonhasnointegrity

[@quoderatdemonstrandum5442]

"Fighter Jet". I hate that term. It's so childish. Please properly refer to such aircraft as "Tactical Fighters". Other than that, great job. Keep up the good work.

[@andyyang3029]

@@Zach-ku6eu thanks but he literally mentioned that in the video lol. Got some armchair aviation experts in here

[@balakrishnanperumalsamy1851]

Make a video on su 57

[@gringostarr69]

Remember when you said that f-35 doens't need a cannon... 🤔

[@stephenbuck1280]

All stealth aircraft can be detected by some radars. What stealth means is the radar profile is so small that you can’t get a missile lock. The actual limits on maneuverability is down to the amount of g force the pilots can withstand. The most important part of a warplane are the radars and electronics. We have no idea how good they are until they go head to head. Then tactics and the ability of the pilot will also have a major impact on the out come.

[@TheBooban]

Eh, alot of armchair pilot talk there. You can get a missile lock on small things too if you want. Doesn’t matter how small it is, if it’s still picked up. The rest is programming. It’s just that maybe you’ll hit a bird.

[@voidtempering8700]

@@TheBooban Do you not know the difference between the various bands of radar. Low band radars such as L-band can detect a stealth fighter rather easily, but although it can tell the general area, it cannot be used to lock, that is where X-band radar come in. They can lock, but at a shorter range. There is a reason an aircraft is detected before it is locked.

[@stephenbuck1280]

@@TheBooban Are you saying that stealth aircraft have no radar profile? I know that is not the case as the US lost stealth plane to a BUK missile in Serbia. The wide band radars can and do see stealth planes but you need a narrow band radar to achieve a missile lock and that is where it gets difficult with a stealth plane as far as I understand it. The g force thing is just physics. You can engineer a plane to turn so quickly the pilot will just pass out. An armchair pilot 😀

[@antwango]

nicely said... people think stealth is a decider when in fact it is not the only factor.... lots of considerations.... and china just offered up tje other side of the convo with canards.... also remembering the mig 144 was considered top of the range also having canards

[@Coinz8]

@@stephenbuck1280 Yeah, but if you look behind the story of why that shoot down happened youd see theres a reason why many werent shot down in the previous months. A very special circumstances lead to that shoot.

[@DavidCurryFilms]

A few things to consider - A) every plane looks/sounds impressive on paper until proven in combat - this goes for every nation's 5th Gen fighters. B) The numbers available, unit cost, reliability, ease of maintenance, and availability of weapons will all influence the potency C) Modern long range missile tech render hyper-manouverability fairly pointless. D) The shift to pilotless fighters and greater computerisation will further change all nations strategy and fighter capabilities (i.e. no pilot fatigue, expendability). 🤔 I really have no clue and hope i don't find out which is best 'in action' 😬

[@antwango]

drones and drone warfare changes everything...... and that is suposedly what the 2seater is for

[@kaltaron1284]

Point B reminds me of the Zumwalt (spelling?). Great on paper and even in early tests but in the end it became just a testbed for new technology.

[@misterbig9025]

But China is not a war monger.

[@jetcitykitty]

I think on a long enough timeline we will have developed countermeasures against computerized combat vehicles that may easily necessitate the development of non-computerized tech that utilizes a pilot and so we might see more of a cyclical and forth development depending on whatever current military Doctrine requires. I mean it didn't just happen in Gundam as the reason mobile Suits been used in war this has also affected the decision to put guns back onto fighter craft after it was found that sufficient countermeasures against missile technology necessitated the use of dog fighting once again. Of course I'm just speculating but I feel like how we wage war will not be a constant curve towards more Technologic toys because technological complexity and computing power is only one tiny and specific aspect of how we go to war now and that is something that could very well lose its position as a paradigm and it could only take one conflict to establish this. Honestly I'm no expert and this comment is way too long what am I doing

[@lgkfamily]

Add to that very thoughtful list is that the West is far more forthcoming about the flaws in new military projects than our rivals are. There are many examples. Authoritarian regimes can hide their sins more effectively than democracies can. If the J-20 is coming up short in some regard, we'd be the last to hear about it. Add also that the nature of war is that of tactic, counter-tactic, and counter-counter-tactic. Given enough time, no weapon system is impervious.

[@mobiuszero2424]

J-20 has: -Long fuselage -Small wing ratio -No auto cannon -Large internal weapons bay with only 4 missiles + 2 small internal weapons bay for short missiles Clearly this means : - not for dogfight - large fuselage to carry more fuel, which means more range in expense of manuverability - big internal weapons bay but only 4 missiles means big and long missiles like PL-15 and PL-21 which really effective to hit large aerial target like AWACS and tankers Their canards are just used to counter balance weight of their internal weapons (look where they were positioned) and shave their take off length (its a big boi) Go check SU-30 and why they have canards, and why SU-35 dont and you will understand why J-20 use canards And you know why india can detect J-20? Because ALL stealth jets use luneberg lens in peace time to amplify their cross sections so it doesnt threaten neighbors, US did it first, but India being India, they like to talk big although its stupid

[@hp8029]

Meh idk about indias capabilities, they kinda just recently got their jet shot down and accidentally shot down their own helicopter over kashmir thinking it was a hostile plane

[@hp8029]

also their airforce is fucking lackin these days (indias)

[@AbcdEfgh-sq2tf]

Apparently someone involved in the J-20 raged online saying that the plane was meant to be a multirole like the F-35 and hence should not be compared to the F-22

[@frankmerriwell8339]

I mostly agree except the canards part. There are basically two different layouts of the wings on the jet, the secondary wings either on the back of the main wings or the front. They are only called canards when placed on the front of main wings. Both layouts have their pros and cons. In the end it all comes down to the aerodynamic design and craftsmanship. China obviously is more experienced with the canards layout as they have started with it since J10. The application of canards design on J20 just shows it suits the purpose better for them.

[@mobiuszero2424]

@@AbcdEfgh-sq2tf nope, its neither air superiority (F-22) nor multirole (F-35) but interceptor like MiG-31, it has no guns and its has long fuselage to be air superiority, its not designed to carry bombs to be multirole, but it has large fuel capacity and carry extremely long range air to air missile

[@TBCN69]

Fun fact: Americas F-35 and F-22 cannot destroy even a single Su-57 squadron. This is due to the fact in order to form a squadron you need about 12-15 planes, and russia has 8

[@travis6342]

I think you’re missing the Forrest for the trees. A single F-35 or F-22 can destroy the entire Russian Air Force; obviously exaggerating but what I m getting at is that a single F-35/F-22 can act as an elusive interloper if you will, where they send target data to “missile busses” (I forgot what types of aircraft are said to be used as this function but think of a B52 or 747 with no purpose except carrying as many long range air to air missiles and loiter way off and toss missiles non stop which then use the F35/F22 radar targeting data to guide and track to a red horde.

[@Nigel-Nathan]

@@travis6342 A missile bus would be shot down long before they could get in range to fire an AMRAAM.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@travis6342 you missed the joke

[@davetuttle8861]

The j20 is hamstrung by a lack of a decent engine for it.

[@willstikken5619]

@@travis6342 The F-15EX is reported to be intended for this role as the "missile truck" hauling additional ordinance for the stealth fighters to target.

[@sret7880]

F22 is definitely the best 5th Gen jet. Recently it has successfully strike down a weather surveillance balloon.

[@steezykenz466]

Utilizing its $400,000 dollar sidewinder missile

[@川流不息233]

233333333

[@VarietyGamerChannel]

One of the balloons was an $8 school project.

[@Stan_the_Belgian]

China should less arrogant spying on us ground. They build balloons, us builds jets

[@RohanSingh-zc4bm]

If everyone has so many problems why don't you guys tell what US should have used if not sidewinder

[@mikeyknighty8226]

This channel is great, they view much of the technology from different countries from an unbiased view and give their honest opinions and facts on it which is very hard to say for many other western military channels.

[@abdelhakimchibani4712]

Thought the exact same, most other reviews have the awesomeness of the f-35 and f-22 as their ending point and don't even admit to the strenths of russian and chinese jets, but this one was on par by giving a clear and unbiased review of what this jet is, as well as warning us about the speculative nature of reviewing these fighter jets.

[@Appletank8]

Do note that there is a difference between being able to detect a stealth aircraft vs being able to get a weapon lock on a stealth aircraft. Stealth aircraft are generally going to focus on being stealthy to high-band radars due to their usage for weapon locking. Being able to know a stealth fighter is "somewhere over there" is less useful if your missiles don't know where to go.

