Military Review

Sohu: The J-20 has excellent performance, but the US has a clear lead in the number of 5th generation fighters

62

It became known that by now the number of new-generation F-35 fighters delivered to the US Air Force and Navy has exceeded 550 units. By the end of the year, according to the announced plans, deliveries should reach 600 combat aircraft. At the same time, it was noted that since March, the pace of deliveries has significantly slowed down due to the well-known world problems of a sanitary and epidemic nature.


News The fact that in the coming months the number of fifth-generation F-35 fighters in the American arsenal will be brought to six hundred has caused concern on the part of Chinese military experts. In the profile section of the Chinese information resource Sohu, it is noted that today it is extremely important for China to achieve an increase in the pace of construction of its own new generation J-20 fighters. While their number is determined by several dozen. For the confrontation with the United States, including in the Taiwan direction, according to the PRC, this is clearly not enough.

At the same time, the problem that the PLA faces when acquiring the J-20 for its needs is indicated. This is a high price to pay.

From material to Sohu:

The United States had a similar problem at one time. The price of one F-35 fighter reached an incredible $ 180 million per unit. When they started mass production of their aircraft, it began to decline. Today, one F-35 fighter jet costs the US Air Force approximately $ 80-85 million.

The Chinese author believes that the J-20 fighter "has excellent performance", but the United States has a clear advantage in the number of 5th generation aircraft. To negate this advantage, the Chinese industry needs to start producing J-20s today at a rate of 100-120 aircraft per year. But the Chinese industry cannot afford this yet. One of the reasons is an unresolved problem with aviation engines of suitable characteristics.
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of China
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 13 August 2020 07: 41 New
    +2
    At the same time, the problem that the PLA faces when acquiring the J-20 for its needs is indicated. This is a high price to pay.
    Put on the stream, the price will fly)) down. Let's see, there is still time.
    1. Varyag_0711
      Varyag_0711 13 August 2020 08: 16 New
      14
      It's not about the price, but about LTTH, which, due to super secrecy, no one, including Sokhu, knows. But personally, I strongly doubt their characteristics.
      To copy a glider does not mean to create a 5th generation aircraft with acceptable characteristics.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 13 August 2020 09: 41 New
        +5
        Everything reminds me of this:

        But seriously
        An aircraft of the 5th generation with Al-31 engines? At the same time made according to the duck pattern ?! And it's like Stealth !!!?
      2. vVvAD
        vVvAD 13 August 2020 23: 08 New
        +1
        And from whom did the Chinese copy this glider, I would like to know?

        Is it the Koreans with their KFX-201? But who saw him? And the J-20 can fly quite well, albeit with the AL-31F. Or with MiG MFI? And they didn't mess anything up - didn't they?

        The fact that the VGO at the "duck" scheme and the lower vertical stabilizers will increase the RCS is understandable.
        On the other hand, China has created an engine with an all-purpose UHT (increasing its resource is a matter of time), an aviation radar with an AFAR and an airborne missile defense system, which is larger than the American radius, as well as a stealth coating that is more durable and cheaper than the American 2nd generation (that of the F-22).
        So shapkozidatelstvo is not appropriate.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 17 August 2020 16: 53 New
          0
          And the build quality of the fuselage is high. Everything is very licked
      3. Outsider
        Outsider 21 August 2020 15: 08 New
        -1
        - There is no need to doubt China, it is high time to beware of it. In 2009, the then US Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, having said that the Russians would make stealth in 6 years, and the Chinese - not earlier than 12 - missed!
        "Russia is probably 6 years away from Initial Operating Capability of a fifth-generation fighter and the Chinese are 10 to 12 years away. By then we will have more than 1,000 fifth-generation fighters in our inventory."
        There is still no stealth aircraft in Russia, but the Chinese have made TWO long ago!
    2. URAL72
      URAL72 13 August 2020 08: 30 New
      +1
      What is there to watch? You read these numbers, and a frost on the skin. With our budget, we can only rely on nuclear weapons. But the less raw materials, water and agricultural products on the planet, the less confidence in it. Guns instead of butter !!!
  2. Victor_B
    Victor_B 13 August 2020 07: 46 New
    0
    Why not boast?
    The real characteristics of the F-35 and J-20 are still unknown to anyone.
    And why shouldn't the parameters of the (real) J-20 turn out to be better than that of the Penguin?
    What, in fact, besides the puffy cheeks of the Americans, prevents this?
    1. vadim dok
      vadim dok 13 August 2020 18: 48 New
      0
      Lack of NORMAL, for generation 4 ++ engine in China!
  3. svp67
    svp67 13 August 2020 07: 48 New
    +4
    The Chinese fell into the same "trap" as we did. Of course, you can make a lot of heavy twin-engine fighters, but it will be VERY, VERY expensive, and there is no powerful aircraft engine to put one, not two, on a light fighter of the 5th generation, to reduce the price, without losing combat qualities. So that the J-31 will not save the situation much, it will still be expensive
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 13 August 2020 08: 51 New
      +2
      and there is no powerful aircraft engine to put one on a light fighter of the 5th generation, not two, to reduce the price, without losing combat qualities.

