What is the best 5th generation fighter in the world? What are the criteria? These are the questions I have asked for sometime now.

I will tackle this question.

I will evaluate it based on current fighters abilities not the SU-57M or Block 4 F-35. I also do not care about numbers in total built. I agree that in a real war that matters. However for this question it does not. This question is simple to me, if I could only have 1 of these fighters to protect my country which one would it be.

Lets start with the biggest question does the fighter have to have all the parameters that Lockheed Martin laid out when they developed the 5th generation brand? I would say no you do not, as those goal posts were moved by Lockheed themselves in order to get the F-35 to fit the as a 5th generation fighter title. Super maneuverability and Supercruise was removed with the reasoning being since there are no more dogfights( which will turn out to be incorrect) and speed is not important anymore. Consequently I will not be holding the fact that the SU-57 does not have serrated nozzles yet or the J-20 lacking supercruise ability. There will be one caveat to this discussion there is quite limited information J-20 just as the Chinese prefer it but this will make a comparison to other fighters more challenging but I will do my best.

Lets start by defining what I believe makes the best 5th gen aircraft. It would be the best all around aircraft that if you could only have one of these 5th generation fighters in your inventory, which one is best able to carry out A2A, A2G, standoff attacks and air superiority would it be. that the basis of the this discussion lets begin.

BVR

The West has convinced the world that air battles will now be fought only from beyond visual range(BVR). In this scenario sensors are king, and how far your radar can pick up a target and create a firing solution is what matters. In this regard I will talk about the individual abilities of the fighters not a grouping of fighters working in unison. In the case of BVR other than the sensors the missiles are the most important weapon in the arsenal of these fighters. We should now look at how each fighter stacks up in these categories

F-35

The F-35 uses the APG-81 with 1000-1600 T/R modules and a range of 200km and 110km on 1sqm target the EOTS is a combination of IRST and FLIR that has shown range out to 90kms not sure what range it can create a firing solution from officially but it is believed to be around 50kms from what is in open sources.

The missiles for air-to-air are the AIM-120D which incorporates active seeker with a max range of 160km and a predicted NEZ of 70km in stealth configuration and when stealth is not required the AIM-9X for short range attacks. Both missiles can be shot off boresight even at targets in the rear hemisphere. Max air-to-air load out in stealth configuration is 4 AIM-120D. Both missile can receive datalink correction from F-35

F-22

The F-22 uses the APG-77 with 1500 -2200 T/R modules with a range of 400km on a 1sqm target it does not have any kind of optical tracking abilities as it was designed as a pure air superiority fighter and the US had rejected IRST as general rule in fighter aircraft at this time. It also has the AN/ALR 94 with passive sensors with a claimed range of 463kms to detect radar signals.

The missiles are very similar to the F-35, with AIM-120D as primary medium distance and the AIM-9X. The F-22 does not have the ability to shoot off boresight missiles but can carry 6 AIM-120D and 2 AIM-9X in stealth configuration.

J-20

The J-20 uses the Type 1475 with approximately 2000T/R modules which are rumored to Gallium nitride which would make for a very powerful radar. Before people say that cannot be possible, China makes 98% of the world production of Gallium. The only numbers to be found is a range of 200km. They also claim the J-20 has an IRST but again there is no real open source information specifications.

The missiles used by the J-20 are the PL-15 with an AESA radar seeker and 200km range and dual pulse motor. For short range it uses the PL-10 with an imaging infrared (IIR) seeker, thrust-vectoring exhaust nozzle, laser proximity fuse, and reportedly boasts a 90-degree off-boresight capability.

SU-57

The SU-57 is a bit different than all the others, it has 4 X-band radars that cover 360° The nose radar has 1514 T/R modules with a range of 400km on 1sqm targets and two side arrays with 414 T/R modules each with range of 110km+ there no numbers on T/R of the rear radar it may be RWR only or another full radar. The Felon also incorporates two L-band arrays in which many argue about their uses but I believe because they are part of the radar system. It also has probably the best IRST in current fighter with the quantum well technology(QWIP) with minimum range 130km. The OLS-50M and 101KS-V Infra-red Search And Track System ( IRST ) is designed to detect heat emissions from aircraft and missiles passively. IRST are essentially thermographic cameras that detect and track heat sources without emitting any radiation in the process ( passive ).

The SU-57 in stealth mode can carry the R-77M a medium distance dual pulse motor missile with a range of up to 193km with datalink the missile has a AESA seeker that when it picture is completed may have largest NEZ of any missile again that is opinion not a fact. The R-37M has a version called the Izdeliye 810 with folding wings. There are pictures of it being manufactured and information it would be included in the SU-57E so we will assume it is an option. The range is said to be 300km+. For short range internal bays the RVV-MD2 missiles is equipped with a combined guidance system, which includes inertial guidance plus a multi-element double-channel infrared seeker with increased resistance to interference, plus a radio correction receiving channel. The missile can independently determine its coordinates in space, regardless of external factors. The scanning area of the homing seeker in the forward hemisphere is 180°, which allows tracking all evasive maneuvers of the attacked enemy aircraft.