[@frederickczajka573]

But it damn sure can keep your own planes from getting shot up and destroyed on the ground.....

[@xlxl9440]

This is true when it comes to ground radar batteries. All stealth planes can be detected but supposedly not able track them enough to be able to lock in and shoot down (the one exceptionwas the F-17 that had a comediesof errors ove Bosnia that allowed it to be tracked and shot down with a surface to air missle). But the Indian Air Force said that their fighter jets detected the J-20's flying in the air particularly from the back and the side (the Cunards). If this is true it does not bold well for the J-20's overall stealth. It means that it is only stealthy from from the nose. Not good on a 360° battlefield.

[@kanash8851]

I love the "some where over there" part

[@danielcurtis1434]

That’s true, who needs to be invisible when your invulnerable???

[@youmad7068]

@@xlxl9440 F117 was shoot down over Serbia in 1999, not Bosnia and it was not the only F117 to be hit over Serbia, another was hit by a Serbian air defense system which was confirmed by retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Charlie Hainline, a former F-117 pilot himself who was there when his friend was hit by a missile. Plain was damaged by S125 Neva missile system but managed to get back to base. Which pretty much confirmed what Serbs were saying and that is that they could see F117 on radar screen just like any other plane but their radars on air defense systems were constantly targeted by anti radiation missiles so most of the times when they know that there is to many enemy aircraft in the air they would not even turn their radars on. If they had a bit more up to date multi layered air deference at the time like BUK-M1s covered by Pantsiers or Tunguska they would have much more success, because if you hit BUKs radar you still did not take out whole system, and this is because of the fact that every TEL has its own fire control radar an can continue to fight on its own. Serbs also said that it was much harder for them to hit F16s than F117 with missile systems that they had because they could lock on F16 and send the missile but they could only send a missile at the time because of out dated SAM-s and F16 maneuverability those planes would easily out maneuver missiles and run away. So it makes sense that Americans went with F22 and F35 program having both stealth and maneuverability.

[@marcbow]

I was very sceptical at first but the design is starting to grow on me. I'm getting the feeling that the J-20 is probably not as stealthy as the American craft are, yet is still going to be a quite capable platform to perform it's roles. Very hard to say at this time. The Chinese have long struggled to produce domestic jet engines with the power, economy and reliability that's needed so I'll be interested in the WS-15 development.

[@chrisdoulou8149]

The WS-15 will be a monster however the WS-10B and C models are entirely acceptable for the time being. The C model especially is very close in thrust to the F119 of the F-22 and the difference is made up by the fact that the J20 is a significantly lighter aircraft.

[@yangmeng7708]

@@chrisdoulou8149 There is no advantage in the j-20. f22 equipped with ws-15.

[@robertgittings8662]

*I like how you based everything on "probably"*

[@hkfoo3333]

true Chinese did face problems to develop their own jet engine unlike the west which readily shared all the various components and parts to make a viable jet. Not the Chinese. They had to learn from scratch and not only that the entire west sanctioned Chinese from everything needed to build a jet engine. if it had been other countrires from US to any western country , they would have failed to produce ANY ENGINE. But the Chinese did overcome everything and produced their own home grown jet engine that is equivalent to Western and Russian Jet engines. They are coming out with the WS15 engine that has more thrust than even the F35!! So do you think the Chinese is not great? Try denying and as sure as the sun sets , the WS15c wont be the last jet engine the Chinese will develop. Ban the Chinese? They can make their own alone.

[@ConstantineJoseph]

Don't hold your breath on the WS-15 engines. More thrust and power means even more attention to durability and resilience which the Chinese engines aren't known for. It's like your V8 engines aren't reliable, what makes your v12 engines more.....if the very principles of reducing the wear and tear isn't tackled in the first place. The Russians knew how to develop their engines and reverse engineering will not get to the details of how the materials are created in the first place, they are always second guessing

[@SparkBerry]

Next Megaprojects episode: Simon's Majestic Beard

[@andyyang3029]

🥵🥵 that needs a channel of it's own

[@widodoakrom3938]

Lmao

[@SephirothRyu]

One upon a time, he had hair on his head. It then decided it didn't want to be there anymore and migrated to his chin.

[@darkjill2007]

I think the scariest part of that air frame is that it's in production at scale. More planes mean more opportunities for refinement. Every day one of those fighters take off the Chinese get another data point. Something that gets overlooked when talking about American stealth is that we've had almost 50 years of stealth flights under our belt. We KNOW how to use it beyond being able to make it. We know how to fight and defend against it. Now the Chinese are playing in the same arena as we are. Learning the same lessons as we have. I'd imagine the research and experience from J 20 flights will do far more damage to the F 35 than any dog fight between the two.

[@SoloRenegade]

mass production doesn't mean every single jet is an experiment. that's not how mass production works.

[@zaco-km3su]

Bingo!

[@dandane5227]

They usually just spy on the US

[@kieranh2005]

Good points

[@hughmungus2760]

so far the US has zero combat experience in 5th gen to 5th gen combat meaning both countries are essentially starting from scratch. its like moving from prop fighters to jets.

[@pl3045]

I like your comment about the plane. It is more objective. As to my thinking, you can change the style, but you cannot change the physics behind it. Therefore, if no better style that fits the current physics principles, similar design is the obvious result. Just like F-1 race cars, they all look pretty much the same.

[@zackmoon592]

This is the first time I've seen it called the "Mighty Dragon" and now all I can think about is the part from Tropic Thunder where he's on the phone with Tom Cruise like "THIS IS FLAMING DRAGON!!" 🔥🐉🔥

[@lingth]

The term "Mighty Dragon" is a translation of the Chinese name for the J-20.

[@JohnDoe-zs6gj]

Exactly what came to my head, except in the proper "Fwaming Dwagon."

[@xinleitang6734]

@@JohnDoe-zs6gj I thought chengdu is just a city name. LOL

[@johnrobert385mm]

😆😆😆

[@Rose.Of.Hizaki]

It will be a _'flaming dragon'_ when it messes with an F-15

[@saynotowars]

Fair? objective and educated reporting. We need more channels like this to counter wrong and lies reporting.

[@crazyjohnhoward]

beautiful plane

[@DixonLu]

Simon needs to expand the Mega part of this video, in particular, having the information is not the same as being able to build from it. The amount of infrastructure needed to build a combat jet is mind boggling. Some of the things that can't be bought off the shelf, for example, are: tiny screws with enormous strength, adhesives to glue stealth surfaces, the software to run the plane, the helmet mounted UI (can't use the American English version). All the developments have to be funded, and then further funded to build to scale. One side note: Without international sales, building combat aircrafts is expensive on a per unit basis. The Chinese couldn't sell many combat aircrafts internationally because its airplanes depended on Russian engines. Russia is a competitor in arms sales, forbidding China from selling aircrafts with Russian engines. Hence China had to design and build its own engines.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

Er, no. In fact, until the J-10CP EVERY single Chinese combat aircraft exported abroad (J-7, Q-5, JF-17) had used Russian-licensed or actual Russian engines.

[@DixonLu]

@@andrewsuryali8540Real Q: Do you know if they have sold any J10s to countries other than Pakistan? From what I have been able to find, the limitation was they could sell to countries that are not Russia's potential/existing customers. So they could sell older jets to existing customers (Pakistan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, N. Korea). Even Pakistan took 15 years of negotiations to buy 25 of J10, sticking mainly to JF-17s.

[@CrossWindsPat]

Dude its China. If they want to build something they will throw untold resources and human suffering to make it happen. They have 2 billion people and make everything for the entire planet. I could see them getting ramped up and spits these things out like like a queen ant spits out eggs.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

@@DixonLu No. There was never such an agreement with Russia about ENGINES. China can't sell planes Russia is still exporting. Period. In the case of Chinese planes with Russian engines (the JF-17) no problems. Russia will supply the engines happily. We in fact know this from the old Argentinian tender (the one before the current one that went nowhere) where MiG-35 and JF-17 were both offered without any complaints from Russia. J-10 is not exported anywhere other than Pakistan because none of the usual Chinese customers can afford it. Some can't even afford JF-17, hence the FTC-2000. Even in the case of Pakistan, it's questionable. There must be some sort of crazy financing device used to buy the planes. PAF survives on American dole. All their F-16s are basically free. It's really strange for them to actually buy equivalent planes with cash.

[@narrativegundam4710]

@@DixonLu The Republic of the Sudan. 3 units.

[@sphereslip]

I always liked the SU-47. It was only a prototype yet highly maneuverable.

[@ericwang7959]

It's a pretty radical disign that would've worked, until they realized that there's no material strong enough to keep the wing from tearing itself apart. Hense it stayed a prototype, but it's still pretty cool design though.

