>The Chinese are still struggling to successfully copy previous generation Russian designs
This is certainly not true. If anything, the Chinese are very successfully copying current generation American designs.
This is certainly not true. If anything, the Chinese are very successfully copying current generation American designs.
Look at those round vector controlled engines. It is Russian 4th (mostly 4+ as of today) gen engines. That is the reason Russia hasn't so far been able to build an F-22 competitor - for PAK-FA, out of the 3 key component of the 5th gen, they built body, not bad of a radar, yet they haven't been able to build a 5th gen engine as of today. China has as of today almost been able to replicate that 4th+ gen engine, yet still very far from the 5th gen.
Even more - Russia has actually officially given up on building the 5th gen. They decided to go straight to the 6th gen which is supposedly all about AI/networking/sensors/drones/etc. with engines playing only secondary role. Not that they have much hopes to succeed at the 6th gen game too, it is just recognition of reality that the 5th gen F-22 level engine isn't happening in the near future and thus they need a plan B. In some sense that leaves China totally on their own when it comes to the 5th gen, and that means like at least 10 years from the current state, and by that time the air will be dominated by the AI/drones/etc. In that sense AI engineers going to work in China may be more strategically important than the Honeywell drawings :) As an example - the current drone powerhouse dominating the region - Turkey - got their drones built by a returned MIT graduate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sel%C3%A7uk_Bayraktar .
Accordingly to online sources they are actually testing second stage 5+ gen engine for SU-57 and are hoping to deploy it sometime in 2022. Will they succeed is a different question of course.
https://eurasiantimes.com/russian-su-57-fighter-soars-high-i...
"The Russian military will be supplied with 76 jets by 2028, 22 of which will be operational by 2024."
Even if they deliver on those estimates, i think the skies will be different in 2030-ties (imagine the thousands of Starlink like satellites managing the army of drones - each drone is easy to shoot down, yet no human carrying plane can defend itself from a large group of drones simultaneously firing beyond-visual-range missiles) Anyway, i don't believe those estimates for a lot of reasons. In particular most of the Russian new military hardware - i mean generationally new, not just modernizations - that has been shown and planned for deliveries starting in the last decade hasn't yet materialized, with the money being one of the key reasons. Another is that Russia is still not going to be able to project power anywhere beside its own vicinity, and thus will be focusing on protecting its shores which, given limited financial resources, favors as the first priority ground based advanced anti-aircraft defense and MiG-31 style approach (ie. like SU-35 with advanced radar and missiles instead of going all the way with Su-57).
The Su-57 would like to have some words with you. Granted it is a bit late to the party..
Where they lag behind isn't range or power, but (maybe for the J20) in stealth.
no. The Russian and Chinese planes with those engines can't supercruise. Thus they either use afterburner - short range - or go slow.
>, but (maybe for the J20) in stealth.
exactly - the engine for stealth plane needs to be stealth itself. That means a bunch of technical solutions and limitations (like hiding the turbine from the radars looking from behind the plane, lowering IR signature, etc.) which complicates the engine construction and may clash with for example the power requirements to supercruise.
The WS-10C engines for the J20 are of equal power to the F119 engines of the F22. They cannot supercruise indeed, yes, but neither can the F35. The J20 is however larger and less aerodynamic and the engine probably has different trans-sonic characteristics and thus cannot supercruise despite being as powerful as the F22.
>exactly - the engine for stealth plane needs to be stealth itself. That means a bunch of technical solutions and limitations (like hiding the turbine from the radars looking from behind the plane, lowering IR signature, etc.) which complicates the engine construction and may clash with for example the power requirements to supercruise.
There is no rear-aspect stealth for any aircraft. The F22 has a 20-25dB higher RCS from the rear than the front, enough to make it plainly detectable. The same will be for any airplane, including the J20 that seems to have a similar drop in RCS from the rear. As for IR signature, this is simply not known. Modern IR sensors can already detect heat emissions from air friction, and lock onto planes even with their engines fully turned off.
F35 is able to supercruise at 1.2 M. The issue is that its stealth coating gets damaged.
>There is no rear-aspect stealth for any aircraft. The F22 has a 20-25dB higher RCS from the rear than the front, enough to make it plainly detectable. The same will be for any airplane
Not the same for any. While the rear aspect situation is naturally worse, it is still very different for "normal" vs. stealth airplanes - i.e. distances at which it can be detected and how well a missile can lock are still significantly decreased by stealth measures like those for F22 and F35 for example :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_F135#Design
"Like the F119, the F135 has a stealthy augmentor where traditional spray bars and flameholders are replaced by thick curved vanes coated with ceramic radar-absorbent materials (RAM). Afterburner fuel injectors are integrated into these vanes, which block line-of-sight of the turbines, contributing to aft-sector stealth. "
As for the F35 supercruise, this is simply wrong. The engine overheats without the afterburner at supersonic speeds and thus supercruise cannot be done for more than a few seconds. Afterburners must be used, but the afterburners in turn damage the RAM.
The RAM in the F35 is not actually destroyed by air friction. It's destroyed by the afterburners : https://www.defenseworld.net/news/26992/Swiss_Internal_Repor...
From this one concluded that the F35 cannot sustain Mach 1.2 without using afterburners.
This is actually even worse than not being able to supercruise - it cannot sustain supersonic flight, full stop.