BVR Analysis

This will be a contentious topic as the Westerners have a very hard time with accepting anything but clear dominance and that is simply is not the case if you look at the open source available data. The fact is that the F-22 and the SU-57 are the standouts in this category. Yes the F-35 networking with multiple platforms is a great ability but we cannot look at things from that perspective. In a battle AWACS will be destroyed and communications disrupted. The individual abilities of the fighter to perform in a contested environment is the measuring stick. The SU-57 and F-22 radars outrange both the F-35 and J-20 along with longer range passive sensors. The SU-57 has upper hand in missile range and ability to fire totally passively. The AN/ALR-94 cannot create a firing solution without the use of its radar which will alert fighters to being targeted, especially the SU-57 with 4 X-band radars.

There is one more combat avionics system made especially for BVR that the SU-57 has, it is unique in the fighter aviation community. It is called BOSES-TU ‘Duel’ ,this is from one western sources in 2014 :

”This is the first time we have seen such a system anywhere. This system enables the aircraft to be programmed with the capabilities of its adversary, allowing for the aircraft to track its opponent and recommend optimized decisions to the pilot, creating a fine balance of man and machine. Such a system is only the tip of the iceberg with what can be done, it’s the first time we have seen the introduction of AI on a combat platform.”

Aircraft Operational Recommendation Expertise System of Tactical Level called ‘Duel’ for usage in BVR combat. Besides the Su-35S ,only the new Su-57 has this combat system. Something like this western fighters do not possess. What is the story about? Thanks to Russian Intel ,hundreds of flight and maneuvering performance data, combat potential and other details and data for all operational western 4th and 5te gen fighters are stored in two 6-processor/Elbrus-4S/ digital comps type Baget-53-31M. So this system helps pilot of Su-35/57 to take decisions and actions in BVR combat in all possible tactical/combat scenarios: 1vs1,1vs2,2vs1,2vs2,2vs4 or vice versa and in squadron level.

In conclusion the BVR battle will most like be won by the F-22 or SU-57.

Stealth

Next we will cover the stealth of each aircraft,:

F-22 – Has a claimed RCS of 0.0001sqm. Whether this is correct or not it is the number most often quoted. While I have my doubts about the veracity of theses claims I will not cover that here and will just use the above number. This makes the F-22 the most stealthy fighter in the world.

F-35 – Has a claimed RCS of 0.001sqm. This would have it ranked as the second best stealth fighter in the world

J-20 – There are no official claimed numbers from the Chinese for the J-20. Therefore I choose to reputable modeler Dhimas Afihandarin who has estimated the J-20 to be around 0.2sqm which even he admits seems high but that is what the modeling says, therefore since we have nothing else to go by that is the number I have to be settled on.

SU-57 – There are many that try to use the patent as the basis for the SU-57 in which case the we should the ATF for the F-22 which called for the fighter to be 100x smaller than 10sqm F-15 which equals out to 0.1sqm. Lockheed has since revised that number to 0.0001sqm. Russia has said the actual number is classified. So again I turned to Dhimas Afihandarin who is one of the only modelers to take into account radar blockers and screens and carbon fiber skin. According to his modeling the SU-57 RCS is around 0.006sqm. Which would put the SU-57 firmly in third place in the stealth race.

Stealth Analysis

Stealth is a very interesting topic people obsess about having the lowest RCS number, and yes in certain situations that is most important factor. How the fighter will be used matters more though. If you plan for your plane to do deep penetration SEAD and DEAD mission that small RCS will be vital. What is vital is that the rapid speed at which radars are catching up with stealth. The US has admitted they believe the S-400 radar can track and target a F-35. According to Alastair Crooke a well know retired intel specialist on the middle east with deep deep inside information. The reason the planned 24hr operation of Israel to attack Iran only lasted a few hours was due to the fact that F-35’s that were supposed to lead the charge being locked and targeted by an unknown radar. This radar is believed to be the S-400 Russia brought in to support Iranian IAD. This is not even the best Russian radar, that honor would go to the new S-500 radar not to mention the multiple ground radars used by China and Russia in multiple bands that are linked together to create a picture for their respective IAD’s.

Within the WVR realm which contrary to popular belief still exists. The stealth of an aircraft becomes much less important and Kinematics and pilots become the main measuring sticks along with missiles. If you look for example at the the ranges at which a F-22 for example would see an SU-57 on radar you are looking at about 37kms and that does not take into account EW abilities. Against a none peer adversary like Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan etc, stealth doesn’t matter. If you plan to take a F-22 and F-35 into an IAD that will also have alert aircraft like MiG-31’s , SU-57’s, J-16’s and J-20 they will not survive. Many will argue that the F-22 on a radar is a blip on a radar but a blip traveling at 1200km per hour is still a red flag. The Russians, Iranians and Chinese have been building a radar blueprint for these planes for over 20 years.

The Russians and Chinese do not do SEAD and DEAD missions as a general rule they are more apt to use missiles to destroy air defences. Stealth is vital and against non peer opponents it can be deadly. However for those countries that still plan tp use modern air power as their main strategy, I would advise them to re-think that strategy going against a peer level IAD network.

In conclusion the Lockheed brother definitely win the stealth game. However that does not give them the edge it did 20 years ago when the F-22 took to the skies to be part of the US Air Force.

Air to Ground/Stand-off munitions

F-22– This where the F-22 really falls down it can really only carry 2 1000lbs GBU-32 PGM 445lbs of explosives with 15km range.

F-35 – The F-35 can carry internally 2 JSM range 275km+ or 8 SDB PGM with 105lbs of explosive each or it can carry a total of two GBU-32’s. Typical loadout for ground attack is 2 GBU-32’s PGM 445lbs of explosives and 2 AIM-120D.