[@sphereslip]

@@ericwang7959 Exactly. I agree. While I loved the design, I just don't think it's there yet. Most fighters wouldn't be able to get off the ground without computers guidance. They learnt the hard way when the US produced the f-117 stealth fighter. I'm only talking about fighter jets (not country), if you know what I mean.

[@adenkyramud5005]

Man I loved that thing in ace combat. I gotta start playing that game again...

[@vaniellys]

The Su-47 was absolutely beautiful indeed !

[@christiant.s.f.9029]

Suffered from wing torque/tearing due to the wing design. Super cool looking though.

[@ignitionfrn2223]

1:15 - Chapter 1 - A new player 4:35 - Chapter 2 - Design & weapons 8:40 - Mid roll ads 10:00 - Chapter 3 - Competitor of copycat

[@Aethid]

13:31 Being able to detect a J-20 near your border doesn't really mean anything about how good its stealth is. Stealth fighters aren't good at hiding from low frequency radar as used in early warning systems. What they are good at is avoiding high frequency radar used by targeting systems. You know when stealth aircraft are around - you just can't shoot them.

[@Gongolongo]

Stealth fighters use Lunenburg Lenses during non war times. It's common practice even for the US. India does not operate fifth gen fighters so they aren't aware that fifth gen are not utilizing their stealth capabilities during normal CAP.

[@chiraggowda4928]

Canards throw a wrench into the stealth profile, there's a reason no other stealth fighters have canards. Also the J-20s were detected by Su-30MKIs, but obviously they didn't try a weapons lock because that would be like declaring a war. But many experts believe that the J-20s RCS is not small enough to be called a stealth fighter.

[@chiraggowda4928]

@@babycyndi3235 haha you're right, democratic Indian government is brainwashing people, not the authoritative Chinese ccp who put people in "reeducation" camps for opposing ccp or practising Islam.

[@tringuyen7519]

J-20 against India’s SU 30MKI. I put my money on the SU 30MKI and its 30mm cannon.

[@carlxlinify]

​@@chiraggowda4928 lol you probably don't know that the early prototype of x-35 is in canard-delta layout. And it was designed to be a stealth 5th generation fighter. You can google the images by yourself. They drop that design eventually because conventional layout has better lift performance at low velocity, which is critical for carrier landing.

[@team3am149]

A well thought out and produced episode, very high quality as always.

[@whiteshark450]

Great video, love the fair and simply neutral coverage of a foreign jet.

[@jmanj3917]

00:35 It isn't, and it won't.

[@champvamp]

I'd love to see a megaprojects video covering the Iowa Class Battleship. If it can be done

[@HBagel0313]

I was just about to request that! USS Missouri is a beast.

[@champvamp]

I was thinking the one and only time the USS Wisconsin got hit 😆

[@stephenmayer9228]

Battleship New Jersey museum has a great KZbin page, it would be cool to see a collaboration video.

[@adenkyramud5005]

Get the whistleboi aboard New Jersey, and have a video with him and the museum crew... Oh that would be perfect xD

[@jpmoor0]

@@champvamp “temper, temper”

[@mp40submachinegun81]

13:55 it should be noted detection is not necessarily the primary use of stealth tech. the f-35 is also fairly easily detected. nearly anything with some reflective properties can be detected on radar, from trees to the little bits of foil dropped from bombers in ww2 to confuse the radar. the point of stealth is not to be undetectable, but to prevent and confuse weapons locking onto the jet. what good is knowing a jet is in the air if your missile cant tell it apart from a bird or any other object protruding into the skyline?

[@Justanotherconsumer]

This is apparently the point of NGAD - it will not just be hard to lock onto, but hard to detect at all.

[@sofascialistadankulamegado1781]

Exactly. Unfortunately for nations that want to rival the USA, they have a long way to go to perfect electronic warfare and electronic scrambling strategies that the USA has available today. The F-35 has frighteningly advanced signal intercept and emission capabilities. Its about screwing with the enemies weapons systems and breaking down the information linking up the chain of command.

[@PomaReign]

Apparently US F-35s were able to detect and get close to the J-20s earlier this year undetected and was able to observe them off the cost of China.

[@hughmungus2760]

F35s are about as stealthy as non-stealth aircraft in the infrared spectrum and most modern fighters have IRST with ranges well over 30km.

[@rexcarolus5874]

@@hughmungus2760 and bwr... Is..

[@ccsakuya3912]

A small factor can affect the aerodynamic performance of a fighter. You compare the front views of two planes, but you don't want to let the audience see the side, bottom and top views, because you know that the two planes have very different shapes, but you want to prove the existence of "copy".

[@mattblom3990]

I found a toy of one of these at a Canadian flight museum. I thought it was the Firefox from the 1980's film but only later was disappointed...

[@timbrwolf1121]

🤣

[@dylanwhite3383]

Well hopefully you will find that Firefox to add to your collection

[@asahearts1]

The toy and the real plane might have been made in the same factory lol

[@digitalfortressmining5004]

@@asahearts1 lmao best comment

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

First time I saw one of these things I thought the Chinese design team must have all watched Firefox and thought it was a documentary!

[@blackegret666]

I still find it fascinating how CnC Generals predicted the J-20 a decade before it's introduction

[@dsdy1205]

That's because the MiG from Generals and the J20 both draw very heavy inspiration from Russia's MiG 1.44 project

[@dronessential]

How exactly? The Chinese use MiG fighters there, heavily based on the 1.44 project.

[@NationChosenByGod]

@@dsdy1205 Nope, it drew no inspiration from Mig 1.44.

[@dsdy1205]

@@NationChosenByGod MiG themselves think that this is a strong possibility, and honestly Chengdu would be dumb to _not_ crib as many notes as they could find on the 1.44 if they were going to make a similar form factor aircraft

[@NationChosenByGod]

@@dsdy1205 nope you should watch millenium 7 history tech about the design of J-20. It is on youtube.

[@timfriday9106]

really loving all these aircraft videos's lately.

[@georgepalmer5497]

A while back everyone was saying that the primary role of the J20 was to remain undetected and take out high value support targets with long range air to air missiles. They were supposed to go after the tankers, AWACs, and submarine hunters. That might be an attack that we'd have a hard time stopping.

[@PrinterStand]

thats the role of all new stealth fighters. The major powers figured out, that if they use a small number of stealth fighters to take out the Radar and other ground AA. They can then send in older, and cheaper, 4th gen fighters with more ordiance once the airspace is clear. might change in the future if the major powers go to war, but right now, 5th gen is mainly just the trump card to establish air dominance over smaller, poorer countries.

[@georgepalmer5497]

I remember an American pilot quoted in the paper as saying that, "After you beat down their air defenses you can go along dumping out inertially guided bombs." The only air force in the world that could give us trouble doing this is China's air force. Russia has a fifth generation fighter, but they don't have the numbers of it to even form a squad.

[@jaek__]

​@@georgepalmer5497 In time they will, plenty of American pilots, and many of my peers all understand the crucial importance of understanding why China's AF is such a massive threat, it's going to be the worst and most dangerous adversary the USAF and USN has ever faced. I can't really do this whole situation any justice in a comment but it's incredibly nuanced, and I for one am looking forward to seeing just how potent the PLAAF is firsthand.

[@georgepalmer5497]

I don't know if it is the most dangerous threat our air force has ever faced. The U.S. air force going head to head with the German Luftwaffe in World War II, might have been a more dangerous situation, but I agree that we need to guard against them. They say there is nothing more expensive than having a second best air force.

[@martinjrgensen8234]

@@jaek__ That would mean war with a nuclear power. Only psychopaths want that

[@granatmof]

The Canards were chosen because they didn't originally have directional thrusters. Also super high speed is kind of overkill. US studies of fighting speeds shows that when engaging in air to air pilots would slow down to about 700 mph for more maneuverability. Further high speed burns more fuel and reduces effective combat range.

[@jetli740]

didnt you listen, canard chosen because it give x2 lift mean it can carry more weapon or extra fuel tank

[@jzNottobee]

Higher sustainable mach speed means you can get to the combat area sooner.

[@mojothemigo]

@@jzNottobee Won't get there if your fuel runs out or your stealth is damaged which high speeds do indeed damage the stealth coating on a jet. No, China has not figured out a way around it but we probably have 😂

[@brentbartley6838]

​@@jzNottobeeNot to mention being at a higher speed at high altitude increases effective range of missles when launched.

[@thesheepthemightythecrazy]

What is funny is having the canards means less maneuverability to some people. What a bunch of clowns.

