The high speed taxi tests for the Chinese J-20 4th generation (stealth) fighter have been getting press lately. One of the most interesting articles is in Aviation Week (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/awst/2011/01/03/AW_01_03_2011_p18-279564.xml&channel=defense), my most reliable source of military technology information for the last 30 years. In this article by Bill Sweetman, the size of the J-20 is discussed: it is about 75 feet long, longer than the F-22, comparable to the F-111, suggesting longer range and heavier munition capability than a general purpose fighter/interceptor would have. Several of the articles commenters suggest that this size is associated with delivering advanced air to surface missiles, perhaps in association with penetration of a carrier battle group some distance from China. This is the kind of capability that could change the calculus of the projection of force in the Western Pacific.
The second interesting discussion (from my perspective) is the question of the link between the rapid development of the J-20 and the cyber attacks on the military and defense industries, starting in 2006 and reaching a peak in 2009. Sweetman quotes Lockheed Martin’s Chief Information Security Officer Anne Mullins that “six to eight companies” among its subcontractors “had been totally compromised—e-mails, their networks, everything,” in late 2009 to early 2010. Sweetman does not expect this link to be clarified by anyone soon, however, the timing of the attacks aligns well with the probable development schedule for the J-20.
Those of us who have been involved in large, high-tech development projects know that the fast follower game is much easier to execute, both in terms of time and expense, than true technology leadership. If cyber espionage is less costly than independent development, then the rational strategy is to leverage cyber espionage to shorten development time and expense and close the gap with the leader. It seems that without the clarity of who the adversaries are (such as we had in the cold war), defense against cyber attack becomes a lower priority and a rational strategy for any power trying to catch up with the leader.
What are your reactions to the J-20? Do you see a relationship between advanced weapon development in China and cyber attacks on the US defense industry?
I think the J-20 could help change the balance of power in the Pacific, but since it's still a prototype, I think there are still a lot of unknowns.
ReplyDeleteI noticed some differences between the J-20 and the F-22 from simply looking at the photos:
Engines: from the rear the engines aren't deeply inset into the fuselage like they are in the F-22. They don't have the long square tapered nozzles that reduce the radar and hide the heat signature, to give the F-22 its all-aspect stealth. It also leads one to believe that the J-22 doesn't have thrust vectoring.
The Chinese also don't have a great track record with high performance engines In one of the articles, they were speculating that the J-20 would fly faster and higher that the F-22. I think this is highly unlikely unless the engines generate more thrust than the F-119s which crank out 70,000 lbs. The F-119s dry thrust is also unrivaled, which gives the F-22 the ability to fly at Mach 1.8 without afterburner.
Canards:
The canards on the aircraft probably don't help it's signature and lead one to believe that the J-20 airframe is partially derived from the J-10 rather than a direct knock-off of the Raptor.
Other unknowns are whether the J-20 has anything like the AESA radar and high degree of sensor fusion that exists in the Raptor which is also a large part of what makes it such a world-beater. In war games in Alaska, the Raptor would act as a mini-AWACS - helping setup kills for the other F-15s and F-16s - after it had expended it's weapons.
Which brings up the final unknown, which is the ability of the PLAAF to build training and tactics for the aircraft and integrate it into an overall battle plan with older generation aircraft - something that the US Air Force is doing extremely well with the Raptor at Red Flag and in war games with the Navy.
I think cyber espionage is definitely saving China 10-15 years of basic research when developing a weapons system.
The irony is the Obey Amendment - a law which congress passed to prevent the US from selling the Raptor to any other country - even Great Britain or Japan - because the technology was too sensitive. It looks like the Chinese got what they wanted anyway.
In my mind, they should open up the Raptor production line again and sell a substantial number to Australia, Japan and Israel - all of whom wanted to purchase it. This would bring the unit cost down, allowing the Air Force to purchase the amount that they actually need - not the 187 that they got stuck with.