J-20 – The J-20 is intended to carry internally the LS-6/50 PGM 110lbs of explosive and LS6/100 PGM 220lbs of explosive. Quantities unknown.

SU-57 – The Su-57 can carry internally D-30SN glide bomb 220lbs of explosive 90km range, KAB-250 PGM 365lbs of explosives KAB-500 PGM 990lbs of explosives, Kh-36 Grom-E2 Glide bomb range 50km 551lbs of explosive, Kh-59MK2 290km range 705lbs of explosives, Kh-69 400km range 683lbs of explosives. Kh-31 260km range 207lbs of explosives.(anti-ship/anti-radiation). Kh-35U 300km range 320lbs of explosive, Kh-58UShKe 260km range 328lbs of explosives.

In this category there is a clear winner, and that is the SU-57 it has by far the most variety and destructive firepower. On top of that unlike some of the air-to-air missiles all of these munitions have been used in either Syria or Ukraine or both. The SU-57 has the ability to dominate ground warfare without even entering the IAD envelope of all the Western IAD’s.

Another caveat is that the Russian create all missiles with belief they may have to carry a nuclear warhead one day. So missiles like Kh-69 or the smaller version of Kinzhal intended for the weapons bay of SU-57 or the new long range prototype cruise missile based on the Kh-555 with a range of 2,500km could possibly carry long range stand-off nuclear missiles.

Avionics/Sensor Fusion

This is a very interesting subject because sensor fusion is such a new term and function on the battlefield. The consensus is that the F-35 does it best and I can see why people say that. The way the US has chosen use fusion is very efficient and creative things like being able to see through the fighter and fusing the information from the radar and cameras to display on the helmet is very impressive feat of engineering. The F-22 does have sensor fusion but not to the level or in same way that the F-35 does but enough to give excellent awareness in the sky. There is literally nothing open source on China that I can find. The Russian definitely do sensor fusion integrating all the sensor to create a picture of the battle space along with what they call the second pilot AI system that manages many functions thus allowing pilot to concentrate on the fight.

People will speak about the avionics of F-22 and F-35 being superior to the SU-57 but factually the SU-57’s electronics and eternals are superior to block 3 F-35 let alone F-22. The F-35 current (Block 3) has a less powerful ICP than the Su-57’s compute module. The F-35 uses PowerPC MPC7448 chips vs Elbrus-4S (quad-core Elbrus) on the Su-57. The F-22 is even worse, it uses i960MX processors. This is supposed to change on F-35 when Block 4 comes out. On top of that the SU-57 uses NTC Module 1879VM8Ya (sixteen-core NeuroMatrix DSPs with five-core ARM controllers AI accelerators, and all the networking is done by fiber optics. The radar uses second generation gallium arsenide elements.

Who has the best sensor fusion? The realty is we do not know, yes the F-35 under ideal circumstances can interface with the most assets but the chance in a real WWIII type scenario that is going to available is probably zero. The question for me is who systems will allow their pilots to kill the most adversaries efficiently. It is great to be able to see through your fighter but is that better than side radars that can see from a fighter from over 100kms away. What picture does fusing Optical, L, and X-band together to create a firing solution vs the AN/ALR-94. The actual only way to tell whose system is the best is to have an actual war and have them battle it out. I am sure they will all have their strengths and weaknesses but trying to use red flag events as your proof of superiority is foolish. As far as I am concerned this is an immeasurable category.

Kinematics

F-35- F-135 engine with serrated nozzles 43,000lbs thrust with afterburners 28,000lbs without AB, T/W at normal takeoff weight of 1.07, wing loading 526 kg/m2, Mach 1.6. The F-35 cannot supercruise and is limited to about 10 min of supersonic flight unless there is an emergency. Range internal fuel 1400km. Climb rate 277m/s.

F-22 – F-119 engine with 2D flat nozzles 35,000lbs x 2=70,000lbs with afterburners 50,,000lbs without AB, T/W at normal take off weight 1.25 wing loading 377 kg/m2, top speed Mach 2.25. The F-22 can supercruise at Mach 1.8 and has a range without drop tanks 1000km. Climb rate 350m/s.

J-20 – WS-10C engine with serrated nozzles 32,000lbs x 2=64,000lbs with afterburners unknown dry thrust, T/W 0.95 wing loading 340 kg/m2 , top speed Mach 2.0. The J-20 cannot supercruise and has a range of 3500km. Climb rate 304m/s. Top Speed Mach 2.

SU-57 – AL-41F1 engine with 3D TVC 33,000lbs x2=66,000lbs with afterburners 39,600lbs without AB T/W at normal takeoff weight 1.15 wing loading 371 kg/m2, top speed Mach 2.0. The SU-57 can supercruise at Mach 1.3 and has a range of 3500km. Climb rate between 361–384m/s.

Kinematics Analysis

This is the easiest to break down. The SU-57 is in a league of its own when it comes to the kinematic world. The design builds on Sukhoi’s knowledge from the flankers and adds LEVCONS, 3D TVC and the best aerodynamics of the 5th generations. The F-22 is no slouch here either with 2D TVC and lots of thrust. The J-20 for its size is very agile due to its canard delta wing setup. Lastly the F-35 might not be as bad as people claim but the numbers do not lie.

Command and Control

F-22– The F-22 was initially excluded from the Air Force’s data-sharing prototype, ABMS Capability Release 1, due to differences in communications design and development. However, the ACC Federal Laboratory has integrated combat apps onto the F-22 using an open software stack.

