First thing first, if you're a fighter jet, one thing you don't want to do is "hunkaar." Silence is golden, stealth is key. Hunkaar is good on TikTok-esque news shows, terrible at scenes of war. These are war machines, not Ramleela props. https://twitter.com/newslaundry/status/1289433175412834304
And the second point, always compare equals. Generations matter. With that said, let's measure up our "hunkaar" machines against the "kaagaz ke sher." https://armedforces.eu/compare/multirole_aircraft
India has 5 Rafales now. What's the equivalent in China? Depends of the endgame. If it's bhakti, then J-10. If reality, J-20.

Chengdu J-20 is one of the world's only 3 fifth-generation aircrafts, the other 2 being F-22 and F-35. Rafale, 4.5th generation.
The first Rafale rolled out when most of today's jingo-bots were still wondering what to do with their lives, 1986. J-20 is barely 3 years old. That a 3-year-old technology is superior to a 34-year-old one is no rocket science to grasp.
Does speed matter? Not an expert but I'd wager it does to fighter jets. J-20 outdoes Rafales by a marginal 0.2 Mach. A difference of over 200 kilometers to the hour.

How about stealth, does that matter? Again, am assuming it does. Are these two stealth aircrafts? Only J-20.
Service ceiling. This is, in layman terms, the maximum usable altitude of an aircraft. You see, air density decreases with altitude. And with this, so does your rate of climb even with engines performing their best. At some point it reduces to 0. That's absolute ceiling.
But absolute ceiling isn't what you can hit and be productive. That point is when your climb rate is a certain predefined value. By most standards it's 100 feet per minute for combat aircrafts. When you hit that point, you're at what's called your "service ceiling."
This service ceiling is key to a combat aircraft's performance and longevity. The higher this value, the better. For J-20, it's 18,000m. For Rafale, 15,000m. A good 3km gap.
Range. Now this is where Rafale scores with 300 meters more than J-20. But ask yourself, does it even matter when the two parties share a 3,500-km border? Does this difference matter even in cases where no borders are shared?
Oh and like I said, we have 5 Rafales. Great. China has no fewer than 50 J-20s. Even its 4th generation J-10 numbers in 300+.

Finally, cost. While we acquired Rafale at well over $200m apiece, a J-20 costs barely over half as much at $110m.
Canards are forewings on fixed-wing combat aircrafts meant to offer improved maneuverability, reduce main-wing load, and better overall aerodynamics and stability. The configuration is at least a century old.
On the subject of canards, Dhanoa makes 2 claims:

1. Canards increase radar signature, so adversely impact stealth.
2. F-22 doesn't have canards.

So let's take a look.

Not only does the F-22 have canards, it has gigantic ones. Its radar signature, anyone?
The second question "calling out China's bluff" was about supercruising. He does have a point there. J-20 does NOT have supercruise abilities, i.e. it cannot fly at supersonic speeds without burning extra fuel in the engine's exhaust.

The ability is only one WS-15 retrofit away. WS-15 is an in-the-works engine that will potentially add supercruise ability to J-20. In its current avatar that is already available, it still doesn't do supercruise, but the one nearing completion can. https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2018/09/06/china-stealth-fighter-clear-engine-roadblock-mass-production.html
All that said, is the Rafale actually trash then? Not really. For one, stealth is still a feature tested best in live combat situations. Not having stealth is a detriment but having it doesn't guarantee untouchability either. It's a desirability, not the holy grail.
Supercruise is another plus with Rafale because it's always an advantage to be able to perform maneuvers at supersonic speeds without burning a ton of payload.

But is that enough to accord it the vulgar spectacle we seem to have on our new channels? Not even close.
Although not by a fat margin, Rafale is still a technologically inferior piece of machinery next to Cengdu J-20. No shame in admitting what's essentially gospel truth.

Another comparison our news anchors can't make enough of is with Pakistan's F-16.
Again, compare the equals. Why bring in F-16, something it acquired as long ago as 1983? Why not JF-17 Thunder which came in 2007 and of which it has 122, almost twice as many as F-16?

Answer: Narrative.
Is JF-17 as good as Rafale? Probably not. But is as pale in comparison either? Let the specs speak for themselves.

First thing first, J-17 is 4th generation, unlike Rafale's 4.5. Rafale wins this round, sure. So no supercruise and no stealth.
Top speed: J-17 does 1,960kmph. A minuscule 48 kmph more than our Rafale. Am willing to call that a tie, let's be generous.

Service ceiling: J-17 does 16,900 meters. That's a good 1.7km higher than what Rafal can manage. Sorry, but this round does go to Pakistan.
Coming back to supercruise, the J-17 does have plans of upgrading to the Chinese WS-13 which could lend it the superpower. If WS-13 sounds like a predecessor to the WS-15 we discussed earlier, that's because it is.
And then there's the cost. A single J-17 unit costs about $25-30 million. We acquired Rafale at almost 9 times that price. And just to repeat, they have 122 J-17s, we have 5 Rafales.
Again, is J-17 better than, or even as good as Rafale? Not at all. But is it really one of those "kaagaz ke sher" our anchors are imagining? Let's not insult our intelligence.

Jingoism clouds judgment.

It also kills self-esteem.
You can follow @Schandillia.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: