Beyond stealth specs and sensor data, the ultimate victor in a high-stakes dogfight may hinge on human variables and the speed of a pilot’s OODA loop decision-making.
By Kris Osborn, Warrior Maven
Endless volumes of speculative research continue to be written about the technological attributes and performance parameters regarding exactly how the U.S. F-22 and F-35 would compare to China’s J-20 in aerial combat. The dearth of available technical detail on the J-20 would seem to indicate that much of the open source analysis may introduce more unanswered questions than substantive metrics or reliable answers. Unanswered questions about J-20 weapons, radar, mission systems, AI-enabled computing and targeting could overshadow or cast doubt upon the complete accuracy of any kind of preliminary technical comparison between the jets.
Pilot performance, however, is much less ambiguous or mysterious, meaning any technological differences between the J-20 and its U.S. 5th-Generation rivals could ultimately prove much less defining than simple pilot capability. The true margin of difference separating victory or defeat may depend less upon technical performance parameters and much more on pilot ability to maneuver into position, make decisions and employ weapons effectively under pressure. The ultimate “metric” when it comes to 5th-generation air superiority in a close-in-fight, may be found in less quantifiable human variables.
OODA Loop
Much of this can be understood in terms of the famous OODA Loop concept made famous years ago by former Air Force fighter pilot and theorist Colonel John Boyd. The idea of the Observation, Orientation, Decision, Action (OODA) decision-making loop suggests that the human pilot who completes this process faster and more accurately will prevail in a dogfight. The intent for a pilot would be to get in front of, ahead of or “inside” of an enemy’s OODA Loop decision cycle, complete the process more quickly and therefore be in position to destroy the opposing jet “before” getting hit or becoming vulnerable. A pilot who can use sensor data, targeting specifics, vectoring ability and angle of attack to maneuver into lethal strike position more quickly, is likely to prevail. Completing the OODA Loop relies upon distinctly “human” decision-making capability, something which would suggest that the prowess or “ability” of a given pilot is likely to prove far more decisive in determining outcome compared to minor technical differences between the airplanes.
This is not to suggest that sensor range and fidelity, radar sensitivity and targeting precision are not equally critical in determining an outcome, but rather to posit that these factors alone are woefully insufficient to determine the ultimate result of an air-to-air engagement. Alongside these hugely significant yet less “calculable” human variables, pure technical capabilities are also of massive importance as well. Victory in air war would doubtless result from an optimal blend or balance between human and technological factors.
J-20 vs F-22 & F-35 “sensing”
Apart from the J-20s visible external configuration, and many Chinese press reports about its improved domestically-built engine and fast-improving performance, there may be little known information about the PLA aircraft’s mission systems, computing, sensors or weapons interfaces. There is research from National Defense University suggesting that the J-20’s larger “nose radome” AESA radar may be built to out-range the detection capabilities of an F-35 or F-22 AESA, yet the J-20s sensor fidelity, targeting precision, computing and fire-control integration would determine if its AESA were ultimately more effective. A research essay called “A Look at the J-20 AESA Radar” from Air University’s China Aerospace Studies Institute raises the question of whether “packaging” technologies used in integrating large numbers of transmit/receive nodules into the J-20 AESA radar gives the jet a detection advantage.
Detection is merely one factor in deciding air-combat outcome, as it may prove less significant than agility and an ability to vector and maneuver into an advantageous position. The Chinese J-20 certainly appears slightly larger than an F-22 or F-35 stealth jet fighter, something which might suggest it is less “agile” than its U.S. rivals. The additional length and weight of the J-20 may in part result from its dual wing configuration, an engineering method employed to optimize air flow and achieve improved aerodynamic performance such as flight stability. While the wing configurations of a J-20 and F-22 are decidedly different, the J-20 fuselage itself appears to resemble that of an F-22 with two engine exhaust and blended, curved or rounded main body exterior. What would it mean to truly rival or surpass the F-22 stealth fighter? Now that the J-20 has been modified with the integration of a new, domestically built WS-15 engine, some might wonder if the Chinese aircraft could achieve any kind of “supercruise” capability that has—so far—been unique to the F-22.
F-22 vs J-20 “speed”
The F-22 has a forty-four-foot wingspan and is, at certain high altitudes, able to hit speeds as fast as Mach 2.25. Various data spec sheets and articles cite that, by comparison, a J-20 is several meters longer but built with a similar 44-ft wingspan. Available specs suggest that J-20 can hit speeds of Mach 2.0, a speed placing it in between the Mach 2.25 F-22 and Mach 1.6 F-35. Regardless of a J-20’s speed, a key F-22 advantage is that it not only can reach supercruise speeds but also sustain them as well without needing afterburners, a major technical enhancement. Also, a slightly shorter, sleeker, and more streamlined fuselage, coupled with potentially unmatched levels of propulsion, thrust, and high-speed maneuverability, could very well give the F-22 a decisive advantage.
The F-22 is armed with massively upgraded weapons such as the now software-enhanced AIM-120D and AIM-9X air-to-air and air-to-ground or surface weapons. However, some available open source information suggests that China’s PL-15 air-to-air weapon fired by the J-20 may outrange these U.S. weapons. Pure range, in terms of air-to-air weapons, is less consequential without precision-guidance, hardening and targeting technology, so it seems unclear which aircraft would “see” the other first from a position to strike effectively.
Ultimately, the advantage may reside in the question of pure “sensing” range and fidelity, meaning the point at which an aircraft can “see” and “destroy” the other without being detected or successfully targeted. This is where networking comes into play, something of great significance to the F-35 and the F-22. The F-35 is known for its Multifunction Advanced DataLink (MADL), and the F-22 is often discussed as an “aerial quarterback,” something described by innovators as an ability to exchange real-time, two-way information amid warfare with both fourth- and fifth-generation American and allied warplanes. The F-22 and F-35 are also known to be capable of manned-unmanned teaming, essentially controlling “loyal wingman” drones from the cockpit. Air superiority between the J-20 and U.S. 5th-generation aircraft would also rely heavily upon whether the J-20 were in any way comparable in these areas.
Kris Osborn is the Military Technology Editor of 1945. Osborn is also President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University
--