The 9.3 military parade this year showcased a range of advanced weaponry widely recognized by military observers, including the J-20, J-20A, J-20S, J-35, J-35A stealth fighters, KJ-500 airborne early warning aircraft, KJ-600 carrier-based AEW aircraft, and H-6K strategic bombers.
Among these, the J-20S, capable of commanding multiple stealth UAVs, attracted particular attention. While the U.S. F-35A “loyal wingman” concept remains largely conceptual, China has already operationalized this advanced combat capability.
Commentators noted that the 9.3 parade reflected significant progress in China’s aviation industry and air force in terms of technological innovation, system integration, and strategic transformation.
Controversy Over Air Force Rankings
Despite the parade, some Western think tanks persist in ignoring China’s actual capabilities, remaining locked in the “U.S. absolute superiority” narrative. For instance, the World Military Aircraft Database (WDMMA), a U.S.-based ranking authority, still places China’s air force seventh globally—behind India but ahead of Japan’s Air Self-Defense Force.
These rankings are increasingly questioned for their objectivity and scientific basis. WDMMA’s methodology exhibits significant bias, including outdated technical criteria and exclusion of real-world combat data.
For example, China’s air force scores poorly in helicopter numbers (only 68) compared to India’s 187, even though helicopters contribute minimally to actual combat power. Modern warfare increasingly relies on UAVs for reconnaissance, attack, and supply missions. Yet WDMMA still assigns excessive weight to helicopter quantity. Ironically, WDMMA acknowledges helicopters make up just 2% of China’s air combat power but 29% for India.
Generational and Operational Gaps Ignored
Fifth-generation stealth fighters like the J-20 are undervalued, with a conversion factor of only 1.3, while sixth-generation technologies in testing are ignored. Despite China fielding over 210 J-20s, WDMMA scores them only slightly higher than India’s 36 Rafales, drastically downplaying generational advantages.
Combat data is also overlooked. In the 2025 Indo-Pak air skirmish, Pakistan’s Air Force achieved an 83% beyond-visual-range kill rate using J-10CEs with PL-15 missiles coordinated through ZDK-03 AEW networks—demonstrating system-level combat effectiveness. Yet WDMMA still relies on outdated 2018 electronic warfare scoring.
Conversely, U.S. F-35Bs in Pacific exercises repeatedly revealed operational shortcomings (range only 740 km) but gained extra points for VTOL capability, highlighting the overemphasis on technical specs over practical performance.
Political Bias in Rankings
International political factors further skew evaluations. WDMMA separately ranks U.S. Air Force, Army Aviation, Naval Aviation, and Marine Corps Aviation, giving the U.S. four spots in the top 10. Such segmentation lacks logical consistency and artificially inflates the U.S.’s presence.
India similarly inflates its score despite only 40% domestic production of its “Rafale” fighters. France’s domestically produced Rafales are scored lower than India’s imported ones, exposing blatant inconsistencies.
These manipulations reveal that some rankings function more as instruments of geopolitical influence than objective assessments of military strength.
The Real Picture
Putting aside controversial rankings, the actual global air power landscape is shifting. China is rapidly closing the stealth fighter gap with the U.S. China’s sixth-generation demonstrator successfully flew in October 2024, signaling entry into the top tier of global aviation technology.
Yet WDMMA continues to depress China’s ranking by citing a “lack of strategic bombers,” showing a moving goalpost approach designed to downplay Chinese military capabilities. Meanwhile, the U.S. B-21, despite only 12 aircraft due to cost overruns, receives full “strategic delivery” points, illustrating the rating system’s disconnection from reality.
In South Asia, system-level combat efficiency is striking. Pakistan’s Air Force integrates J-10CEs, PL-15 missiles, and AEW networks into a complete kill chain, whereas India’s Su-30s and Rafales suffer from incompatible data links, reducing combat efficiency, as demonstrated in May 2025 exercises.
Independent think tanks like the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) provide contrasting analyses: China’s operational effectiveness index (OEI) reaches 82, far above India’s 47, highlighting the inadequacy of WDMMA rankings.
Experts suggest adopting multi-dimensional evaluation models, emphasizing combat data and third-party oversight, to create a more transparent and scientific air force ranking system.
Conclusion
Current WDMMA-style rankings fail to reflect actual air combat capability and are heavily influenced by political considerations. With rapid advances in sixth-generation fighters, hypersonic weapons, and AI technology, traditional parameter-based assessments face unprecedented challenges.
For China, the takeaway is clear: rather than relying on flawed rankings, it must focus on strengthening its air force and becoming a core force safeguarding global peace.