F-35 – MADL, when operated in conjunction with other F-35 sensors, can achieve the much sought-after goal of sharing threat data and helping the jet find and destroy enemy targets from ranges where it remains undetected. This ability, shown in several wargames in recent years, is something that F-35 pilots point to as a defining reason for its superiority.

J-20 – No open source information I can find.

SU-57 – The upgraded S-111 system uses AI based cognitive radio technology it enhances interference and intelligence immunity, helping it counter jamming and other electronic warfare techniques employed by adversaries. The equipment ensures data transmission validity by means of noiseless coding, message symbol interlacing, universal time synchronization for signal processing, simultaneous message transmission via parallel links, extending stable communication range, and using artificial intelligence technology. The system includes computers, interlacers and de-interlacers, high-frequency-band antenna tuners, digital signal processors, and noiseless encoders and decoders. This allows for seamless communication and battlefield management with all assets from the IAD, to ground forces to the control air battle space.

Again I prefer to look at how the fighters would perform independent of larger network but I am sure while AEW&C and AWACS will not survive the battle space the ability to work in coordination with other fighters will to some degree. The F-35 whole design is based on interoperability and the ability to pass on information to other fighters within the kill chain.

The F-22 is integrated but not to the degree that the F-35 is but is a lethal part of that chain.

The J-20 does have ability to link fighters together it has been spoken of but details are so sparse that it really impossible to say much of anything except do not underestimate the Chinese.

The SU-57 and the Russians have a very robust ability with the SU-30SM2, SU-35S, MiG-31 and SU-57 to communicate with the Russian networks. Many think Russia is far behind but it is actually not. Since the 80’s a group of four MiG-31s was capable of exchanging data in automatic mode regarding targets being tracked within 800km-wide sector with the ability to communicate to a distance of 2000km with ground command to target data to a ground or air-based targets. The SU-35S lead in 4 fighter group can target/pass information and even fire the missiles of the 3 other fighters while they fly passively. The SU-57 abilities are significantly more than these examples obviously.

In the end I would give F-35 the edge as this is its primary strength, however the other 3 fighters should not be underestimated.

Electronic Warfare

F-35 – In today’s signal-dense environments, the AN/ASQ-239 system provides long-range 360-degree, full-spectrum situational awareness and rapid-response capabilities. Its offensive and defensive capabilities include threat warning, radio-frequency and infrared countermeasures, and targeting support – allowing pilots to detect, analyze, and counter threats and reach well-defended targets.

F-22 – BAE Systems’ AN/ALR-94 digital electronic warfare system geolocates potential threats by detecting adversary radars at significant ranges, allowing the F-22 Raptor to limit its own radar emissions, enabling it to better conceal its location when operating in hostile territory. Data collected by the AN/ALR-94 system helps identify, monitor, analyze, and rapidly respond to threats by providing the pilot with maximum situational awareness. Advanced avionics and sensors provide a complete view of the battlespace, enabling pilot to take appropriate action and ensure mission success. The AN/ALR-94 electronic warfare system also is reliable and maintainable reducing long-term life cycle costs.

J-20 – I am sure there is one but again there is no information except about electronic warfare support drones

SU-57 – The L402 Himalayas system works on the principle of active jamming, which involves emitting powerful radio signals to disrupt and confuse enemy radar and communication systems. It also includes passive jamming, which involves analyzing and mimicking enemy signals to deceive their systems. Passive jamming involves detecting the radar signals emitted by the enemy radar system and then transmitting a signal that interferes with the radar’s ability to detect targets. This can be done without alerting the enemy to the presence of the jamming aircraft, allowing it to remain undetected and avoid being targeted by the enemy. Passive jamming is an effective countermeasure against radar-guided weapons and is an important component of modern air defense systems.

This again is a very hard again to gauge. EW is the biggest secret of all in fighter aircraft, the basics are known but details are never given. Personally I think they are all most likely excellent BAE has a great reputation and Russian EW is also very good. Knowing which one will do the best job is impossible. The only way to know is a war, without that it is all talk and speculation.

The Conclusion

After doing this review I am going to give the J-20 an incomplete grade as their is just not enough information in open sources to do a proper evaluation. I will try find more info and update this post.

After all this what have determined. When it comes to BVR the F-22 and SU-57 are the ones to beat especially against 4th generation platforms. The SU-57 has actually had a BVR kill with R-37M at 217km. WVR Again this will be the domain of the SU-57 and F-22 with SU-57 having the advantage in maneuverability and the fact it can shot off-boresight missiles. The ground attack game is all SU-57 the F-22 can drop a couple bombs well within any IAD of almost any country. The F-35 is designed to be a ground attack queen but the SU-57 has better variety, firepower and range on its munitions. Avionics all the fighters have elite avionics made to work within their fighting doctrine. The US leverages it worldwide network of allies and bases and ships to create an electronic picture. THE Russians design there fighters around being part of their IAD defence as mini AWACS to fill in the gaps in IAD and attack threats to IAD. In a electronically degraded environment with GPS and electronic communication limited it becomes a BVR and WVR fight which we have already covered. Electronic warfare again realistically all the fighters do very well, whose system works best we would only know in actual wartime scenario it is all chest thumping bravado right now. Stealth the US fighter win hands down, but the truth is that according to modeling the Su-57 will most likely be within visual range before the missiles start flying. Plus Russia and China plan to fight in their own backyards with IAD coverage, with the networking of radars it is highly doubtful even an F-22 or any fighter will go undetected.

