There is no denying that it's a good training model to spar with peers from different countries, but this is not easy for us Russians, just like during the Soviet era. Although we now have frequent joint exercises with China, we have limited aircraft models, and most of them look similar to the naked eye, which gives our Russian experts the opportunity to get close to Chinese Su-27s, and at the same time makes them feel desperate about the development of Russian technology. We have far more opportunities for real combat or civil wars, but our opponents basically use equipment that is almost the same as ours, although those Soviet aircraft have been modernized by the West. Compared to us, Western opposition aircraft are much more diverse. NATO has a wide variety of aircraft, with Britain and France each having their own designed planes, even including the Gripen produced in Sweden.
Good news is that Chinese peers have made great technological progress in recent years, otherwise we would have been bored with the same equipment. For example, we have held many years of tank competitions, and the Chinese brought in the Type 96 tanks, which made the competition more diverse, but also caused us some trouble. First of all, the appearance of the Chinese tank does not look like Soviet equipment; many female spectators who are not familiar with tanks on the stands said it was a Western tank. I do not deny that it is different from all the T-series tanks participating, and even looks more advanced, but if you really understand tanks, you will know that the Chinese Type 96 tank is developed from the technology of our Soviet T-54 and T-62, which were captured by China during the Zhenbao Island incident. At that time, China had already designed their next-generation tank. Their previous generation, the Type 59 tank, was a copy of the Soviet T-54, and it was a very controversial piece of equipment in China, but it had a generation gap compared to our T-62 at the time. So when our T-62 was blown up and its tracks were broken, it was stuck on the ice of the Ussuri River, and both sides fought over it. Since we did not want the T-62 technology to be obtained by China, we finally blew up the ice and sank the tank into the river, but in the end, the tank was still salvaged by the Chinese, and this led China to completely abandon their previously designed tank design, raising the technical specifications of their new generation of tanks to a higher level.
Every time we mention these stories, we historians feel particularly emotional. If it weren't for these accidental events, China's land, sea, and air equipment today might be completely different, and they probably wouldn't have reached such a high level. The Chinese Type 96B tank also evolved from these technologies. Three years later, China brought in an updated Type 96B tank, and some of our experts insisted that the Type 96B was a model specifically developed for the competition by the Chinese. Although the changes in appearance are not very significant, it has a larger horsepower engine, and even uses a steering wheel and automatic transmission. To keep it secret, the Chinese refused our request to install cameras inside the tank, but they exposed all these things in their domestic media. You should know that this tank used to be driven with a control stick, just like our T-72, but only three years later, the Chinese changed it so that only the appearance remained unchanged - just like what the Chinese did with our Su-27 series aircraft. As long as you don't open those hatches, you'll never guess what new equipment the Chinese have installed inside.
This is also the trouble the Chinese bring us. Tank competitions are essentially used to promote Russian tanks, but the Chinese seem to have forgotten the art of socializing. Later, Europe also held similar tank competitions in 2016, of course influenced by our Russian tank competitions. With the continuous holding of tank competitions, the air force was also added to the competition, but competitions are competitive in nature, and real aerial competitions should be seen in large-scale military exercises between Russia and China. However, we mentioned that the joint drills between Russia and China have limitations, especially for China, who has aircraft with performance similar to ours, and enough time to train with them. The Chinese are very familiar with our tactics and strategies, so the exercises between Russia and China are mostly cooperative. But we are very interested in the Chinese fighter jet drills, while the Chinese Air Force wants to drill with other opponents, hence the presence of pilots of different skin colors and races flying their planes frequently in the Dingxin base.
Certainly, these risks are great, but the Chinese Air Force is willing to bear them, because these risks are relative: they can take Chinese secrets away, but they can also bring in the secrets of Western tactical methods. This is a gray area where retired Western pilots are legally restricted, and China paid a lot of money for the latter, which will play a huge role in the future development of the Chinese Air Force. It may be a double-edged sword, but from the current performances, the one who is more anxious is clearly the Western world. Our Russian Air Force's attitude is to sit back and enjoy the benefits, because the final beneficiary will ultimately be us. When China accumulates enough experience, the next step will be to gain experience in fighting against Western aircraft.
Although China's coastal areas have several opponents who can provide free long-term practical training, it is still unrealistic to achieve intense confrontation, because as soon as China makes a slight tactical move, the opponent will immediately turn away and not engage. The next day, the US Air Force will publish related news reports, saying that Chinese pilots have done unprofessional actions in certain airspace; and if there is no report the next day, it can be basically determined that they suffered a major defeat that day. But this attitude of fleeing at the first sign of trouble is really boring for the Chinese Air Force. We all know that the Chinese Air Force has always been very eager and urgent for the opportunity to confront foreign troops in real combat, but in fact, if they do get such an opportunity, they will handle it very carefully, which is a unique trait of the Chinese.