[@iknujbyhvtgcrfxedw-nb6ew]

thank you so much

[@zylaaeria2627]

Thing about the J-20 is that it isn't fair to compare it to say an F-22. F-22 is a dedicated air superiority fighter & the J-20 is more equivalent of a long range missile truck. Chinese doctrine as a whole tends to lean heavily towards very long range engagement. F-22 would likely win against a J-20 just about every time in a "1 vs 1" scenario, but the point is moot as dogfights as most people know them are a thing of the past. From what I have seen from wargames, J-20s are primarily designed on trying to snipe critical stuff like AWACS or EW systems from beyond visual range or flanking from behind; dropping their load & promptly RTB for resupply. They are not intended to ever really get close to anyone or anything. A lot of Chinese doctrine seems to be headed in this direction. It is going to be interesting to see what their other 5th gen fighter currently in development, the J-35, is going to perform like once it enters IOC. Another issue is regarding it's overall shape. There aren't many ways to design stealth fighters or modern aircraft for that matter hence why so many of them look so similar all the time. Modern aircraft tend to go through countless iterations using digital modeling & ultimately everyone ends up with more or less the same designs. No sense changing what ain't broke. Of course, it is no secret that China is rather adventurous when it comes to espionage, but so does everyone else so this point does not have any real merit to it. I do agree that the RCS rating of this aircraft is an interesting point to ponder at as we know next to nothing about it. For all we know it could rival the best western fighters or just be practically non-existent. Nonetheless, it should be treated as at least equal until proven otherwise. Regarding SU-57, that thing is dead in the water & has been dead in the water for many years now. Shame because I have always had a bit of a soft spot for Russian Sukhois. Russia was already struggling trying to keep up with the Joneses for many years now & with their recent soiree in Ukraine, any dreams of Russia building a proper digital age military died with it. There were some images I saw a few weeks back from one of their SU-57s with the fuselage poorly held together with rivets leaving exposed gaps in several locations along the belly of the airframe which is disastrous when you are trying to maintain an ultra low RCS rating. Suffice to say, Russia is no longer competing with the rest of the big boys & is SoL for the near future.

[@mill2712]

I wonder if the Russian arms industry takes a massive hit, which country do you think will replace them?

[@zylaaeria2627]

@@mill2712 The elephant in the room would be China as they have started slowly dipping their toes into the export market these last few years. China has been known to take much of their legacy Soviet gear & engineering it to operate beyond it's designers original capabilities. In some cases, they have already surpassed the Russians. With Russian influence waning, China is poised to absorb a large chunk of that market. Wouldn't surprise if these next few years we start seeing Chinese tech emerge within insurgency groups as no doubt Beijing will eventually be forced to field test their hardware against NATO systems at some point. My next bet would be South Korea. S. Korea has a flourishing MIC & plenty of their systems are top class. I am expecting more countries to line up on that front these next coming years.

[@hughmungus2760]

@@mill2712 china is probably the best candidate for countries that are on bad terms with the west. But turkey and Iran are potential contenders.

[@humbleasian8866]

Thanks for your unbiased analysis. 👍

[@henghongzhu5191]

J20 very beautiful👍

[@silversurfergw]

the 2 seater version of j20 can become a command center for a group of stealth drone fighters and surveillance. a recent focus is the j35 for carriers.

[@kineticdeath]

a different take on the aussie "loyal wingman" project to have drones flying along side manned fighters? Though i see a 2 seat 5th gen platform as superior to the single seat F-35 lead ship for the loyal wingman system as the pilot just flies and leaves the back seater to handle the drones and technology

[@tylerclayton6081]

@@kineticdeath 2 seaters are only needed if you don’t posses the computing technology to make the drones completely autonomous. Future jets will be completely unmanned so they won’t even need a single pilot. The 6th generation American NGAD will have multiple autonomous drones being controlled by an optionally manned 6th generation aircraft. It’ll be in operational service by 2030

[@MGZetta]

@@tylerclayton6081 "autonomous" what do you mean? Lmao. You still have to give orders and micro manage drones much more effectively with more brains. imagine bunch of bots without command center.

[@testphone8379]

@@tylerclayton6081 the main problem is the long range communications, it is the weakness of the whole system. It is less of a problem if the commanding centre is at the local vicinity. AI might still have some way to go yet.

[@didyoumissedmegobareatersk2204]

2 seater is For Many of one purpose that is Another pilot can maneuver drone or perform drones Attck with helping Another one

[@amunra5330]

The J20 is not a multirole fighter. Its an interceptor- primary mission, taking out enemy AWACS, Re fuelers. Bombers

[@tomiputra3720]

I think there are a demo few days ago, and now we know the second seater is to be used for drone swarm controller and it is looks cool

[@cyrilio]

Request to do a video about the massive ‘HSL’ (High Speed Line/Hoge Snelheids Lijn) in the Netherlands. It’s a huge tunnel right through the country.

[@ydid687]

why do the plains people need a tunnel lol?

[@ex0duzz]

Just before some haters wanna talk about tofu dreg construction or whatever just remember that china is the ONLY country who has its human rates ION HALL THRUSTING space station currently orbiting earth. They've also done a soft landing and put a Rover on Mars. This was done in a 3 in 1 mission, where the orbiter, lander and rover were sent together and autonomously programmed to work in cooperation, using all new information gathered during the mission. For example. When they finally reached mars since it was China's first time, they spent months (like 6 months iirc) just to map mars using the orbiter. All the while this was going on, work and debate was going on earth to pick from the preselected potential landing sites(they weren't doing in totally blind even if NASA can't work directly with Chinese marijuana doesn't mean China doesn't also know what everyone else already does). Then China picked out the landing site, prayed it will survive the 6-14 minutes of terror(with all comms blackout), and luckily for China, it survived and made usas only peer these days in space even if Russia can get there they can't do anything with it alone unlike China can. China has also done moon return sample mission and succeeded, first time since 1970s someone brought material from the moon back. All 2.5 KG worth which china happily shared with the world's scientific community. This obviously includes USA also. China also put a drone on the far side of the moon that is always facing away from earth, so to achieve mission success, China needed to put a relay station in place to link up Rover with relay orbiter back earth. Maybe relay orbiter talks with other orbiter since China has sent at least 3 rovers to the moon(all successful), same with the incredibly ambitious and incredibly successful mars mission, and then of course how can we forget the permanent Chinese presence in space inside the Tiangong Chinese Space Station. Always 3 Taikonauts, and 6 crew at once for about 1-2 weeks during swap over of crew. So with that tofu dreg nonsense out of the way, back to the topic. China is the only other country apart from USA to bothbe able to and also to fully produce and maintain a fleet of thousands of 5tg gen fighters. I also heard that usa relies A LOT on Chinese IP and technology when it comes to raw minerals and refinement technologies since China mines, refines and research and developes everything that they are the world's most advanced asn have the most full top to bottom supply chain as the world's factory also. Stuff like gallium which is essential for semiconductors and other high tech stuff comes as a by product of refining other stuff that China needs to define anyway as the worlds factory But something is telling me China is going for 6th Gen and have all drones do dangerous or unknown work. Even if usa oe anyone jams or takes out thar oir of the thousands you sent in formation, you will now know exactly where the target is and the drone swarm can just kill it automatically. Even if you had a whole carrier group with you, how many missiles do you have vs Chinas drones? DJI already dominates and has like 75-80% of the whole global civilian drone market. Even american soldiers buy and use this, Same as both sides in Ukraine war. America gov banned the jsd of dni drones by us military but many sjs not care since it's their lives on the line. In the end usa tried to make their own domestic version but ended up with a drone that cost twice as much and with half the capability. On the battlefield as the eyes and ears, the costs of losing the "drone wars* vs China will be the eye opening moment for USA and west as China restructures it's economy into war time configuration and our producers usa 100-1 or even 250-1. Just like Soviet Union, it will spend itself into collapse. Ita just simple maths and logic. China already produces EVERYTHING for the WHOLE WORLD, and with "civil/military" fusion which every country has and would use in war time, just who and how is anyone going to beat China in a war of attrition, assuming that no one is crazy and dumb enough to attack China proper either conventionally or nuclear wise. Against except Russia since they have a massive land mass, China could literally destroy all their capital cities in less than 30 minutes tops and for every country except China, Russia and USA, this just means doom. The nuclear contamination where leave nowhere to hide in small countries like SK, Japan Taiwan,.Singapore etc etc. Even Australia without its 6-7 major cities is basically done as a country. It would be like a literal mad max society afterwards. All in all, a war vs China who's the longest, most successful continuous civilization in all of recorded human history and who has faced dozens, even hundreds of existential threats that have been much much worse then conceivable today, even after such a setback or loss, life must go on, the Chinese people must still eat and Chinese civilization will undoubtedly continue. You can't kill a concept that is in the hearts of 20% Chinese themselves, buf include the world and how much affect China has in it and it would be near 100%. You'd have to be living in a cave for over 5000 to not know the contributions China has given the world over millennia. Like compass, paper, printing press, fiat currency/money, guns and gunpowder, missiles and rockets, silk, ceramics/china etc. Now Chinese innovation is back like Huawei 5g which is why USA tried to destroy their biggest threat.

