J-20到底是轟炸機還是攔截機
本帖最後由 ykkidog 於 2016-3-30 10:58 PM 編輯滿多網友大概都把J-20當成五代機,小弟就寫了文章分析J-20的真實戰力
J-20最大的問題就是--實在不知道造來幹嘛用的,到中國和俄羅斯簽訂SU-35合約時
才真相大白--就是要騙俄羅斯賣SU-35的釣魚機而已
不信??看看下面老外的評論:標題就是問J-20到底是轟炸機還是攔截機??
原因就是J-20造的太大太重,只配個四代機中都算很差的推重比不到7的AL-31F 推重比慘不忍睹大概和老美當年的攻擊機Ｆ-111好點,連當四代機都不合格了,何況是五代機??
文章來自 The Diplomat 網站
=========================
Stealth Fighter or Bomber?
Is China’s J-20 stealth jet likely to be a bomber or an interceptor? It might not actually matter.
By David Axe
July 26, 2011
A photo from a Chinese aerospace exhibit, posted on an Internet forum, provides the first new evidence in more than six months regarding the role and capabilities of China’s first stealth fighter prototype.
The photo depicts the underside of a scale model of the Chengdu J-20, showing the angular fighter’s three weapons bays open and eight air-to-air missiles mounted inside. The missile loud-out includes one short-range infrared-guided missile in each of two small side bays, plus six medium-range missiles packed into the single, large, belly bay.
Since shortly after the J-20 made its public debut on Christmas Day, the consensus among Western observers has been that the new fighter is optimized for air-to-ground attacks against heavily defended targets. That belief stems from the J-20’s apparent large size: up to 70 feet long and 40 tonnes fully loaded, compared to 62 feet and 32 tonnes for the US F-22 stealth fighter. The J-20’s basic dimensions most closely match the F-111 bomber retired from service in the late 1990s.
Beijing’s emphasis on pre-emptive military doctrine seemed to support the J-20-as-bomber theory. Many of China’s most impressive weapons developments in recent years, including the long-range ballistic missiles of the Second Artillery Corps plus surveillance satellites, have been driven by the People’s Liberation Army’s ‘Joint Anti-Air Raid Campaign’ doctrine.
‘The Joint Anti-Air Raid Campaign is designed as the cornerstone for countering US military intervention and draws heavily on PLA observations of US war-fighting tendencies as demonstrated in numerous conflicts including the 1991 Gulf War and 1999 Operation Allied Force,’ Wayne Ulman wrote in Chinese Aerospace Power, a new collection of essays edited by noted China analyst Andrew Erickson.
In part, the doctrine aims to disable most US airfields and aircraft carriers in the western Pacific before they launch aircraft to intervene in any Chinese military operation. The missiles and satellites are key components of that offensive capability—and the J-20 was previously thought to be so as well. A fast, long-range, stealthy, precision bomber might be able to penetrate US defences and destroy any airfield infrastructure that survived the missile barrage.
But the scale model of the J-20, if accurate, undermines this conclusion. ‘It is hard to judge definitively from this photo of a scale model, but there doesn’t appear to be room for air-to-surface missiles like the bulky YJ-12 or smart bombs inside the internal bays,’ aviation journalist Stephen Trimble wrote on his blog.
Instead, the J-20 appears solely configured for an air-to-air weapons load—in fact, a load that matches the F-22's arsenal of two short- and six medium-range air-to-air missiles.
But if the J-20 is strictly an interceptor, what kind of interceptor will it be—and how might the People’s Liberation Army Air Force employ it in future conflicts?
Ask the Russians. Throughout the Cold War, Moscow invested heavily in large, fast interceptors meant to destroy American bombers flying over Siberia. In their day, the MiG-25 (65 feet long, 40 tonnes) and MiG-31 (75 feet, 45 tonnes) were both widely feared by NATO. But when the prospect of World War III faded, so did the interceptors’ utility, and Moscow has chosen not to continue their development.
But the Chinese Communist Party views the world differently. An interceptor J-20 might still figure in the Joint Anti-Air Raid Campaign, though in a different role than previously thought. After all, the doctrine ‘has both defensive and offensive components,’ Ulman pointed out. In the event of major war, the PLAAF would need to defend its own airfields and installations against any US warplanes that survived the initial Chinese onslaught.
In fact, Washington is working to remove the bulk of its air power from within the range of Chinese missiles and warplanes, possibly heightening Beijing's need for an interceptor. The new ‘B-3’ stealth bomber, under development for the US Air Force, would reinforce the current American bomber presence on Guam in around a decade’s time. ‘The PLAAF and Second Artillery Corps currently have only limited capabilities to threaten US facilities on Guam due to their distance from mainland China,’ Ulman wrote.
As more US aircraft concentrate on Guam, the PLAAF might need to counter with an improved capability to intercept them en route to their targets. The J-20 could possibly meet this need.
Of course, the destruction of stealthy bombers doesn’t necessarily require a stealthy interceptor like the J-20. The J-20's ability to evade detection—a consequence of its airframe shape, above all else—doesn’t really improve its own ability to detect a B-3 or another US stealth plane.
But the J-20 could help the PLAAF develop other methods of countering stealthy planes. ‘As the PLAAF gains access to reduced-signature systems, it will allow the development of tactics, training, and procedures for use against low-observable threat systems,’ Ulman posited.
In that case, it hardly matters what role the J-20 actually performs if and when it enters full-scale military service. All that matters is that it helps the PLAAF understand stealth technology, so Beijing can develop systems specifically tailored to defeat it. If the J-20 also performs as a useful interceptor in its own right, helping defend against incoming US bombers during some hypothetical shooting war—well, that’s just a nice bonus.