      you confuse warm with soft. And you also draw a conclusion from this
      1. svp67
        svp67 13 August 2020 08: 55 New
        +2
        Quote: Ka-52
        you confuse warm with soft. And you also draw a conclusion from this

        Then tell us what the Chinese have a powerful modern engine for a 5th generation light fighter. And with how many engines is the Chinese Krechet tested?
        And what is the percentage of the engine in the cost of a fighter ...
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 13 August 2020 09: 14 New
          +4
          Separate data on the engine price is available only for the F-35.
          The engine for "A" and "C" costs 11 million, for "B" - 14 million.
          The Pentagon buys the F-35A for 80 million (including the engine).
          This means that the engine is 11/80 × 100 = 14%.
          Little...
          But it should be borne in mind that the F-35 has a very high price for avionics and software in the total price of the aircraft.
          The rest of the aircraft will have a larger percentage of the engine.
          I estimate that for a 4+ generation twin-engine fighter, the cost of 2 engines reaches 40% (20 × 2) of the cost of the aircraft.
          1. svp67
            svp67 13 August 2020 09: 21 New
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Separate data on the engine price is available only for the F-35.

            And what about the Raptor? Well, for comparison
            Quote: voyaka uh
            I estimate that for a 4+ generation twin-engine fighter, the cost of 2 engines reaches 40% (20 × 2) of the cost of the aircraft.

            Here it is close, but not a fact ... Still, apparently a little lower, but ... But here "but". Additional fuel for the second engine, additional metal for an enlarged body, additional systems, so that it can be more than 40%
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 13 August 2020 09: 35 New
              +2
              Additional fuel for the second engine

              heh, you probably think that the flow rate is proportional to the number of engines? laughing
              1. svp67
                svp67 13 August 2020 09: 44 New
                0
                Quote: Ka-52
                heh, you probably think that the flow rate is proportional to the number of engines

                Do you think not? That is, you want to say that a twin-engine aircraft is the same weight as a single-engine aircraft. And how much is the "dead weight" of the engine in one and the other? Then what is left for the combat load?
                1. Senka naughty
                  Senka naughty 13 August 2020 14: 20 New
                  0
                  Quote: Ka-52
                  heh, you probably think that the flow rate is proportional to the number of engines

                  Do you think not? That is, you want to say that a twin-engine aircraft is the same weight as a single-engine aircraft. And how much is the "dead weight" of the engine in one and the other? Then what is left for the combat load?

                  hi
                  As a specialist, can you tell me who is not very versed in aviation, tell me about the advantage of fighters with one propulsion system over a fighter with two? Except that one is cheaper than two ..
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 13 August 2020 14: 27 New
                    0
                    Quote: Senka Mad
                    Except that one is cheaper than two ..

                    But in the current situation, this is not unimportant.
            2. Liam
              Liam 13 August 2020 09: 56 New
              0
              Quote: svp67
              And what about the Raptor?

