What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

kungfugymnast

FULL MEMBER
Sep 19, 2015
661
-8
340
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
your all terminologies are false, you only trying say WING AREA, that's shows your expertise in this field, And j10/FC31, specially FC31 still not have wing area to land on Carrier and forget about J20/F22
That's not your expertise neither since you don't have certs in aeronautics engineering. Everyone here only took general aeronautical physics knowledge to post

Do you know that US General Dynamics had landed F-16N (navalized variant F-16) on carrier deck before? A-7 Corsair 2, F-8 Crusader are single engine aircraft that used to operate from USS Saratoga, USS Kitty Hawk.

J-10C wing area + fuselage bottom surface area are good enough to land on carrier with slower approach speed than J-15. FC-31 copied design cue from F-35 to get similar RCS and aerodynamic, you think it can't land on carrier better than J-15?

Whereas, J-20A & F-22 can't because they would approach the carrier too fast.
 

Su33KUB

BANNED

New Recruit

Jan 3, 2018
86
-2
37
Country
Chile
Location
Japan
Great info. Basically, any aircraft with 30,000lb max thrust engine could easily take off from carrier. Su-57, F-22, J-20 can be fitted with strengthened landing gear, no issue. It is the landing approach part that matters most, as they would approach too fast due to their design. Aircraft such as F/A-18E, Rafale, J-10C, FC-31, F-35 however are designed for low speed maneuverability & stability allowing them to approach slower and land safe.

F-14B+ swingwings would extend forward being less aerodynamic to gain more lift, better control & slower approach. F-14B+ internal fuel tank max 15,000lb fuel while F-22 max fuel 18,000lb. F-14B+ vs J-20 in terms of maneuverability, the J-20 would win because of better lift from larger wing area. F-14 could hardly get 9G and known of pulling mostly 7G. An F-15C could easily out turn the F-14 in dogfight. F-22 and J-20 have higher max takeoff weight 80,000lb mainly from larger fuel tank 18,000-22,000lb and heavier armament payload >18,000lb compared to F-14B+ max take off 74,000lb (aircraft weight 34,000lb + payload max 14,500,lb + internal fuel 15,000lb). Fighters with large internal fuel tank don't fill full tank unless needed to travel long range. They don't carry full payload neither depending on mission.

J-20A with WS-10C, it would fly more like an F-15E on full internal fuel + CFTs than F-14B.


Gambit is ex-USAF pilot by the way, he posted facts and he's definitely different person.
J-20 is still limited by TWR, So using a lighter aircraft is better for a naval fighter.

Regardless of opinion, the bank angle tells you the max G load a 82 deg of bank angle generates 9Gs and the aircraft is close to stall, at Zhuhai the J-20 showed bank angles near 80 or more.

When they get WS-15 the turn rate will improve, but now still in underpowered, taking off from an aircraft carrier still will be harder.
 

Brainsucker

SENIOR MEMBER
Feb 11, 2014
2,448
3
2,645
Country
Indonesia
Location
Indonesia
I found a yoytube channel called mhdefence or something that show about j20 carrier version with arresting gear. Is it legit?

Is that mean that j20 will become the next csg and not j35? Or is it fake?
 

Su33KUB

BANNED

New Recruit

Jan 3, 2018
86
-2
37
Country
Chile
Location
Japan
Can you please stop with these stupid analysis? They are all based on the premise that they are showing the full capabilities, which is plain wrong.

The Chinese have no intention to reveal any notable true capabilities, there is no intention for chest-bumping with hyper-fancy manoeuvres like the Russian's do at MAKS.

All you can deduct from this display is the PLAAF political will to show it to the public and as such it's confidence in the WS-10C.

Anything else like turn-radius, speed of climb, thrust to weight ratio, manoeuvrability and whatever MUST be WRONG, since - in Germany we would say: "Der Pilot is mit angezogener Handbremse geflogen!" - this was just to show the J-20 flying, and not to impress the audience or any armchair analyst!

So please stop it.
I care less about you banning me, as long as I am right, and there are more forums I am happy, any way math does not lie, a bank angle in a turn close to 80 degs means 9Gs, it means corner speed.

Can I say the exact Turn rate of J-20? no of course not, but by looking at that bank I can see it is turning tight, and is a better aproximation by method than just saying "we can not know" , I am using math and physics.