So which on is the best all around I think everyone has an opinion. Most will say that if you do not pick one of the American fighters then you are crazy or you are Russian or Chinese bots. The lack of intellect behind those kind of statements is something I find amusing or just ignore.

The SU-57 is essentially an omni role stealth plane. With the most varied types of armaments’ tied for best range and has best kinematics overall of the 5th generation. It is also the only fighter to prove itself with BVR and WVR kills along with standoff destruction of infrastructure and IAD. There are individual abilities that other fighters do better but all around I think it is quite indisputable which fighter is the best overall .

As serious as it is for us.

Answers like that of Roland’s anger me because they’re very clearly propaganda designed to paper over real problems. What I and all the officers at USTRANSCOM saw were challenges that were unique to our situation, drawn by several factors:

1. The GWOT went on for too long and we had become too specialized in COIN. This created a need for the force to unlearn and reorient, both of which were fraught with uncertainty because we did not have experience in whatever was going to be the war of the future (but we were certain it wasn’t going to be a repeat of the last 50 years).
2. Adoption of new strategies and defenses against new cyberwarfare were fraught with talent issues. People like Roland do not spend their time asking how good the quality of nerds are at J6. Maybe he knows of some magical staffing fixes in the intervening time, but I am not holding my breath given how often Americans repeat to themselves myths like “I am not a math person.” This is especially true of the American nationalist who values loyalty over talent, which is why I have next to no confidence that the more loyalist posturing we exhibit the better our cyber is going to be. If anything this tends to be an inverse relationship.

The gap between theory and practice is insurmountable without fighting a war of its kind. Yes, we have our heads on straight figuring out what the next plan ought to be. That is not the hard part; most influential players today seem to be perfectly capable of this as well. The bottleneck for now is in the trial— there just aren’t many opportunities to test the theory out. The breakout of war will change that, but then we all will simply have the next bottlenecks exposed.

I don’t care that we are good at transporting goods. That’s the mantra to make people look away from the obvious factor that we transport goods over distances and the expected place where there will be a war is extremely far away from us compared to China, and that such a distance exists in more than one dimension (the complexity of the system grows geometrically, not linearly). Even if we presume we are able to surmount this challenge, the real issue is in replenishment. A lot of people have argued either from the historical perspective (arsenal of democracy) or from a spending perspective that we can easily scale up and replenish losses. Fundamentally, these people show a great amount of disrespect towards the needs of engineering. The fact of the matter is that we only have a strategic degree of civilian factories that we can convert into military production, particularly in shipbuilding, and we also have an intense lack of engineering workforce that can fill in the missing factory positions. Hell, it should already be bizarre that anyone proposes a scenario where we retain half of our ships or aircraft in a real shooting war with China. From where does this infinite confidence stem, in this day and age of Oreshnik missiles, Navy “mistakes,” and surprise 6th gen aircraft? And how long do people think we can afford to take with replenishment and logistics, given that Taiwan is right off the coast of China and halfway across the world from the vast majority of our industry? That alone will permit China a great many mistakes of inferiority, in a scenario where the US and China have in-kind experience fighting that kind of war (observation in Ukraine and elsewhere, training exercises, simulations, low intensity peacetime logistics). This was very aptly demonstrated the last time the US and China were in a direct, high intensity war!

If anything China was far more inferior to the US during the Korean War and it was still fought to a stalemate. Now that China is much less inferior relative to the US, we expect that somehow the US is going to win?

Slander never won us wars, and racist slander tends to lead to the greatest complacency. When someone insists that we should embrace such propaganda on account of feeding our fighting spirit, ask yourself how that went with the fascists of the past. I have never considered this rhetoric to be prudent, and neither should anyone here tolerate it as such. There is a nasty historical pattern in which the more this rhetoric is present, the more the institutions issuing such rhetoric believe in their own lies.

I truly hope the military has not succumbed to this hubris. For anyone who still has unreasonable confidence in the speed to which we can update our warfighting capacity (especially logistics), let me ask you: How long did it take for us to switch to MRAPs? And how long did it take for the USMC to do the same switch?

The addendum: How long did it take for the Ukranians and Russians to switch to anti-drone countermeasures? How long do you think it will take us?

How serious is the Chinese military’s lack of experience?

It’s not that serious and the people who are suggesting that it is here, are doing so without any proper arguments or evidence. China’s military certainly hasn’t fought a major war, but most of the world’s military forces hasn’t. I see people suggesting China would fail a fight with Taiwan because of this lack of experience, why? Taiwan has more military experience?

The Chinese has the largest navy in the world, and no naval combat experience, neither did Ukraine when it sank the Moskva.

Unlike fighting experience, logistical experience is something you can actually get in peace time. Rodra Hascaryo’s answer talks about logistics, but it is basically saying that the USA had great logistics in WW2, and China doesn’t because they haven’t fought. First of all, the USA had no major combat experience prior to WW2, so he has made the argument that isn’t necessary for great logistics, second of all he has not addressed a shred of knowledge that we have on Chinese logistics, despite the fact that the US War College have an update to date and open source book on the subject.[1]

Bartetzko’s answer is based entirely on ignorance and racism. An even better basis of course. Bartetzko opens with a quote from General Eric Smith of the US Marine Corps, who said that the last Chinese war was so long ago that it was captured on oil and canvas unlike American wars which are captured on iphones. Incredible that both Bartetzko and a General in charge of preparing war against China, are so ignorant of China that they think the Chinese didn’t have cameras in the 1950s when they fought, let me just check my notes here, the USA in Korea.