              In May 2003, Pratt & Whitney was awarded a $ 431 million contract funding production of 42 F119 engines as well as spare engines with deliveries slated for 2006
              http://www.deagel.com/Propulsion-Systems/F119-PW-100_a001720001.aspx
              About 10 million for 2006.
          2. Liam
            Liam 13 August 2020 09: 46 New
            0
            Pratt & Whitney F135
            F135

            Unit cost F135-PW-100, US $ 13.3M per LRIP 9
            F135-PW-600, US $ 19.05M
            http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/172975/pratt-says-latest-f_35-engine-contract-worth-%241.4bn.html
            The cost of the motor for 2016 for A -13.3 million for B-19.05 million
          3. 5-9
            5-9 13 August 2020 12: 12 New
            0
            80-89 Lyamov is it with the engine?
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 13 August 2020 12: 30 New
              +2
              For the Pentagon, yes. Foreign buyers pay more.
          4. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 13 August 2020 17: 42 New
            0
            In 2009, a batch of 100 RD93 units was sold to China at $ 2,3 million apiece, and al31 a year or two later, 140 pieces were sold at a price of $ 5 million.
            The difference in price is two times, so it is far from the fact that an airplane with two engines will be much more expensive than a similar one with one.
        2. Ka-52
          Ka-52 13 August 2020 09: 21 New
          +4
          Then tell us what the Chinese have a powerful modern engine for a 5th generation light fighter. And with how many engines is the Chinese Krechet tested?

          you did not understand. The very design of a twin-engine aircraft does not arise solely from the problem of creating a high-thrust engine. Like a light single-engine fighter, it does not rely solely on the fact that suitable TRDFs are lying around in the warehouse.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 13 August 2020 09: 36 New
            +4
            Look at civilian liners.
            The largest, like the Boeing 747, until recently were all with 4 engines. Then Prat-Whitney and Rolls-Royce stepped up and developed fuel-efficient high-thrust engines.
            And that's all. ALL liners became 2-engine.
            In the military sphere, it is about the same.
            The light MiG-21 had only one engine.
            But they wanted faster and more cargo-carrying fighters. But there is no engine.
            I had to start betting two at a time.
            The Americans managed to create a rather powerful engine for the F-16. And the single-engine F-16 survived the competition. And he has a follower.
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 13 August 2020 09: 56 New
              +3
              Look at civilian liners.

              don't look at the civilian market. In addition to the general layout of the aircraft, there is little similarity.
              In the military sphere, it is about the same.

              nor the same. Before you argue, at least think about WHY and WHY a gradation is created for heavy and light combat vehicles. First of all, this is the purpose and features of the theater of operations. And attracting the engine here is at least not correct.
              If the Americans were considered as local sofa experts, the hornet program would have been curtailed back in 79, and superhornets would never have been born. Why drag a twin-engine aircraft if you have F-16s and F-35s? Why is the purchase of F / A-18E / F in parallel with the purchase of the F-35?
              And the single-engine F-16 survived the competition. And he has a follower.

              purely thanks to the American GDP lobby.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 13 August 2020 10: 08 New
                +1
                "Why is the purchase of F / A-18E / F in parallel with the purchase of the F-35?" ///
                ----
                There is a definite answer to this.
                Because the purchases of the F-35S were many years behind the plan for the re-equipment of aircraft carriers.
                The release of model "C" is small in the general line of the Pentagon and ten other countries.
                Hornets are getting old and have to be written off and replaced.
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 13 August 2020 10: 58 New
                  +3
                  in the general queue of the Pentagon and ten other countries.

                  Do you seriously think that commitments to supply F-35s to some Poland or Japan could have forced the United States to spend an additional $ 25 billion on the purchase of obsolete (from your point of view) aircraft?
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 13 August 2020 11: 41 New
                    +1
                    Sure. Obligations to foreign suppliers are very serious. Everything is calculated for 6-7 years ahead. Israel knows how many planes will be received in each quarter for years to come. In accordance with this, pilots are trained in advance, new squadrons are formed. So far, there hasn't been much delay
                    ----
                    Isn't it the same in Russia? First, they supply to foreign customers, then to their own Air Force.
                    1. Ka-52
                      Ka-52 14 August 2020 04: 54 New
                      +1
                      Obligations to foreign suppliers are very serious. Everything is calculated for 6-7 years ahead.

                      I repeat once again: do you seriously think that the US government would be better off parting with 25 billion and adopting an outdated (in your opinion) aircraft, but would not violate its obligations to Poland? laughing laughing laughing
                      $ 25 billion is for example 2 aircraft carriers USS Gerald R. Ford (the world's most expensive aircraft carriers) or 6 aircraft carriers of the Queen Elizabeth type
                      1. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 14 August 2020 10: 24 New
                        +1
                        The rearmament of the AUG on the F-35S is going according to plan. Now 2 educational
                        squadrons on two aircraft carriers. As new training squadrons are formed,
                        old training ones will receive combat status. At the first stage, all AUGs plan to equip
                        F-35S in proportion to F-18, as 1/3 to 2/3. In the second step, 2/3 to 1/3.
                        On the third - completely switch to the F-35S
                        In accordance with these plans, purchases of both types of aircraft are carried out,
                        considering the aging of the F-18.
                      2. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 14 August 2020 12: 38 New
                        +1
                        they do not need to purchase new hornets to complete the equipment, they simply extend their service life.
                        You simply rested on your version and do not want to admit one truth: in the American Air Force for the past 50 years, there have been both single-engine and twin-engine aircraft at the same time. MDD and Grumman built mainly twin-engine (F-14, F-15, F-18), and GD / LM single engine. And moreover, both GE and PW engines were generally comparable in traction characteristics and resource.
                        The F-16 was once created under the LWF program as an inexpensive and lightweight close air combat fighter. In the early 70s, supporters of light fighters finally managed to get funding from the US Congress to create prototype demonstrators, the construction of which was proposed to be entrusted to two firms (Northrop "and General Dynamics). And a month later, US Secretary of Defense Laird (lo and behold, it was not otherwise, someone gilded the pen ) suddenly declared that it was necessary to turn the demonstrators into full-fledged combat aircraft, which would become an alternative to "expensive tactical aircraft"... And this is exactly the same as the situation with the F-22 / F-35. So the question is not cravings, not at all. In the end, money always wins, not practicality and functionality. Do not fence a garden, Alexey, where you don't need
                      3. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 14 August 2020 13: 42 New
                        +2
                        I did not come up with plans to re-equip aircraft carriers. I mean it
                        read the article.
                        The F-16 is the most widely used fighter in the world.
                        With an impressive battle track record. Although he is expensive.
                        Money / cheapness (your hypothesis) its popularity
                        cannot be explained in any way). And there are still orders for it.
                        With avionics (the last unit) almost like the F-35,
                        and ahead of others in this respect (twin-engine wink )
                        aircraft of the 4th generation.
                        ---
                        But your version also has a right to exist. drinks
                      4. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 17 August 2020 07: 36 New
                        +1
                        The F-16 is the most widely used fighter in the world.

                        logical. Half of the fleet is owned by the US Air Force. There is no alternative in the domestic market, and the lobby helps well in the foreign market.
                        With an impressive battle track record.

                        given the number of wars the United States has waged, even a flying soup bowl would have an impressive combat reputation laughing
                        It's expensive though.
                        Money / cheapness (your hypothesis) its popularity
                        cannot be explained in any way).

                        hmmm ... if memory serves, then the price for the last Block does not exceed 40mln +/-. Those. 1,5 times lower than that of the F-18 E / F. The argument is more than sufficient. Neither Rafali and Eurofighters can resist him on the foreign market, because cost comparable to F18
                      5. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 17 August 2020 12: 10 New
                        +1
                        Just the other day, Congress approved sales of 80 more
                        F-16 to different countries. Single engines are selling well.
                        How is the new engine for the Su-57?
                        If he achieves the high thrust as promised, then
                        on its basis it will be possible to create a light Russian fighter.
                        And it will sell no worse than the F-16 and F-35.
                        For the successes of the Russian military-industrial complex! drinks
                      6. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 17 August 2020 12: 16 New
                        +1
                        F-16 to different countries. Single engines are selling well.

                        well, who can argue. The characteristics are at the level, the price is excellent.
                        How is the new engine for the Su-57?

                        working, fine-tuning based on test results
                        For the successes of the Russian military-industrial complex! drinks

                        drinks fellow
                      7. 3danimal
                        3danimal 17 August 2020 14: 30 New
                        0
                        It is important to provide reliability comparable to the F100-PW-229, it is more critical for a single-motor circuit.
  • PROXOR
    PROXOR 13 August 2020 10: 11 New
    0
    Yeah. The Boeing 737-8Max "flies" while standing on the ground. They pushed on.
    1. Pete mitchell
      Pete mitchell 13 August 2020 12: 04 New
      0
      Quote: PROXOR
      Boeing 737-8Max "flies" while standing on the ground

      We will not scratch: chickens are counted in autumn ...
      1. PROXOR
        PROXOR 13 August 2020 12: 15 New
        -1
        And what is there to count. They have been standing for 1,5 years.
        1. Pete mitchell
          Pete mitchell 13 August 2020 13: 05 New
          -1
          They will be launched on the line in the fall; even a 20% reduction in the number of orders will not particularly affect the further development of the program: Boeing plans to issue 70 aircraft per month. Amid refusals, there are companies that intercept these orders ... so it will be very difficult to move them out of the market
          1. PROXOR
            PROXOR 13 August 2020 14: 40 New
            0
            Will they start ?! Well, let's see how they start. Boeing's losses are already enormous, and it is not yet clear how much dough will be poured so that a couple of dozen decisive people close their eyes. And God forbid, after that another 737 will fall. Here Boeing will no longer otmazhitsya.
            Let me remind you that the first jet liner Comet of the de Havilland company was destroyed by two hatches in the fuselage roof. They were square, but oval were needed. The jamb was fixed, but the liner had already lost its lead.
            And if we with our MC-21 and the Chinese with 919m arrive in time, then the 320th Airbus will have two competitors instead of 1. And Boeing will not be among them)))
            1. Pete mitchell
              Pete mitchell 13 August 2020 15: 55 New
              0
              For MC, I personally only behindbut you need to get down to earth and see the situation / numbers realistically. The number of Comets could not affect aviation, and it is very difficult to move the 737. Neither MC, nor 919th will become competitors of A320 / B737, but statistics ... If MC can move them out of the Russian market, it will already be good luck.
              And the MAX has been tested by the European aviation authorities in Europe for three weeks now: it will return, and to Russia too - it is being promoted very successfully, the capitalists ...
            2. PROXOR
              PROXOR 13 August 2020 16: 20 New
              -1
              Well, now, besides Boeing, there is only an alternative arbas. Boeing sellers do not shun kickbacks. In this regard, Aerbus is getting worse.
            3. Pete mitchell
              Pete mitchell 13 August 2020 16: 38 New
              -1
              Sorry, but blessed is he who believes, commerce ...
              And if you are interested in the topic of the crash of the MAXs, then I recommend looking for a decent report, for example, it is well translated in NYT by the way: Boeing, of course, sinned and will reward them for this, but there is not all their fault, far ...
            4. PROXOR
              PROXOR 14 August 2020 09: 11 New
              -1
              NYT is still that rag. How many they write about Russia fables and other objectionable regime, this is a straight song. Shame on you that you refer to these sorry .... current "corrupt women".
            5. Pete mitchell
              Pete mitchell 14 August 2020 10: 43 New
              -1
              Dear, you have beguiled: I suggest you not look at an article about Russia, the paradigm of which is visible from the title ... In NYT, quite decent authors are published, rummaging in their topics. Sometimes it is necessary to use different sources of information, maybe then we will hear fewer slogans.
              Have a nice day and look in the mirror more often ...
            6. PROXOR
              PROXOR 14 August 2020 13: 45 New
              -1
              This is you beguiled. I cannot read the edition. which in 2014 told how 1000 Russian tanks storm the Donbas. How the same rag categorically accused Russia of the Boeing MH-17 crash. And now the articles are not very independent. And believe me, I draw information from various resources, including those in English. And it's not for you to tell me what to read and what not. CONVERSATION WITH YOU IS CLOSED.
            7. Pete mitchell
              Pete mitchell 14 August 2020 14: 13 New
              -1
              I repeat - you messed up something
              Quote: PROXOR
              not for you to tell me what to read and what not ..