[@rahu9125]

It doesn't matter if it's a copycat. It's a killing machine, not an artwork. As long as it can kill, even an 1:1 copy is still formidable

[@bbbzhong4166]

杀美国佬的

[@Mukdener]

indeed

[@Patrick-857]

Chinese tech usually looks good but performs poorly. In this case the archillies heel is that the Chinese don't quite have the material science figured out when it comes to the engines, so they can't do sustained high thrust without melting the engines.

[@macturner2196]

@@Patrick-857 Well, Chinese alloys aren't known for being great. I doubt everything they say. They're not imaginative.

[@amackzie]

@@Patrick-857 they are using russian engines and seeking to replace them

[@dzus123]

It definitely is hard to rate a plane that has most of its details hidden. 1. Detecting stealth fighters is nothing new, low frequency radars can do that; however, getting a weapons grade lock with a high frequency radar is extremely difficult. India's claims about tracking the J-20 therefore make sense, but tell us nothing about the plane's stealth capabilities. It is safe to assume it is less stealth than US planes, but equal to or better than Russia's Su-57 (canards do hurt its stealth abilities) 2. The design is probably based of the MiG 1.44 blueprints MiG sold to China in the 90s. While the basis may be the MiG 1.44, this is not a carbon copy and China did do more than just a couple of changes. 3. The largest weakness of the J-20 is its engines. Making jet engines is ridiculously hard, being considered a type of art rather than science by many in the field. China has zero past experience with jet engines and it shows when compared to the Russian engines. Russia inherited the experience of the USSR, which was still behind the US in jet engines. While the domestic engines are a breakthrough, the US will enjoy superiority in this aspect for many years to come.

[@种花家-f4r]

中国国产发动机已经成功换装了，兄弟

[@alancox5777]

It’s kinda like with F1. There’s a set of parameters and to meet them you get convergent designs. And yes they may have copied some tech and reversed engineered some tech but when it comes to tech it can sometimes be harder to understand why stolen tech works and to figure out how to produce it than to develop it yourself

[@tarikahmad4749]

yeah its looking so beautiful

[@556to762]

seeing someone on your radar is not the same as having the ability to lock and kill a target

[@ttemp2631]

You cannot copy a copy a fighter jet, or it must be identical. Any changes on the design affect the aerodynamics of the jet.

[@minus21334]

you cant copy a jet as complex aerodynamically as j20 periodt. The first jet to feature leveled canard-delta+fairing......the flight control system has to be pretty damning to allow this jet to fly in stable motion alone...given its destabilizing design trait.

[@jameskreger3932]

Yeah but if I start with an F-86 and you start with an F-22 guess who builds an advanced modern fighter jet. Like that’s a dramatic hypothetical but you get what I mean.

[@minus21334]

@@jameskreger3932 neither can teach you how to design a destabilizing trait fighter jet

[@suberchen3604]

From the program and comments, I didn't see any professional opinions. J20 is a fighter jet different from other existing design concepts. Its appearance features, as well as its difficult and complex detailed gas design, are all centered on the supersonic mode of air combat setting. In addition to having a similar low RCS design to other stealth fighters, it is a completely new species. The design scheme must pass the large-scale wind tunnel test before it can be finalized, which is by no means a complex work that can be completed. In addition, if the manufacturing process is not up to a very high standard, you can't make stealth fighter jets. It is a demonstration of the whole industry of a country, not just the design level. The SU-57 is an example. It is a good design, but the overall level of Russian industry does not make it as good as it should be.

[@누런피부에짐승을뿌리]

J20 targets heavy attack aircraft，At present, the engine has been replaced with a turbofan 15，Its air combat capability is comparable to F22...The advantage is that the control ability is very strong, and the coefficient can reach 2.0.Of course, J20 only has a strong anti air capability, and is relatively weak against the ground and sea.At present, J20 has deployed 5 squadrons, about 150 sorties, and may expand to 300 sorties in the future，Now China's focus is on the J35, and the benchmark is the F35 light fighter

[@gnahzli4639]

you knew too much, just relax neighbor. lol

[@Patrick-857]

Shame that China can't make a decent engine because they're unable to figure out the material science. China can't do metallurgy very well, they never have.

[@watb8689]

just to update the J-20 has a squadron fitted with WS-15 about more than 20 of them

[@andrewsuryali8540]

I call bullshit on this... only "source" we have is Song Zhongping.

[@lilunchengsmiles]

Are you sure? Where is the source?

[@ServantofGod904]

Thanks for the video.

[@Aromatize]

Let's be honest here what hasn't China stolen ? And to add just because you copy someone else idea doesn't make it better just means your always behind.

[@huwzebediahthomas9193]

My specialty was avionics development and testing. Imagine back engineering software code? A near impossible nightmare to do - pitfalls galore... 😎

[@Spright91]

I'm just an average software developer. I imagine it would be easier just to create new software than to reverse engineer something like that.

[@Robert53area]

My specialty is cybersecruity and coding. Depends, back engineering coding wouldn't be as hard as back engineering a mechanical component, because once you back engineer the mechanical side, I would just write a physical code to make the component work, I wouldn't work it backwards. Just the mechanical side, if you can get an intact code blueprint, the script keys will give you the language for the codes, needed for each action. The easiest thing, China could do is look at a design mechanically design something similar and just write the code, is what I am saying.

[@Robert53area]

@@Spright91 I agree, I would just write a whole new code for the mechanical components. The only needed to reverse engineer is the mechanical side. Then from there, design your own and test functionality for the desired outcome. For instance if the j20 doesn't have a cannon, the long body and only 6 missle slots, I would come to the conclusion the internal fuel bay is huge, meaning it's sole purpose is designed to do long range tanker and skyeye attacks. Arm it with harm missles or develop a missle like the russian r37 for long range interceptions.

[@zhishulu3244]

I really really REALLY enjoyed watching this video. Your very neutral opinion based on available info and humble calm attitude is something this world needs more of. Thank you, I loved every second and will continue to support u

[@whalehands]

Their canards may be the most stealthy ever made, but canards are a big radar cross-section when they are moving. I'm sure they can lock them into place in while cruising. If they need to maneuver quickly, they'll need them. It most likely generates most of its lift from its main is fuselage. With small delta styled wings, the canards are a big part of its maneuvering.

[@MGZetta]

Good thing you don't need to "maneuver quickly" when you're not detected. Lol.

[@dsdy1205]

Canards need not take up the maneuvering as the J20 also has elevons. Clever programming of the FCS can lock the canards to particular trim angles while elevons and TVC handle maneuvering. Helpfully, the need for agile maneuvering only really presents itself when you're close enough that stealth doesn't matter anyway, so this probably isn't that great of a loss

[@biochemwang2421]

Canards are automatically a big radar cross-section? There are multiple ways hiding the canards into the airplane projection. BTW, what if the canards are made of radar-penetrating material?

[@whalehands]

@@biochemwang2421 I'm sure they are made up of radar absorbing materials. We have no idea how much China has perfected this material though. What I'm saying is when those things are deflecting back and forth, even just a little it's going to add to the radar cross-section.

[@whalehands]

@@dsdy1205 yeah I wondered if the canards themselves are programmed to be as stealthy as possible when maneuvering towards a target. Pitching up and down to what would be suited best for a stealth profile. While using just the rear ailerons to maneuver. There is a video that shows the J20 maneuvering with the canards locked in place.

[@rebelvision8247]

You are so kind to call the Chinese J20 a bastard child, you must be the leading expert in aviation or some famous critic of everything Chinese is bad!! So much to learn from people like you!! Keep up the good work of you bashing Chinese campaign, and come up with some more bad comments for anything Chinese next time 👍🏻 BTW, I love your hair style, who’s your barber??

[@Patrick-857]

Oh look a wumou. Why are you all so rude just like your government? You know that's not how you win people to your side.

[@machdaddy6451]

The F-22 is almost twenty years old and the rest of the world is still trying to catch up.