1634362697295.png


And I have used known data easy to use, that turn on the picture shows a close to 90 degree bank, that approximation by bank angles is a much better method to guess the real capabilities by using physics, now you might think it is stupid but the reality the bank angle method is a scientific approximation since it is a fact that bank angles tell you the G load,

So do as you wish ban me if you want ban me i careless about it, as long as physics and math support me and there are other forums i careless.
 
Last edited:

kungfugymnast

FULL MEMBER
Sep 19, 2015
661
-8
340
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
J-20 is still limited by TWR, So using a lighter aircraft is better for a naval fighter.

Regardless of opinion, the bank angle tells you the max G load a 82 deg of bank angle generates 9Gs and the aircraft is close to stall, at Zhuhai the J-20 showed bank angles near 80 or more.

When they get WS-15 the turn rate will improve, but now still in underpowered, taking off from an aircraft carrier still will be harder.
With CATOBAR in Type 003, you can launch the heavy F-111 (old TF-30 with only 23,000lb thrust on afterburner) up in the air, no problem.

Only ski ramp Type 001 would require lighter aircraft with enough thrust to dust off safely. That's why Shenyang made the J-15A more aerodynamic to gain speed fast in order to carry more payload than Su-33 which made landing approach speed faster too which is bad. J-15B probably being redesigned to less aerodynamic with max speed just almost mach 2.

You're right on the J-20 flight envelope, just compare the performance of J-20A vs J-10A/B could tell the maneuverability and nimbleness between the 2. Like the F-15, the J-20 would avoid dogfight unless really necessary.
I care less about you banning me, as long as I am right, and there are more forums I am happy, any way math does not lie, a bank angle in a turn close to 80 degs means 9Gs, it means corner speed.

Can I say the exact Turn rate of J-20? no of course not, but by looking at that bank I can see it is turning tight, and is a better aproximation by method than just saying "we can not know" , I am using math and physics.

View attachment 785446

And I have used known data easy to use, that turn on the picture shows a close to 90 degree bank, that approximation by bank angles is a much better method to guess the real capabilities by using physics, now you might think it is stupid but the reality the bank angle method is a scientific approximation since it is a fact that bank angles tell you the G load,

So do as you wish ban me if you want ban me i careless about it, as long as physics and math support me and there are other forums i careless.
Just ignore them and stick to facts talk, they can't do anything other than angering you hoping that you would respond with anger posting wrong words that could get you banned.
 
Last edited:

kungfugymnast

FULL MEMBER
Sep 19, 2015
661
-8
340
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
I found a yoytube channel called mhdefence or something that show about j20 carrier version with arresting gear. Is it legit?

Is that mean that j20 will become the next csg and not j35? Or is it fake?
Could be real and for testing on mock deck purpose. If they wanted a navalized J-20, the first thing they'll alter will be the wings to less swept angle, too much modification required therefore better for them to come up with totally new design instead. To play safe, they'll pick design from F-35C but with twin engines and longer.
 

Deino

INT'L MOD
Nov 9, 2014
10,891
15
18,298
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
...
And I have used known data easy to use, that turn on the picture shows a close to 90 degree bank, that approximation by bank angles is a much better method to guess the real capabilities by using physics, now you might think it is stupid but the reality the bank angle method is a scientific approximation since it is a fact that bank angles tell you the G load,

So do as you wish ban me if you want ban me i careless about it, as long as physics and math support me and there are other forums i careless.

I#m not interested in banning you, but in a decent discussion and all you do is extrapolating - or by your definition "calculating" - something as facts based on a wrong premise! The J-20 at Zhuhai did not demonstrate its full potential and manoeuvrability - in fact not even close to - and therefore I ask you again:

Why do you think it did and even more why do you think that any reasonable conclusions can be drawn from it?

Otherwise I beg you both - including @kungfugymnast not again to derail this thread with baseless stupid claims since this will lead to consequences.
 

Su33KUB

BANNED

New Recruit

Jan 3, 2018
86
-2
37
Country
Chile
Location
Japan
I#m not interested in banning you, but in a decent discussion and all you do is extrapolating - or by your definition "calculating" - something as facts based on a wrong premise! The J-20 at Zhuhai did not demonstrate its full potential and manoeuvrability - in fact not even close to - and therefore I ask you again:

Why do you think it did and even more why do you think that any reasonable conclusions can be drawn from it?

Otherwise I beg you both - including @kungfugymnast not again to derail this thread with baseless stupid claims since this will lead to consequences.
First let me tell you this:

If in the past I was rude with you, I beg you to forgive me for such behavior, I do not like feel I have disrespect any one, so please forgive me if I was rude, offensive or unpolite.