Bartetzko goes on to say that NATO has perfected the way to fight modern wars, this is why we win all of them, like Afghanistan which we won, and Vietnam which we also won, just like Libya, Syria and Iraq, which are all war zones which we won and turned out exactly how we wanted it, and let’s not forget Somalia, which we fixed.

Finally Bartetzko realize that the Chinese mind is actually the real problem for them, they just can’t use their brain as good as us. Because the key element to the Chinese brain is conformity, they are historically known as very unimaginative people you see. Bartetzko does not actually directly point to any evidence or cultural traits of China in this regard of course, probably because his primary source of information is a US general who doesn’t know the Korean war happened.

China lacks experience, as does any nation not currently in war. Experience can be gained at different levels and in different ways. Experience is also transferable. If experience was not transferable, then tactics would never progress beyond what a single person could learn in life, and schools wouldn’t make much sense. Experience in modern warfare is without a doubt being acquired by China right now. You do not think they have observers in Ukraine with the Russians? Of course they do, they are watching and learning as much as everyone else.

I am not an expert on everything Chinese, but it is stupid and dangerous to think that between 1.4 billion Chinese people they can’t find capable officers, logisticians and tacticians, because of racial traits and culture, or that they don’t know how to load equipment on ships and move them around.

China moves around more material everyday, than all of Europe and USA combined. China has actually fought wars, and I think the key thing from those wars we should learn is that when China was serious, they were able to fight the USA to a stand still to the point that US generals thought nuclear weapons against a non nuclear country was the only way to attain victory. That is China after a civil war at its lowest, with the USA at one of it’s most productive periods in history. Of course, if your generals are so ignorant they don’t know this happened at all in Korea, of course they will not learn anything. You could say that experience is lost.

Chicken Divan Pie

Yield: 6 to 8 servings

Ingredients

• 1 1/2 cups cooked rice
• 4 eggs, divided
• 1 cup (4 ounces) shredded Cheddar cheese
• 1 cup milk
• 1 cup broccoli, cooked and chopped
• 1 cup chicken or turkey, cooked and chopped
• 1/4 cup green onions, chopped
• 1/4 teaspoon salt
• 1 dash ground black pepper
• 1/4 cup (1 ounce) Parmesan cheese, grated

Instructions

1. Heat oven to 350 degrees F.
2. In small bowl, combine rice and 1 of the eggs: mix well. Press rice mixture onto bottom and up side of lightly greased 9 inch pie plate.
3. In large bowl, toss cheddar cheese with flour. Add remaining 3 eggs, milk, broccoli, chicken, onions, salt and pepper: mix well. Pour over rice crust. Sprinkle with Parmesan cheese.
4. Bake for 50 to 60 minutes or until set in center.

Attribution

Pampered Chef

Why Are Maintenance Men So Attractive?

When Sully hit birds, even the flight attendants knew they had to return to La Guardia (based on the movie). The return scenarios said that if he began turning immediately, he could have made it back, why did he not start turning immediately?

Sully did not immediately turn back, because he did not immediately know that power was permanently lost in both engines, and he did not immediately know that LaGuardia was actually within reach. You’re much more likely to get into more trouble by taking immediate and irreversible action in an emergency without thought.

If Sully had immediately turned back, the plane would have disproportionately lost altitude in the turn, possibly eliminating other landing spots from consideration, and not being able to reach LaGuardia. The altitude lost in the turn is altitude you won’t get back.

Sully and his first officer, per the transcript, determined they were unable to reach LaGuardia within one minute, and briefly considered Teterboro. (“1” is Sully, “2” is the First Officer.)

The flight attendants speculated they would return to LaGuardia, apparently, but they also did not know if LaGuardia was within reach, and if power could be restored to at least one engine.

15:26:37 HOT-1 uh what a view of the Hudson today.

15:26:42 HOT-2 yeah.

15:26:52 HOT-2 flaps up please, after takeoff checklist.

15:26:54 HOT-1 flaps up.

15:27:07 HOT-1 after takeoff checklist complete.

15:27:10.4 HOT-1 birds.

15:27:11 HOT-2 whoa.

15:27:11.4 CAM [sound of thump/thud(s) followed by shuddering sound]

15:27:12 HOT-2 oh #.

15:27:13 HOT-1 oh yeah.

15:27:13 CAM [sound similar to decrease in engine noise/frequency begins]

15:27:14 HOT-2 uh oh.

15:27:15 HOT-1 we got one rol- both of ’em rolling back.

15:27:18 CAM [rumbling sound begins and continues until approximately 15:28:08]

15:27:18.5 HOT-1 ignition, start.

15:27:21.3 HOT-1 I’m starting the APU.

15:27:22.4 FWC [sound of single chime]

15:27:23.2 HOT-1 my aircraft.

15:27:24 HOT-2 your aircraft.

15:27:24.4 FWC [sound of single chime]

15:27:25 CAM [sound similar to electrical noise from engine igniters begins]

15:27:26.5 FWC priority left. [auto callout from the FWC. this occurs when the sidestick priority button is activated on the Captain’s sidestick]

15:27:26.5 FWC [sound of single chime]

15:27:28 CAM [sound similar to electrical noise from engine igniters ends]

15:27:28 HOT-1 get the QRH… [Quick Reference Handbook] loss of thrust on both engines.

15:27:30 FWC [sound of single chime begins and repeats at approximately 5.7 second intervals until 15:27:59]

15:27:32.9 RDO-1 mayday mayday mayday. uh this is uh Cactus fifteen thirty nine hit birds, we’ve lost thrust (in/on) both engines we’re turning back towards LaGuardia.

15:27:42 DEP ok uh, you need to return to LaGuardia? turn left heading of uh two two zero.

15:27:43 CAM [sound similar to electrical noise from engine igniters begins]

15:27:44 FWC [sound of single chime, between the single chimes at 5.7 second intervals]

15:27:46 RDO-1 two two zero.

15:27:50 HOT-2 if fuel remaining, engine mode selector, ignition.* ignition.

15:27:54 HOT-1 ignition.

15:27:55 HOT-2 thrust levers confirm idle.

15:27:58 HOT-1 idle.

15:28:02 HOT-2 airspeed optimum relight. three hundred knots. we don’t have that.

15:28:03 FWC [sound of single chime]

15:28:05 HOT-1 we don’t.

15:28:05 DEP Cactus fifteen twenty nine, if we can get it for you do you want to try to land runway one three?

15:28:05 CAM-2 if three nineteen-

15:28:10.6 RDO-1 we’re unable. we may end up in the Hudson.

15:28:14 HOT-2 emergency electrical power… emergency generator not online.

15:28:18 CAM [sound similar to electrical noise from engine igniters ends]

15:28:19 HOT-1 (it’s/is) online.

15:28:21 HOT-2 ATC notify. squawk seventy seven hundred.

15:28:25 HOT-1 yeah. the left one’s coming back up a little bit.

15:28:30 HOT-2 distress message, transmit. we did.

15:28:31 DEP arright Cactus fifteen forty nine its gonna be left traffic for runway three one.

15:28:35 RDO-1 unable.

15:28:36 TCAS traffic traffic.

15:28:36 DEP okay, what do you need to land?

15:28:37 HOT-2 (he wants us) to come in and land on one three…for whatever.

15:28:45 PWS go around. windshear ahead.

15:28:45 HOT-2 FAC [Flight Augmentation Computer] one off, then on.

15:28:46 DEP Cactus fifteen (twenty) nine runway four’s available if you wanna make left traffic to runway four.

15:28:49.9 RDO-1 I’m not sure we can make any runway. uh what’s over to our right anything in New Jersey maybe Teterboro?

15:28:55 DEP ok yeah, off your right side is Teterboro airport.

15:28:59 TCAS monitor vertical speed.

15:29:00 HOT-2 no relight after thirty seconds, engine master one and two confirm-

15:29:02 DEP you wanna try and go to Teterboro?

15:29:03 RDO-1 yes.

15:29:05 TCAS clear of conflict.

15:29:07 HOT-2 -off.

15:29:07 HOT-1 off.

15:29:10 HOT-2 wait thirty seconds.

15:29:11 PA-1 this is the Captain brace for impact.

15:29:14.9 GPWS one thousand.

15:29:16 HOT-2 engine master two, back on.

15:29:18 HOT-1 back on.

15:29:19 HOT-2 on.

15:29:21 DEP Cactus fifteen twenty nine turn right two eight zero, you can land runway one at Teterboro.

15:29:21 CAM-2 is that all the power you got? * (wanna) number one? or we got power on number one.

15:29:25 RDO-1 we can’t do it.

15:29:26 HOT-1 go ahead, try number one.

15:29:27 DEP kay which runway would you like at Teterboro?

15:29:27 FWC [sound of continuous repetitive chime for 9.6 seconds ]

15:29:28 RDO-1 we’re gonna be in the Hudson.

15:29:33 DEP I’m sorry say again Cactus?

15:29:36 HOT-2 I put it back on.

15:29:37 FWC [sound of continuous repetitive chime for 37.4 seconds ]

15:29:37 HOT-1 ok put it back on… put it back on.

15:29:37 GPWS too low. terrain.

15:29:41 GPWS too low. terrain.

15:29:43 GPWS too low. terrain.

15:29:44 HOT-2 no relight.

15:29:45.4 HOT-1 ok lets go put the flaps out, put the flaps out.

15:29:45 EGPWS caution. terrain.

15:29:48 EGPWS caution terrain.

15:29:48 HOT-2 flaps out?

15:29:49 EGPWS terrain terrain. pull up. pull up.

15:29:51 DEP Cactus uh….

15:29:53 DEP Cactus fifteen forty nine radar contact is lost you also got Newark airport off your two o’clock in about seven miles.

15:29:55 EGPWS pull up. pull up. pull up. pull up. pull up. pull up.

15:30:01 HOT-2 got flaps out.

15:30:03 HOT-2 two hundred fifty feet in the air.

15:30:04 GPWS too low. terrain.

15:30:06 GPWS too low. gear.

15:30:06 CAM-2 hundred and seventy knots.

15:30:09 CAM-2 got no power on either one? try the other one.

15:30:09 4718 two one zero uh forty seven eighteen. I think he said he’s goin in the Hudson.

15:30:11 HOT-1 try the other one.

15:30:13 EGPWS caution terrain.

15:30:14 DEP Cactus fifteen twenty nine uh, you still on?

15:30:15 FWC [sound of continuous repetitive chime begins and continues to end of recording]

15:30:15 EGPWS caution terrain.

15:30:16 HOT-2 hundred and fifty knots.

15:30:17 HOT-2 got flaps two, you want more?

15:30:19 HOT-1 no lets stay at two.

15:30:21 HOT-1 got any ideas?

15:30:22 DEP Cactus fifteen twenty nine if you can uh….you got uh runway uh two nine available at Newark it’ll be two o’clock and seven miles.

15:30:23 EGPWS caution terrain.

15:30:23 CAM-2 actually not.

15:30:24 EGPWS terrain terrain. pull up. pull up. [“pull up” repeats until the end of the recording]

15:30:38 HOT-1 we’re gonna brace.

15:30:38 HOT-2 * * switch?

15:30:40 HOT-1 yes.

15:30:41.1 GPWS (fifty or thirty)

15:30:42 FWC retard.

15:30:43.7 [End of Recording]

15:30:43.7 [End of Transcript]

This CAN’T Continue – US Credit Card Crisis Hits HIGHEST DEFAULT In 14 Years

Have you ever known someone who went on vacation and just decided they were going to stay?

Me.
After my freshman year of college, which I was fortunate enough to do on scholarship, I was broke, my truck was broke, and my scholarship was only for the year. I really couldn’t afford to continue, and needed money to fix my truck, so I moved back home to my dad’s house in North Florida and went to work for his construction company. However, my father and I were butting heads. Even though I was 19, had been on my own for a year, attended college on scholarship, made Dean’s list, and now was paying rent to him for my room and board, he still insisted on treating me like I was 12, with a ridiculous curfew, controlling my social life, and even who I could and couldn’t date.

As Christmas approached, my mom invited me to go visit her in Orange County, California for a couple weeks of Christmas vacation. As I had stayed in school for summer session, I hadn’t been to see her as I usually would have in summer. She offered to fly me out and pay expenses, so I jumped at the chance. I really needed the break from my father and his drama.

I flew out, and got busy seeing the West Coast family for the holidays and such. Mom then suggested we go snow skiing for a few days. Having grown up in Florida, this was completely new to me, and I was worried whether I’d manage to have any fun as a rank beginner, but mom, an avid skier, assured me I’d be fine. As I’d always loved the mountains, I thought, what the heck, at least there will be pretty scenery, and for sure my first “White Christmas.” So off we went to Mammoth Lakes, CA.

I definitely didn’t become a great skier (or even a good one) in four days, but I absolutely loved it there. It was breathtaking and so different from everything I was used to. Then I ended up on a chairlift next to a mountain employee. Her name was Melanie, and she was a peach! (Melanie, if you read this, you should recognize yourself in this story, and thank you!) I asked her what it was like to work there. She said it was great, free ski pass, employee housing available across the street from the main lodge for a very reasonable rate, and decent pay, much better than my father was paying me. I thought to myself, “Self, if I’m taking a year off from school to make some money, wouldn’t it be a whole lot nicer doing it here?” And my Self replied, “I do believe you are right!”

I marched into the mountain human resources office and applied for a job. Since I had worked at a popular fast food restaurant in high school and college, they hired me on the spot for one of their cafeterias, which was halfway up the mountainside. I also took a room at the employee housing. I literally walked across the parking lot each morning, boarded a gondola, and whisked a thousand feet up the mountain to work as a cashier in a glass walled cafeteria with a view from 10,000 ft of altitude.

Even better, I worked half-days on weekdays, and we had ski lockers downstairs, with a backdoor that opened onto the slopes. I skied 150+ days per year for the next four years, and lived there 7 years, total. I skied, hiked, camped, rockclimbed, bicycled, windsurfed, tubed, and waterskied more than I have the entire rest of my life. I also began volunteer firefighting, which I have continued to do since. On the fire department I also met a certain lady.

My 4-day ski vacation turned into 7 years, plus a wife and two kids. I did move to Atlanta after that and finish college, but I’ll always cherish my ski vacation!

Edit:
Nearly 2k upvotes, thanks! I’m glad this story resonates with so many.
In answer to several commenters, I thought I’d add some “rest of the story” explanations.

Given that they’d had a very acrimonious divorce a dozen years earlier, and were still both very bitter at the other, my mother was of course delighted that I moved away from my father and more into her sphere of influence.

She was also glad to have an excuse to go to Mammoth more often, and of course she might as well ski while she’s there, no? My father harrumphed a bit but had surprisingly little to say about the whole thing, other than, “Well, if you aren’t prepared to live by *my* rules, perhaps it’s best if you stay there.” All I could think was, “Oh pleeeeeease don’t throw me in the briar patch, B’rer Bear!”

I did, as I mentioned, return to school and finish my degree, Nuclear Engineering at Georgia Tech. I am still married to the same great lady I met on the volunteer fire department 34 years ago. As I’ve moved, I’ve been on three different volunteer departments over the years, and have been Chief of my current one for over 10 years now.

I still keep touch with many friends from Mammoth, including several from the fire department. It really did become the center of my life the last few years I was there. I’ve been to visit a couple of times and been to a fire department “old-timers” reunion. And, living back in Florida, I torture myself by getting the ski reports from Mammoth Mountain, just to keep up on how much snow they’ve gotten (almost 60 feet last year!).

Perhaps it’ll be time for another ski vacation soon…..