[@ehabali7303]

You know there's something called upgrading right, it's like sayings ios is 15 years old

[@machdaddy6451]

@@ehabali7303 It is being upgraded...but then you knew that right?

[@game1mail324]

Awesome Jet !

[@MirorR3fl3ction]

the most important thing here i think is that China has the mass production capacity that Russia lacks, which means they could actually compete with the US properly. the biggest thing in military readiness isnt just tech advances, its also the ability to produce equipment and deploy it. Russia has proven this with their complete failure in the skies even though they have "better tech". just because you can build a 5th gen fighter doesn't mean you can win a war with them

[@jacobrogers2214]

There is a lot of nuance here. Low frequency radar can see an F-22 100 miles away. But you cannot get a weapons lock with low frequency. Another consideration is that the radar absorbent materials degrade with temperature and ablate with speed. So supersonic fighters have degradation of material. There are some ceramic materials coming to light that might be able to help with this but for the time being those coatings are a big factor. Production tolerances are key here. Otherwise you’ll be flying while covered in RAM tape.

[@allgood6760]

Awesome plane!... thanks Simon✈️👍🇳🇿

[@BIGLY012]

How long does it take you to research these videos? They're incredibly informative and a delight to watch.

[@fenrir834]

as long as it takes to read the wikipedia Page

[@subasthapa4839]

@@fenrir834 fact

[@HEATSEEKR]

The Mig-28 is simply the better jet. Pure antagonist energy.

[@arioch2112]

I now know why I've always thought the J-20 reminded me of a short necked Firefox from the 80s movie with Clint Eastwood.

[@wayneaustin5533]

The PL-15 is a strong missile

[@johndawson6057]

Lol

[@ddruprup12ify]

Hasn’t been proven in combat yet

[@kongwee1978]

@@ddruprup12ify Yup, US Air Force doesn't have 300km missile so PL-15 should be a scam. /s

[@陈晨-y7r]

@@kongwee1978 you don't understand chinese people, for example , The Chinese say the Long March 5 has a carrying capacity of 25 tons, so if you look at the spacecraft it sent into space it would weigh 25 tons and even have a capacity of 30 tons. Not only did our rockets not lie about their thrust, they said they had less. Easterners and Westerners think differently, but both are excellent. So don't say it's a lie

[@xt7519]

I think you are missing something. It's more than possible that the Chinese put the canards on for stability reasons. Stealing some of the plans doesn't automatically ensure you can build the same fighter, it just might give you some insights and short cuts, but you still need to make it work. I don't think it's nearly as ridiculous as you are making it out to be that China stole the plans and then used them to build out the J-20, especially the stealth aspects. It's kind of what China does after all...that's how they finally got homegrown jet engines after all.

[@power2ix605]

As of today, the WS-15 engine has completed its first flight. China is well on its way to becoming the leading superpower in aircraft.

[@cikame]

I've always thought it looks a bit strange, it's very long like a limo, it reminds me of the Foxbat in that way like it's designed to be a fast interceptor and the twin engines support that, but the canards add drag which doesn't support that, the canards do increase maneuverability but it doesn't seem to have the thrust vectoring to make it super maneuverable, so it's like a Typhoon but longer and probably heavier. So in a roundabout way they've ended up with basically an F-35 but maybe less stealthy due to the added surfaces, the lack of a cannon supports that since the F-35 is about fighting with advanced weapons more than dog fighting, the length gives it more stowed munitions which supports that further, so now it's entirely about their advanced weapons and systems and we probably won't know anything about that unless one suddenly lands on a NATO runway, it could be pure magic inside but it's a little suspect on the outside :P.

[@jetli740]

it does have thrust vectoring

[@cikame]

@@jetli740 That thing'll probably flip like crazy then. It would make sense to have a cannon if they decided to give it that much dogfighting capability, i'm guessing it's hidden like the F-22's.

[@jetli740]

@@cikame modern warfare missile replay cannon.

[@accountantthe3394]

The slender body is pretty deceiving but it's merely ~1meter longer than F22. I do think the length of the body is to accommodate the long (physically) missiles with 200km long range tho.

[@tonypeng1815]

It's shorter than Flanker

[@simonyip5978]

About 250 x J-20 are already in service with the PLA Airforce. They are intended to be able to take out the AWACS, IFR, EW and reconnaissance and surveillance aircraft.

[@PlugInRides]

The J-20 doesn't look just like an F-35, but the Shenyang FC-31/J-35, is pretty spot on, except for having a twin engine layout.

[@didyoumissedmegobareatersk2204]

😂Lmao Even as a chinese fan boy..i can clearly say that j35 is pure copy of f35 crappy lmao

[@kongwee1978]

Even look more closer than F22.

[@mariajiao4855]

@@didyoumissedmegobareatersk2204 no it looks better than the f35

[@hughmungus2760]

@@didyoumissedmegobareatersk2204 time will tell if its better or worse than the F35. If properly engineered it probably won't have any of the stupid teething problems of the F35 or habit of falling into the ocean.

[@worldtraveler8613]

Modern fighter manufacturers no longer make jets that can dogfight but they forget you still need high g maneuverability to defeat sams and amraams, etc

[@kieranh2005]

Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen disagree with you.

[@Robert53area]

I would say that, just different approaches to problems. The US airwings are designed for specific purposes and each having different roles and ment to be used in conjunction as a combined wing. So it works for the US as they have a large airwing. Others don't have as large so they design them for the ability to do other things but sacrifice other things. Example the refale, typhoons, gripens are all light canard agile fighters but lack the range and energy retention of say the f15. The mig 29 a light airframe can handle better than some su30s which have canard, but it lacks the range the heavier fighter has. That is the problem, most people are not looking at, everyone wants this best to beat all, and that's not how engineering works, you design something to address a need or problem and to fit a doctrine. Even the US looked into canard with the nasal version of the f15, to equip the canard they had to remove the cannon. American pilots didn't want to do that. Nasal also noted the canard caused only advantages at low air speed, which goes against US doctrine of energy retention. With stealth aircraft the f22 went a different direction, it is still considered one of the most agile fighters ever, because of its limitations on avionics it is a true air superiority fight highly agile and focused more on its stealth, with the inability to add in helmet mounted sights, and data link. But in a dogfighting role it is unmatched. The su57 goes a different approach, not as stealthy as the f22 it has abilities the f22 does not, the ability to track and target at longer ranges, data link to both human and drone piloted aircraft. As it was designed to lead a flight of 3 air to air drone fighters. This is addressing the need of russia to put fighters in the air with too low of a manpower to fill with actual aircraft.

[@hughmungus2760]

Despite what games like DCS might depict, evading a missile with aerobatic manoeuvrability is generally considered impossible, when engaged modern fighters tend to run the other way and rely on how good their engines are to outrun a missile rather than try to dodge it.

[@worldtraveler8613]

@@hughmungus2760 i dont believe you can out run a missle traveling at mach 3 or mach 4 with any aircraft. The most you could do is run long enough (if you have enough distance already) to hope the missle runs out of gas, so to speak. Cause i think they can only track and stay airborn for so many seconds. But anyway dcs is based on the best flight model data available to the public, and probably some thats not. Its damn near the same simulation professional pilots use. Plus i have seen interviews on Vietnam pilots who had to defend against sams. Now you can say we are flying stealth aircraft now but honestly the majority of the US fleet is still f15, f16, and f18.

[@hughmungus2760]

@@worldtraveler8613 the 'no escape zone' of a missile is determined by how fast the missile is and how fast the plane is, the faster the plane the smaller the 'no escape zone' typically, even long range missiles only have a range of around 20km against a fleeing enemy. any further and the missile runs out of fuel before it reaches the target. that being said No escape zones of SAMs tend to be alot larger because they tend to be much larger missiles. while air to air missiles are very limited in their size.

[@NeMayful]

Thank you for the content!

[@CautionCU]

It's very important to understand context with descriptions like this. The Chinese military is ONLY configured for regional conflicts on many different levels. This means that things like force projection in Taiwan are on the menu while Japan is far less likely. I think that a budget f35 with 4 missiles is plenty enough to defend their homeland and is consistent with their overall defensive strategic posture.

[@outman6207]

If we are talking about Taiwan....why PLA need j20? PLA is famous for their super long range rocket launcher. And PLA's mission is to defeat anyone within first island chain.

