Another note; the early RAF exampls of the Eurofighter Typhoon (air-to-air only) are designated F2, but the later ones (with ground-attack capability) are known FGR4:

 

RAF announcement

Another note; the early RAF exampls of the Eurofighter Typhoon (air-to-air only) are designated F2, but the later ones (with ground-attack capability) are known FGR4:

 

Yeah, I'm aware of the different designations and capabilities, but since the RAF Typhoon was created in a single entry, with both air to air and air to ground capabilities, it will be very problematic to divide them now into separate entries because of the potential for negative effects on folks' scenarios.

Once we get some actual hard data, we're going to need the "J-20".

Once we get some actual hard data, we're going to need the "J-20".

 

At the rate that photos and info have been coming out in the past few days, it should not be long before at least provisional data becomes available.

 

Though I have to admit that I am not yet sold on whether the J-20 we've seen is actually operational, even as a prototype.

 

It should make for 'interesting' Westpac scenarios.

Does anyone see merit in adding the J-20 to the HCDB as a hypothetical platform, for the sake of scenario building (just as I have done with the T-50 PAK FA)? Even with provisional, and probably inaccurate, specs?

Does anyone see merit in adding the J-20 to the HCDB as a hypothetical platform, for the sake of scenario building (just as I have done with the T-50 PAK FA)? Even with provisional, and probably inaccurate, specs?

 

I definitely see merit in its inclusion, even in hypothetical form. This single platform may make a measurable difference in the ability to help Taiwan. It may also enable China to walk all over India with impunity. It doesn't have to be an F-22 to do those things. So I think such a potential game changer would be useful for exploration of the assumptions we are each making about that very impact.

I agree too, from the usually breathless AUSA:

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-J-XX-Prototype.html

 

And from the China Naval and Air power, 2 salient points:

 

Size - I think one thing that really shocked a lot of people is how large J-20 is or at least how large it appears to be. The original photos lead certain people like Bill Sweetman to conclude that J-20 has "overall length of 75 ft. and a wingspan of 45 ft. or more, which would suggest a takeoff weight in the 75,000-80,000-lb. class with no external load". With those assumptions, many concluded this to be designed in the role of fighter-bomber as F-111. However, recent analysis on Chinese bbs of the size of J-20 vs truck beside it compared to the size of J-10 vs the same truck yielded the conclusion that J-20 is more likely around 19 to 20 m long, which would make it shorter than flankers. Even when we factor in what appears to be greater fuel load and internal weapon bay, it should still be about the same size as flankers. Personally, I kind of see J-20 as replacing the role of flankers in PLAAF in the future. It would have to be capable of handling more long range strike missions than flankers, but it would most likely serve as the heavy fighter jet in hi-lo combination.

 

Engine - This is probably one of the biggest mysteries surrounding J-20. What is the engine that it is using right now? We know that WS-15 is still years away from being ready. We know that AL-31F and FWS-10 would be vastly underpowered options for J-20. So, I would think the most obvious solution in the early stages of testing would either be 117S or some upgraded variants of FWS-10. Since upgraded variants of FWS-10 are not ready yet, 117S is most likely the engine on the first prototype. There has been a lot of talks about worsening China/Russia military relationships due to cloning issues, but I do think turbofan engine is one area where the cooperation is still quite beneficial for both sides. As we move forward, I think it will be interesting to see how the engine situation will change over time. Will 117S be the engine for J-20 until WS-15 becomes available? Will the initial production J-20s use upgraded variants of FWS-10? When will WS-15 be ready and how long will it take to do so? These are all important things to look forward to.

Does anyone see merit in adding the J-20 to the HCDB as a hypothetical platform, for the sake of scenario building (just as I have done with the T-50 PAK FA)? Even with provisional, and probably inaccurate, specs?

 

I see considerable merit in it. There might also be a place for hypothetical indigenous PLAN carriers, once we get an idea of any design capabilities.

I can see merit in adding the J-20 to the HCDB as a hypothetical platform for fun of play and as appeal for new players, as in the T-50 PAK FA case. But if we include too many hypothetical platform and with the limited number of loadouts and platform entries, we known the result can be almost disastrous.

Another answer can be introduce the J-20 in the DB, and if later it not attain production status, replace it with another equivalent/replacement future Chinese fighter. Scenarios produced with the future J-20, if not reach production status, should be played with the J-20 hypothetical future sustitutive in the DB and in the real world.

I can see merit in adding the J-20 to the HCDB as a hypothetical platform for fun of play and as appeal for new players, as in the T-50 PAK FA case. But if we include too many hypothetical platform and with the limited number of loadouts and platform entries, we known the result can be almost disastrous.

 

If I had any worries about that happening, it would not even be a consideration.

 

Another answer can be introduce the J-20 in the DB, and if later it not attain production status, replace it with another equivalent/replacement future Chinese fighter. Scenarios produced with the future J-20, if not reach production status, should be played with the J-20 hypothetical future sustitutive in the DB and in the real world.

 

The only way a hypothetical J-20 entry would be replaced or substituted is if an actual production aircraft resulted from the same program. Thus migrating the J-20 from the hypothetical into a reality.

Is J-15 in there?

Is J-15 in there?

 

Nope.

Is J-15 in there?

 

Nope.

 

Could we please add it at some point soon?

Could we please add it at some point soon?

 

Not a whole lot of information floating around out there about the J-15 'Flying Shark', but I cannot see why not.

 

To be honest, I would rather be adding hypotheticals and potentials from the PRC than just about anywhere else.

Lovely, thanks.