出自LUXGEL原創內容
...<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div><div></div> 所以明天要武力犯中?光復大陸了?
IDF真那麼強大何必買F16和Mirage2000呢?
台灣裝備再怎麼精良，看到國軍訓練的軍人.....唉，連掃地都掃沒別人乾淨了 台灣的IDF最大的問題在於引擎的推力不足, 若是有F-16CD型, IDF應該會被淘汰的, IDF輕型戰鬥機連殲10都打不過海要講什麼
現在IDF頂多是充數空中巡邏的戰鬥機
要論戰力實在是沒魚蝦也好吧 原來台灣之光這麼好用
那幹麻還要跟美國人買阿
自己研發自己做就好了阿<br><br><br><br><br><div></div> 照您的觀點，您很瞧不起的殲10再差也不可能對付不了轟炸機.....比如B-2?
您與大陸的燒友有共通的一個問題，
好像新戰機就必須是空優空戰能力強悍才像樣一般。其實西方國家就算認為殲20是轟炸機或是攻擊機，都沒有影響這些觀察家的看法，畢竟，即使是攻擊機或是轟炸機，能夠越晚讓敵人發現，成功打擊敵人的機會就增加。如果能在F-22起飛前就把機場打垮，就是強五也能耀武揚威，何必如此在乎空戰能力呢? B-2的空戰能力應該不會比殲20好吧? 但老美可是把她當個寶似的。...<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div> J-20真的是五代機,中國幹嘛當冤大頭被俄羅斯敲竹槓當傻瓜玩弄?
你看,俄羅斯人一收了定金馬上改口交不了機,一副吃定了中國一樣 {:45:}{:3:}{:3:}
======================
近期俄羅斯媒体報道稱，俄羅斯技术公司總裁切梅佐夫表示，俄中簽訂的蘇-35戰機合同迄今為止仍未生效。中國今年不會獲得這種先進戰機。也就是說中國訂購的24架蘇35戰斗機可能並不是簡單的延遲交付的問題，而是根本沒有明確何時交付。而按照之前俄方釋放消息，俄羅斯蘇霍伊公司應該在2016年10月份就開始向中國空軍交付首批蘇35戰斗機。...<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div> 呃~這是指滿載吧
應該不會有知道要纏鬥
還把武裝上滿的奇葩吧
另外武裝方面
從二戰開始就有了將戰鬥機和轟炸機整合的想法
最有名的就是可以裝2000磅炸彈的海盜式戰鬥機
直到現在的戰鬥機只要裝上炸彈他也可以是轟炸機
現在戰鬥機與轟炸機的邊界可以說完全被打通了
當然這裡講的不包括戰略轟炸機
那東西絕對沒辦法纏鬥 freyjaminerva 發表於 2016-3-29 04:14 PM static/image/common/back.gif
台灣菜總統應該立即聘請板主當參謀總長,這樣台灣會滅亡更快...............
台灣有IDF就可以稱霸全世界了. ...
此篇是在引用外國評論取笑J20! 非空優機! 我應該告誡過樓主
會引起爭議的主題請不要發表在版面上
這篇主題一發表後
你自己也看到有多少來嘲諷的留言
(當然那些留言是違規的.我全部刪除)
原本有2頁的留言被我砍到剩一頁
你就知道這種主題會引起怎樣的筆戰
再次告誡你.這類的主題如果真得要發表
請將內容稍做修飾
而不是直接指名挑釁某個國家
只要牽扯到國與國之間的言論
通常只會引起一堆反效果
要再這樣下去
版規越訂越嚴格.大家發言的限制越多
這樣也不好過吧??
最後一次提醒...<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div><br><br><br><br><br><div></div> 哈.....做夢嗎?
第一次聽見J20打不過IDF這種笑話...........真是夜郎自大 其實像F111也不錯~而且是進階隱形版的j20本來就是要攻擊人家的武器~
戰鬥機只是比較低調的稱呼~實際上就是要攻破敵人的防空系統，為入主關島作準備。 太大太重? 教主大人, 在你眼中, 心神大概是最好的5代機了吧, 空重只有13噸, 比F-22少了接近4噸.
而且, 5代機著重狗爭? 這個好像是俄系戰機的標準, 歐美系新式戰機不都是著重視距外作戰的嗎? ykkidog 發表於 2016-3-30 10:53 PM static/image/common/back.gif
我應該告誡過樓主
會引起爭議的主題請不要發表在版面上
這篇主題一發表後
請問版主,這哪裡有挑釁??我引的文章就是這個標題,難道該篇文章的老外作者也是在挑釁
這裡的網友??J-31要開加力才能維持是最出名的軍事雜誌詹氏年鑑記者都寫過,,被全世界各大媒體轉載難不成也是在挑釁??
我用的字眼都是中立的,沒有任何挑釁的字眼存在
比方說有人寫台灣的IDF短腳,哪個台灣人會認為是被挑釁??因為IDF本來就短腳
那些嘲諷的言論是那些網友違反版規,有意見應該據裡討論,
雙方拿出不同的觀點和數據來討論,這樣論壇和網友才會進步,...<div class='locked'><em>瀏覽完整內容，請先 <a href='member.php?mod=register'>註冊</a> 或 <a href='javascript:;' onclick="lsSubmit()">登入會員</a></em></div> ae86gxif 發表於 2016-3-29 10:07 PM static/image/common/back.gif
IDF輕型戰鬥機連殲10都打不過海要講什麼
現在IDF頂多是充數空中巡邏的戰鬥機
要論戰力實在是沒魚蝦也好吧 ...
為什麼IDF 打不過 J-10 ???我寫過文章分析,J-10根本不是IDF對手<br><br><br><br><br><div></div>