[@chrisdoulou8149]

You’re confusing regional conflicts with local defence. China is preparing to fight a regional conflict in the worlds largest region, the Pacific Ocean. Range matters, payload matters, it’s why the J20 is basically a modern day P-38 Lightning, it’s designed to fill the same role

[@ronaldwang9838]

F-35 core processor is PowerPC 7448 with 90nm technology note chip. F-22 core processor is PowerPC 603 with 500nm technology note chip, while J-20 core processor is 28-40nm technology note chip. F-35 radar APG-81 is AESA with gallium arsenide second generation semiconductor technology, 1676 T/R modules, F-22 radar APG-77 is AESA with gallium arsenide second generation semiconductor technology, 1956 T/R modules, Power 20kw(peak), while J-20 radar KLJ-5 1475 is AESA with gallium nitride third generation semiconductor technology, 2200 T/R modules, power 100kw.

[@aidenbaker8376]

Soo?.. which one is better ? If you don't mind me asking

[@ronaldwang9838]

@@aidenbaker8376 All real performance data are unknown, but judging from the current technology used, the J-20 is ahead in all aspects.

[@underworldblu]

Unrelated topic but...........that's one COOL sweater. Awesome!

[@mazdamaniac4643]

When do we expect this aircraft to be available for sale on Amazon?

[@subasthapa4839]

Never

[@Shubham_Bahirat]

Many experts said because of those engines and canards they're not completely stealth. It's 4.5 Gen i think f35 and 22 are only stealth jets till date.

[@Fauzanarief-n7i]

Well some us us future fighter concept are using canard too, so no. Canard won't make fighter not stealthy

[@Chris-hb6jt]

@@Fauzanarief-n7i lol the 3 cent army is here

[@hellothere1656]

@@Chris-hb6jt Lmao say anything remotely good about China and u get labelled as a "3 cent army".

[@hellothere1656]

The canards have trim control ability like the eurofighter typhoon which removes the disadvantages it has on stealth. The Chinese wouldn't have chosen to give its stealth jet canards if it compromised its stealth. The engine nozzles on the production aircraft also seem to be as stealthy as that on the f35. Besides I see a lot of people talking about stealth yet forget about the avionics which may be more important. The j20 has more modern avionics than the f22. Only the f35s avionics could be considered as modern or better but the j20 has a much larger AESA radar than the f35. Now even if the f22's old 90s era radar is somehow as good as the j20, it doesn't have IRST or EOTS so would be in a major disadvantage if it came across a j20 that could lock onto the f22s infra-red signature, bypassing its stealth characteristics.

[@sofascialistadankulamegado1781]

Spot on. The J-20 has been dubbed a 4.5 but its actually just a 4th gen. To pursue thrust vectoring and supercruise is such a weird priority for a 5th gen fighter. 5th gen weapons capability and information systems are what makes a 5th gen fighter nowadays. Even stealth is beginning to sit at importance around 4th gen setups. The F-15EX only lacks stealth and advanced situational awareness and information fusion in order for it to be a 5th gen fighter in my opinion. But the F-15EX fits in well with a coordinated 5th gen multirole combat system. The F-15EX can be purposed as a launch platform for 5th gen weapons once F-35s gather enough information when performing direct attack or loitering missions.

[@luisito6314]

Looks way better than the felon

[@twood2032]

I am really interested in both China and the US's 6th generation fighter jet, since both countries is in uncharted waters, it will be interesting to see what they turn out to be. The thing we know for sure is that both of their next generation fighter jets will be a tailless design.

[@petrairene]

There are several European 6th gen fighter projects, too.

[@twood2032]

@@petrairene Yes, there are, but the reason I did not mention them because they will be highly likely behind of both the US and Chinese program. Both the US and China have already been working on it and been spotted here and there; however, the European program is nowhere to be seen.

[@christianvillarreal4764]

@@twood2032 dude. No. China should not even be involved in any conversation if Europe or America is involved. China don't even have a aircraft carrier to carry. Then close to any country. We have 11 in service holding 35 jets each. 15 plus helicopter carriers. What there gonna make a one trip to the USA and back with those things. That won't even be able to fly anything close to our country to re fuel them.

[@ed-te1fp]

It may not even be a traditional "fighter" armed with weapons. Things may change, but based on the publically available NGAD requirements, there is a good chance that this will be an integrated set of systems involving at least one manned plane and a fleet of drones. It should have superior AWACS-type capabilities, electronics for drone coordination and battlespace control, long-range, improved stealth, and a drone swarm. Exactly how much is handled by the manned plane and how much by the drones isn't disclosed but one scenario is the manned plane focuses on overall coordination and the drones do the work normally handled by traditional fighters but without the limitations of human pilots.

[@jackwang1238]

​@@petrairene 欧洲在电脑上搞出了六代机的效果图，五代机的研制，中美如此庞大的经济实力都感到吃力，先进战机所需要的研发经费、工程师数量、零件供应商都是惊人的，除了中美，俄罗斯都已经跟不上队伍。

[@johnc1014]

As an American, I'm not too worried about China, or any other nation for that matter. Yes, our government sees them as a military rival. But, unless we really go to war with them, I don't see their advances as a problem. I think every country should develop themselves and seek after their own best interests. Likewise, each should seek thrir own security interests. If they stole military technology from the U.S., that just means we need better security. I would prefer the U.S. stop being threatened by others and start focusing on more domestic issues. Our government should be there more to simply protect American individual rights. Meanwhile, the public can interact with people of other nations however they like. Trade with China and do business abroad. Leave our governemnt out of it. It always seems like our government creates tensions with other governments that just make it harder on average citizens. Unless someone actually attacks us, I have no interest in seeing any other country as an enemy.

[@dravenvea2605]

rational

[@武统呆蛙-j1l]

可惜 美国的发展一直建立在别国的痛苦之上 所以思维定式认为中国是威胁

[@johnc1014]

@@武统呆蛙-j1l 实际上，美国的发展更多是基于市场资本主义和消费主义。 我们的军事发展只是其中的一个副作用。 如果我的文笔不好请见谅。 我正在使用谷歌翻译，因为我不会说中文。

[@YH-eh3nt]

真

[@Wildcat144]

The heavy use of "allegedly", "supposedly" and "hypothetically" in this video speaks volumes lol

[@TalesOfWar]

Lack of a canon means nothing. If you need to use such a thing in an air-to-air engagement in modern combat something went very, very, very wrong.

[@jeffeby2218]

For multirole air to ground, a cannon might be very useful.

[@thomaszhang3101]

@Karl Bush During the Vietnam war, USAF added a gun to their F-4, while the Navy chose to train aerial combat using close range missiles, cia the Top Gun program. The naval pilots ended up scored a higher K/D ratio than their cannon equipped air force counterparts. Since Vietnam war, the percentage of kills scored by guns dropped steadily until dessert storm, when less than 1% of the kills are done with guns. Now during the Ukrainian war, no air to air kills were recorded using gun. The only instance is when a Russian Su-35 made a gun run on an Ukrainian transport helicopter. The Su-35 missed the gun shot, turned around and finished the helicopter off with a missile.

[@sharequsman596]

@Karl Bush the missles back then were way worse

[@trolleriffic]

@Karl Bush Yeah, like in Vietnam where missiles got the majority of kills. Also, in case you haven't realised, THE VIETNAM WAR WAS OVER 50 YEARS AGO FFS!!! That was the last time any US aircraft got a guns kill in a dogfight and no combat jet anywhere in the world has won a dogfight using its gun since 1988.

[@mojothemigo]

@@trolleriffic I thought it was in the Gulf war in ''91?

[@Vermilion2049]

This video is very good. Unbiased.

[@BoomerZ.artist]

I've seen this rerun before. "russian has the most advance fighter." one defects to japan "nvm, its a piece of shit." Also other countries have a huge problem with maintenance and keeping things up to date. Russian has this problem, it's a huge army on paper. Then they invade a little country and can't defeat a couple drones or resupply its troops effectively. It's all Kabuki theater.

[@ivanivanovitchivanovsky7123]

Iirc that defecting plane was a MiG-25(?) which was for a completely different role than the Americans thought it was for. Not so much completely trash but rather built for another role. But yeah, their planes have generally been inferior.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

Nobody ever said the MiG-25 was a piece of shit when it was new, even after the defection. That's a myth. When Belenko defected the US was actually surprised and horrified at what the plane could do and how optimized it actually was. The myth is a misunderstanding of the scathing review given to the plane's horribly outdated radar and avionics. The rest of the plane was actually incredibly advanced for its time. The problem stems from a misunderstanding of what the Soviets wanted the MiG-25 to do. The collective West had thought it was meant to operate like a more modern, more independent, fighter aircraft. Instead the plane was meant to be directed by proper ground-based radars, dash like a missile, launch its missiles at the target designated by the ground-based radars, then come back. The plane was hyper-optimized for the wrong kind of air warfare. It was a very outdated way of thinking about air defense, so the plane, while being a technical marvel, was always hampered by the conservatism of its planners. Ironically, the Soviet planners listened to the harsh criticism of their enemies and responded by fixing the problems. That's why the MiG-31 was designed with a totally different mindset, relying on its own extremely powerful radar to independently search, track, and attack enemy fighters.

[@ivanivanovitchivanovsky7123]

@@andrewsuryali8540 yeah the MiG-25 was an interceptor for fast aircraft such as bombers like the B1 Lancer and other reconnaissance aircraft and such. It’s a hit and run, which many people fail to realise, not a talk and control the air.

[@nickgiotis6206]

@@andrewsuryali8540 I'm fairly sure it was heaping junk pile. Iirc It was so poorly built they thought it was a test plane that had seen extensive repair work with terrible welds and seemingly random reinforcements welded all over it. Leaked oil and fuel. Was so heavy it could barely fly which is hilarious since Russia has so much titanium but was too primitive to make large pieces of titanium while the us had entire airframe made of it. Was only capable of a third of its stated top speed.

[@ivanivanovitchivanovsky7123]

@@nickgiotis6206 … you have managed to make yourself look like a clown my guy. The Americans thought theMiG-25 was an air superiority fighter, so they were surprised when they found out it wasn’t good at being manoeuvrable, which isn’t even the role of the MiG-25. It’s literally one of the fastest planes in service, so already you’re spouting rubbish with your “muh could barely fly” garbage. It’s an interceptor, not an air superiority, it’s built to boom and zoom, shoot and scoot. It’s not a good plane for the air superiority role but it’s a good interceptor, it does what it’s designed to do well.

[@AZ-hj8ym]

The biggest different between the two is that J-20 can command 4+ drones carrying dozens of bombs and missiles while F-35 can only hold 4 misslies.

[@11Tits]

F-35 can hold 6 aim260s in the main bay and 2 aim9xs in the side bays, and another 2 on external stores. And depending on the version it can have a internal gun. And there are no current drones in service (oh wait the us have multiple… which the F-35s can take control and command over), however no record of china using them. So idk where you pulled your bullshit from 😂

[@Gongolongo]

Stealth fighters use Lunenburg Lenses during non war times. It's common practice even for the US. India does not operate fifth gen fighters so they aren't aware that fifth gen are not utilizing their stealth capabilities during normal CAP.

[@王乾宇-m1b]

When you are still hesitating whether it is copied or not, it has become a queen bee, J-20S with two pilots, can control more than 3 drones

[@canis2020]

Prepare for the Chinese military stans ....

[@AtheistOrphan]

They employ people called Stan?

[@Patrick-857]

@@AtheistOrphan Technically the term is wumou, and this comment section is crawling with them. They are accounts run by people paid by the Chinese government to spread propaganda. They tend to get really angry when you tell them the truth about their government, because they are completely ignorant about anything other than the CCP narrative. True believers. It's kind of sad.

[@simonakos5179]

Me: Can we get f35 lightning 2 5th generation stealths fighter Mom: we have f35 lightning 2 5th generation stealths fighter at home. The f35 lightning 2 5th generation stealths fighter at home: j20

[@norad_clips]

Consider that current 5th gen fighters are generally detectable by modern radar. What matters is if you can get a missile lock and shoot it down. That is rather difficult, so I hear.

[@petrairene]

Heat seekers will lock onto anything that emits suitable amounts of heat, doesn't matter if it has a radar signature or not.

[@norad_clips]

@@petrairene indeed, but heat seekers are often shorter range

[@chrisdoulou8149]

@@norad_clips Modern IR missiles have longer range than their predecessors, most with a 20-30km range. The idea is that long waveband radars from awacs/drones/ground stations give a rough location, interceptors equipped with IRST and IR missiles can lock down and engage the target.

[@norad_clips]

@@chrisdoulou8149 indeed

[@EroticOnion23]

So are "stealth" planes already obsolete?? 🤔

[@shinha]

If making a plane is as easy as 'copycat', then every country can make such plane.

[@flames100000]

Video on history of capability and functionality of air refilling

[@raggedtoothfromgomehcrew5966]

That is one beautiful dragon 🐉

[@GrayFlare]

Still waiting on a video about the F22 Raptor :(

[@rekrapnosduh]

Same :(

[@TheBooban]

Why? So many vids on it. This one too actually.

[@gio957]

The great thing about the j20 is it can make the chinese 6th gen even better.

[@PolymurExcel]

I thought he did that video a while ago?

[@PolymurExcel]

Oh wait, no he didn’t, that was the F23.

[@MarkMiller304]

2 seater variant is for loyal wingman drone operator. It would be good to get more info on that.

[@baba-vh7hb]

f35 confronted j20 near south china sea and lost the battle

[@EAcapuccino]

A Chinese 🇨🇳 beauty of the skies! Not as advanced as its American or Russian counterparts F22 Su 57, but still a cool plane!

[@firehawk5962]

I can assure you, it is far more advanced than an SU-57, both in radar cross section and performance. The SU-57 is held together with literal wood screws, and has the radar cross section close to that of an unladen f-18. It's a 4.5th gen fighter wearing a fake moustache.

[@EAcapuccino]

@@firehawk5962 Aside from yours, I have come across conflicting sources of Intel 🤔

[@firehawk5962]

@@EAcapuccino There is a reason we haven't seen any in Ukraine. I think it's a red flag that Russia's "next gen" Fighter hasn't been seen doing anything but cobra maneuvers at airshows.

[@EAcapuccino]

​@Firehawk596 Russia 🇷🇺 didn't provide Air support to their invasion or - military exercise - full stop never mind their Top of the Range fighter jet. Too valuable or too few(?) Or simply not good enough

[@davidwong4821]

Thanks for being kind of semi-fair to China over copying accusations. China may have developed it independently unless you have solid proof it didn’t, China has a lot of good scientists and engineers.

[@johnthumble5154]

He was too fair the Chinese government has no credibility and is know for dishonest. If they claim they designed and built they have to prove it given their track record.

[@matthewmckinney5387]

The J-20 main target would be our awacs, our awacs would be able to see it at around 100 to 15 miles out but the j-20 has long range air to air missiles and can fire before 100 miles out. The F-22 is still the superior fighter

[@hughmungus2760]

im skeptical AWACS would fly that close to the front lines at all since SAMs like the S400 have specialised ultra long range missiles designed to home in on radiation sources like AWACS

[@matthewmckinney5387]

@@hughmungus2760 the tactic would be to use j-15s as distraction so the j-20s can flank the awacs, awacs can see about 300 miles but won't detect the j-20 til 150 or less. That give the j-20 plenty of room to do this.

[@EurojuegosBsAs]

Yep, but you dont need 200+ airframes for just that. Those numbers demand a multirole use.

[@royk7712]

j-20 is pretty much a sniper stealth fighter to destroy high value target like awacs, SAM and even ships. maybe china need close combat j-20 variant to battle f-35

[@Ob1sdarkside]

That's a large body, obviously meant to give lift, but there are features that act against stealth. It looks like a mash up of current Western aircraft. Thrust vectoring and supercruise missing

[@sofascialistadankulamegado1781]

Your suspicions are more fact than not. Even if thrust vectoring and supercruise were available on the J-20, that would still make it a 4th gen. Thrust vectoring is old school and practically useless against a wave of long range 5th gen missiles taking out their airfields and radar. The J-20 could do with the supercruise to try to get as close as possible to a swarm of F-35s but from the data, the F-35 would splash a J-20 before it even had a chance to see an F-35 on radar.

[@N-A762]

@@sofascialistadankulamegado1781 exactly most people dont realize the f35 has passive radar lol.

[@domokun845]

WS-15 engine will have both thrust vectoring and supercruise, in fact its already present in the less powerful WS-10 engines for J-10 jets. The platforms are never static, they go thru iteration and enhancement. The stealth coating also plays a big part as well as shaping, just because it's wide doesn't mean it's not stealthy. Never rest on your laurels and dismiss threats without doing your research

[@_Chad_ThunderCock]

@@N-A762 ASEA radars is not only available on f35 dumbaśs, the Chinese, European typhoon & Rafale all have ASEA radars What's your point exactly?

[@_Chad_ThunderCock]

@@sofascialistadankulamegado1781 why would you still classify it as 4th gen? "F35s from data" we barley have any decent info on j20s avionics/electronic warfare capabilities isn't it naive to assume the j20 would lose or is patriotism clouding your judgement?

[@egomaniac8510]

The spynese can build and posture all they want. Fact is they are just a show of force with zero combat experience.

[@wernerc.432]

J-20 Mighty Paper Dragon