Now I do not want to speak pages, basically I have said all.

The video has a turn where the aircraft is doing a turn in 20 seconds or around that time so you can guess estimation of 18 deg/s turn.

In order to know if the aircraft is doing its max turn rate, you can use the bank amgle G load chart,

1634374410472.png


Beyond 80 deg bank angle you get 9Gs,

1634374483208.png


The stall speed means at a very high AoA or bank angle the aircraft is close to stall thus sustained turn rates are lower than instantaneous turn rates.

Pretty much the video shows a J-20 banking a lot,
1634374789306.png


If you look at the picture taken from the bellow video the J-20 is turning almost in a 90 deg bank angle.


now see this

To make a maximum rate turn, you need to turn at the highest angle of bank that can be sustained at the lowest possible airspeed – just above VS – that is why the stall warning is used to indicate maximum rate.



In the aforementioned videos J-20 is flying at sea level which is the highest density thus it can generate the most of lift and the aircraft is flying with a very high angle of attack.

Thus the J-20 is showing low speed high bank angles at low altitude so basically you are seeing turning at its best see the engine factor

to turn at maximum rate we need maximum centripetal force and maximum lift. The increased angle of attack means increased drag, so full power is used. As rate of turn is proportional to velocity, the limiting factor in a maximum rate turn is power.

What I am saying is by the low speed and high bank angles you know it is turning at its best or close to it, but still the J-20 is not turning very well the result of still not having WS-15


Now 18 deg/sec is like a F-18 Hornet, so J-20 now very likely can keep up with the Hornet.
 

lcloo

SENIOR MEMBER
Jul 28, 2010
3,709
14
9,221
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
I found a yoytube channel called mhdefence or something that show about j20 carrier version with arresting gear. Is it legit?

Is that mean that j20 will become the next csg and not j35? Or is it fake?
I can assure you that MH Defence youtube video are unreliable. You can go thro' several of his past video if you have time.
 

Deino

INT'L MOD
Nov 9, 2014
10,891
15
18,298
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
First let me tell you this:

If in the past I was rude with you, I beg you to forgive me for such behavior, I do not like feel I have disrespect any one, so please forgive me if I was rude, offensive or unpolite.

Now I do not want to speak pages, basically I have said all.

.....
You have not been rude in the past, only too often far too much off topic and too long and this post is it again:

Please just a short answer to short question: Why do you think it did and even more why do you think that any reasonable conclusions can be drawn from it?


I am asking for any open source doc.
via these books: https://www.harpia-publishing.com/serieschina
 

FuturePAF

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 17, 2014
5,717
20
6,766
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
@Deino Have you seen the videos by the YouTuber “Binkov’s Battlegrounds” called “Is F-22 early retirement a gift to China?” And “Chinese Air Forces: Flaming Dragons or a Baby Tiger?”.

If so, what are you thought on his speculations on the inventory of the USAF and PLAAF by today and by 2030 and 2040? Do you think his estimations are reasonable or just speculations?
 

White and Green with M/S

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 29, 2020
3,810
-2
2,003
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
That's not your expertise neither since you don't have certs in aeronautics engineering. Everyone here only took general aeronautical physics knowledge to post

Do you know that US General Dynamics had landed F-16N (navalized variant F-16) on carrier deck before? A-7 Corsair 2, F-8 Crusader are single engine aircraft that used to operate from USS Saratoga, USS Kitty Hawk.

J-10C wing area + fuselage bottom surface area are good enough to land on carrier with slower approach speed than J-15. FC-31 copied design cue from F-35 to get similar RCS and aerodynamic, you think it can't land on carrier better than J-15?

Whereas, J-20A & F-22 can't because they would approach the carrier too fast.
you're claiming to be an expert, not me, and your expertise on aerodynamics, aeronautics really sucks man, mostly based on pictures
 

Deino

INT'L MOD
Nov 9, 2014
10,891
15
18,298
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
@Deino Have you seen the videos by the YouTuber “Binkov’s Battlegrounds” called “Is F-22 early retirement a gift to China?” And “Chinese Air Forces: Flaming Dragons or a Baby Tiger?”.

If so, what are you thought on his speculations on the inventory of the USAF and PLAAF by today and by 2030 and 2040? Do you think his estimations are reasonable or just speculations?

Nope ... which video is it?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom