October 16, 2024 - The U.S. military website "WDMMA" released its latest world air force rankings, placing China behind India, ranking only 7th. This ranking has sparked backlash among Chinese military enthusiasts and netizens, and a military magazine published an article expressing dissatisfaction, claiming that the Chinese Communist Air Force (PLAAF) poses a deterrent to the U.S. in East Asia. Several Taiwanese military experts offered differing views on the ranking. One expert argued that China’s imitation equipment is bound to fall short of original products and is merely for show.

WDMMA’s PLAAF Ranking Sparks Controversy

In the 2024 global air force power rankings released by the "WDMMA" website, four U.S. branches—Air Force, Navy Aviation, Army Aviation, and Marine Corps—respectively took the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th spots. Russia ranked 3rd, and India came in 6th, while China, despite being considered an emerging power, was ranked 7th (ranking link).

A report from Mainland China’s Ordnance Magazine claimed that while the U.S. fleet is large, its main aircraft types such as the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18 are old models from the last century, with many in service for over 30 years. Additionally, the production speed of the F-35 stealth fighter is unable to meet replacement demands due to material supply limitations. The report stated that the U.S. only maintains a qualitative and quantitative advantage in strategic transport and strategic bombers.

The article also mentioned that China now possesses over 1,300 fourth- and 4.5-generation aircraft, including advanced models such as the J-10C and J-16. As one of the world’s leading fifth-generation fighters, the J-20 has a service fleet of over 300 aircraft, which the report claimed is sufficient to strategically deter the U.S. in East Asia.

In response to the ranking showing India ahead of China, Chinese media argued that it was a "politically correct" decision, calling it simply the U.S. "entertaining itself."

On Weibo, many Chinese netizens expressed dissatisfaction with the ranking, although some urged people to "face the gap and keep striving."

Several Taiwanese military experts shared their views with Dajiyuan. 

Shen Ming-shih: Chinese Copies Can’t Compare to Originals

Shen Ming-shih, director of the Institute for National Defense and Security Research in Taiwan, told Epoch Times that the ranking of air power has a quantitative basis, similar to the well-known Firepower Index, which ranks countries' military strength based on the performance and quantity of their weapon systems. While the rankings rely on quantifiable standards, they only reflect the number and performance of equipment and cannot account for factors like training and logistics. Therefore, this ranking cannot be equated with actual air combat capabilities but is still of some reference value.

Shen pointed out, "Interestingly, any branch with independent air combat capabilities is included in the ranking, and the U.S. occupies the 1st, 2nd, and 4th places, with Russia in 3rd. However, it shows that U.S. air power could be three times that of Russia, which has been verified on the battlefield in Ukraine."

Regarding Chinese air power, Shen said that China’s air force technology originally came from the former Soviet Union, but China’s domestically produced copies do not perform as well as the original versions. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, China acquired some U.S. technology, but sanctions were imposed following the 1989 Tiananmen incident. Because Russia needed money, China was able to acquire a lot of Russian technology. Currently, aside from the J-10, which comes from Israel, China’s other fighters, such as the J-11, J-15, and J-16, are all based on Russian models. China’s stealth fighters, such as the J-20, are based on stolen and copied U.S. fighter technology. "Copied versions can never compare to the originals, and the gap is significant. It may look good for show, but in real combat, the difference would be clear."

Shen also noted that India's Russian aircraft are superior to those China purchased because China reverse-engineers and copies Russian technology and then competes with Russia in exports, prompting Russia to withhold advanced technology. Additionally, India, due to the poor performance of its domestic aircraft, purchased advanced jets from France, including Mirage fighters, which bolstered its air power and contributed to its higher ranking. However, Shen said that India’s air strength is still inferior to China’s.

Shen explained that China’s air force faces challenges not only due to technological gaps but also because its pilots receive insufficient training time, spending much of it on political education. This reliance on mutual supervision during training weakens Chinese pilots' professionalism compared to their Western counterparts.

"Under the Party’s political indoctrination, Chinese pilots may be bold in guerrilla warfare, but when it comes to professional air combat, the U.S.’s high-level joint operational capabilities could allow them to detect Chinese fighters first and use missiles to shoot them down."

Shen added that, generally speaking, China’s fifth-generation fighter jets are equivalent to the 4.5-generation jets of the U.S. and Western countries, representing a technological gap of about half a generation or 10 to 15 years. For example, the U.S. is already phasing out the B-2 stealth bomber and introducing the new B-21 bomber, while China’s copycat version of the B-2, the H-20, is reportedly completed but has yet to enter official service, highlighting the gap. Furthermore, NATO countries have provided Ukraine with F-16s, which have shot down Russia’s Su-30 fighters, the same model that China modified into the J-16. China claims these as fifth-generation fighters, but in reality, they cannot compete with the U.S.'s fourth-generation fighters. Moreover, the improved versions of these fourth-generation fighters outperform China’s so-called fifth-generation jets.

Ou Xifu: The PLAAF Ranks Third in Quantity, but Seventh in Quality

Ou Xifu, director of the Institute of Chinese Communist Military and Operational Concepts at Taiwan’s National Defense and Security Research Institute, stated that if measured by quantity, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) should rank third, behind only the U.S. and Russia. However, the ranking released by WDMMA is based on quality, which includes factors such as modernization, logistical capability, aircraft types for offense and defense, and special emphasis on aircraft for specific missions like close air support, bombers, balanced aircraft types, training, defense industry capacity, and advanced innovation. Because of these criteria, the U.S. dominates the top four spots, and China ranks lower at seventh.

“In terms of innovative development, the U.S. can independently develop new aircraft types, such as the fourth-generation F-15/16 and the fifth-generation F-22/35, which are leaders in the field, followed by other countries. Currently, most of China’s fighter jets are still based on imitation or reverse engineering, with little innovation. Naturally, this lowers their ranking.”

However, Ou Xifu also mentioned that quantity itself is an advantage. Using superior numbers to defeat a smaller force is a strength of the PLAAF. The Chinese air force has a large number of fighter jets, but a relatively low proportion of specialized aircraft, bombers, and transport planes.

He added that rankings like these, which balance aircraft types, are also influenced by their specific metrics. Every measurement has its biases and limitations, so the rankings should be considered as a reference.

Su Ziyun: The PLAAF Should Rank Fifth

Su Ziyun, director of the Institute for Strategic and Resource Studies at Taiwan’s National Defense and Security Research Institute, told Epoch Times that the ranking method used by WDMMA is not very rigorous, so it should only be taken as a reference.

“For example, placing the U.S. Army at third doesn’t make much sense, because while the U.S. Army has many aircraft, most of them are helicopters with no combat capabilities. Ranking the PLAAF behind the U.S. Army is relatively unreasonable.”

Additionally, Su Ziyun pointed out discrepancies in how fighter jet numbers were calculated for the Chinese air force.

He believes that the PLAAF should rank fifth, just behind the U.S. Marine Corps and ahead of India. India’s air force does not have as many fourth-generation jets as China, so its ranking should be lower. “That would put the U.S. Air Force at number one, the U.S. Navy at number two, Russia at number three, the U.S. Marine Corps at number four, and China at number five.”

Su also commented on Taiwan’s ranking, which was surprisingly low at 33rd, even behind Algeria, which ranks 24th, and Indonesia. He argued that Singapore, ranked 35th, should be placed higher as well.

“Taiwan should rank around 15th or 16th. How could Pakistan’s air force, ranked 18th, be stronger than Taiwan’s? That doesn’t make sense. Pakistan’s aircraft aren’t very advanced, while Taiwan’s F-16s are at least modern.” Su added.

Editor: Gao Jing