The Americans have given us a strange feeling in modern times, perhaps related to the assessments of China by their experts in recent years, but we can't speculate too much, because the Americans themselves haven't publicly revealed these intentions yet. So before talking about this part, we need to find some details from another angle. In the previous article, we mentioned the incident where the F-22 lost to the Rafale. However, any aerial confrontation needs to clarify the premise, such as whether it is a system-based confrontation, single or multi-aircraft confrontation, or a confrontation under strong electromagnetic suppression conditions. The Rafale locking the F-22 multiple times occurred during two-plane dogfights, and the event took place in a multinational joint exercise in the UAE in November 2009. In multi-aircraft confrontations, the F-22's achievements were mediocre, and it resulted in five draws. The most surprising thing was that the F-22 was locked by the French Rafale multiple times during a single dogfight, which in a real combat scenario would mean the plane was hit by a missile. Initially, when the news came out, the US Air Force denied it, but their pilots said that indeed one F-22 "was lost" during the exercise. It wasn't until a month after the exercise that the French Air Force released video evidence, prompting the US Air Force to change their statement and say it was a demonstration-style confrontation. In reality, all the pilots knew that each pilot has a heart to win and never give up, ensuring they can survive on the battlefield and complete every flight mission. Finally, the French pilot succeeded. At that time, his flight overload exceeded 9 Gs and he made a very painful sound. If the American pilot hadn't fully exerted himself at that time, we can hardly imagine how dispirited the American pilots have become nowadays.
The mental and willpower competition, the Chinese soldiers obviously won't lose to anyone, just like their physical fitness results always surprise us, even their cooks are the same.
In that publicly released air combat video, we also found the problems of the F-22 in the dogfight. The F-22 has stronger power and vector thrust, although the conventional layout is inferior to the canard layout in terms of maneuverability. Simply put, the canard layout has a significant advantage in the early stage of entering the dogfight, but it falls behind in the middle and late stages because the canard directly pulls the nose, which is why the Chinese call it the "canard" layout. The conventional layout relies on the tail fin's downforce to change the direction of the nose, so the canard's initial pointing is much faster than using the tail fin to push the nose up, but the drawback is a significant energy loss. The dogfight is all about energy, the conventional layout's power point is the second half, once the canard layout doesn't shoot down the opponent in the early stage, it will suffer excessive energy loss, making it easy to fall into a passive position, especially facing the F-22, which not only has strong power but also vector technology. However, in this comparison between the conventional layout F-22 and the canard layout Rafale, the F-22 was locked multiple times by the Rafale in the middle and late stages of the dogfight, which can be attributed to the excellent design of the Rafale, or it can be said that the F-22's maneuverability is not as strong as it seems - of course, this is under the condition that the F-22 is placed in a close-range dogfight confrontation. In reality, fifth-generation stealth fighters rarely enter such situations. Stealth fighters are like powerful assassins who can kill any opponent in the dark, unless both sides are stealthy. We noticed that among the three currently mass-produced stealth fighters, only the Chinese J-20 has removed the cannon, indicating that our Chinese peers are not only confident in their own planes, but also highly confident in their missiles, without considering entering a dogfight to the death.
Certainly, the F-22 losing to fourth-generation or fourth-generation-and-a-half aircraft is not only this time. Also in that year, their navy's EA-18G "Growler" repeated this feat - the Chinese J-15D is a similar electronic warfare model, and the F-22 was also shot down by the F-16 in an exercise. However, these confrontation results can only happen in specific exercise environments. China itself has also published cases where the J-20 was defeated in simulated confrontations, which is also a result that occurs only under specific conditions. However, we can find a problem: the use of the F-22 by the United States is both public and secretive, even not wanting anyone to know the true strength of the F-22. This dogfight with the French Rafale is a very rare case. Since its commissioning in 2005, the F-22 has not actually participated in any real combat, the only record being a night bombing of terrorists in 2014, and in 2003, it shot down a high-altitude balloon.
After combining some of the recent aerial confrontation activities that China has started to conduct with foreign forces, we have increasingly realized that the Americans are becoming more and more like the Chinese. They no longer openly compete with the Soviet Union in technology and quantity, but instead start to hide themselves, remain silent, just like the Chinese saying "the greatest power of the atomic bomb is on the launch pad." Even today, China has never disclosed the specific number of these things, let alone allowing them to participate in various reduction treaties between Russia and the US. Maybe China could have laughed at us while we were mutually damaging ourselves, but now the transformation of the Americans is unknown whether it is a good or bad thing for them.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7549797915066221056/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and we welcome you to express your opinion by clicking on the [Like/Dislike] buttons below.