              I recommended reading the analysis on a technical issue: there is no desire, your business, but let me remind you - I did not recommend you to read libels.
            8. 3danimal
              3danimal 17 August 2020 14: 37 New
              +1
              However, there were Russian tanks in the Donbas. Strelkov / Girkin then bragged with might and main about the "Voentorg", the birdfall, etc. Vacationers, again. Caring tankers who went on vacation on a personal (generously borrowed) T-72B3 smile
        2. 3danimal
          3danimal 17 August 2020 14: 36 New
          0
          NYT is still that rag. How many they write about Russia fables and other objectionable regime, this is a straight song. Shame on you that you refer to these sorry .... current "corrupt women".

          Not objectively. And what kind of unwanted regimes are we talking about?
  • 3danimal
    3danimal 17 August 2020 14: 34 New
    0
    You know, it looks like envy of a strong competitor and a desire for all his troubles. Not objectively
    It is unlikely that the MS-21 will take a large share of the world market, because Airbus remains.
    Let me remind you that with the SSJ-100 there was a huge problem with spare parts for foreigners. I had to "jib", which spoiled the reputation.
  • Outsider
    Outsider 21 August 2020 15: 14 New
    -1
    Have you guys been banned from Google? The Chinese have long since built a plant for the serial production of WS-15 engines, and you still don’t know, how can this be ?!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_WS-15
    Maximum thrust:
    Dry thrust: 125 kN - 12 742 kg - without afterburner
    Thrust with Afterburner: 180+ kN - 18 349 kg - with afterburner
    Goal: 197 kilonewtons (44,000 lbf) with afterburner [4] - 20 tons - in perspective
    Learn the materiel ...
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 13 August 2020 07: 49 New
    +1
    Will not buy engines in Russia? To increase the release?
    1. Ru_Na
      Ru_Na 13 August 2020 08: 11 New
      +2
      Well, as if the industry is not rubber, they want to buy, sell, but not to the detriment of our own producers.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 13 August 2020 08: 32 New
    +1
    An interesting question - Who is going to attack whom? Those. for different types of combat operations, different technical means, different military equipment in priority !!!
    There is something universal, but there is also a specialized one.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 13 August 2020 08: 36 New
    +2
    Yes, what are there, the Chinese are leaders in the 8th and 9th generation planes, only these "Russian misers" do not want to do for the Chinese the gravitational engines that are so necessary for these planes crying crying laughing
  • 5-9
    5-9 13 August 2020 12: 17 New
    0
    The Jin-20 is generally a strange aircraft for the 5th generation ... dumb engines, PGO is a huge plus to visibility and a minus to stealth, it looks more like an interceptor or even a bomber rather than an IS ... or gaining dominance in the air.
    But the Chinese wanted to make something like their own F-22 (like we Su-57), i.e. high performance aircraft, not cheap. Well, we got a hat each day

    PS: Phy-35, well, at least a dozen out of 550, finally learned to shoot a cannon?
  • Senka naughty
    Senka naughty 13 August 2020 14: 02 New
    +1
    From material in Sohu: China also has the most delicious rice.
  • iouris
    iouris 13 August 2020 19: 19 New
    0
    Those who have "excellent" characteristics have the "advantage".
  • Magmax
    Magmax 13 August 2020 22: 08 New
    0
    The F35 is a failure. I dont know about the J 20
  • Klingon
    Klingon 13 August 2020 23: 26 New
    0
    "The Chinese author thinks the J-20 fighter" has excellent performance "* damn it, they pulled up with their excellent performance. It's not enough to draw a dviglo, etc., try to make it exactly in metal. It is known that the Chinese materials science is guano. For example, I am a cyclist, I think you've seen Chinese copies of cassettes, switches and Shimano coins? Yes, it looks similar, but in terms of guano functionality. The metal is soft, you can bend it with your fingers. They can work normally, but you will be tortured to configure. And no resource. (I think everyone has seen and knows Ashanvelo) So in the aircraft industry they have the same canoe. This J-20 is a direct road just on AliExpress. wassat