Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[amalakas]

Well, J-20 nobody claim it is perfect. very few ppl insist it has supercruise capability at least for now.
but, F-22 is different, it it supposed to be the king of the sky.


fifth-generation fighters F-22 defined as big "3S".
1) having all-aspect stealth even when armed.
2) with super maneuverability achieve through thrust vectoring.
3) supercruise capability.


the king with "super maneuverability" get into the lunch salad by 4th generation on dog fighting, it is a surprise to me. the F16 pilot said he saw a F-22 in the front suddenly the same F-22 locks the F16 from behind. F-22 was God like fighter.

I still dont understand "super maneuverability achieve through thrust vectoring" can shoot down by older generation easily. how that is possible. I am not talking about something with "good" maneuverability, it is "super"!


Anyway, the Typhoons scored several Raptor kills during the Red Flag Alaska. On one day a German pilot, recounting a succesfull mission ironically commented: “yesterday, we have had a Raptor salad for lunch.”

There are certain areas in the flight envelope considered "super maneuverability".
Besides the EF2000 has HMQS and IRST, it makes things easier than the simple F-16.

 

[gambit]

you did not answer this,

Yes, I did. Here is the significant passage that others and you ignored because it is too inconvenient...

F-22 Raptor kill markings shown off by German Eurofighter Typhoons. “The F-22 is not invincible” saga continues. « The Aviationist

However, as already explained several times, simulated kills scored during dissimilar BFM engagements don’t prove a fighter plane is better than another one, and are almost meaningless unless the actual Rules Of Engagement (ROE) and the training scenario are known.

We do not know what those rules were at that time. Probably unknown to you, the reality is that instructors often lose to students, not because they are inferior pilots, but because they set themselves up in inferior positions to illustrate principles, to teach students how to maintain advantages, and how to cope with dissimilar flight capabilities. Anyone can be an instructor for a short amount of time in Red Flag. That comment by the German pilot could be simple bravado. I know you do not like to know facts that may challenge your made up mind about this, especially when the pull of China is strong in you.

Moreover, at a distance of about 50 km the Typhoon IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is capable to find even a stealthy plane “especially if it is large and hot, like the F-22″ a Eurofighter pilot said.

No one is immuned from his own IR radiation, meaning no one has yet able to control his own IR radiation the way we could with EM via shaping. So there is nothing new here. Further, IR sensor do not give vital target resolutions like: altitude, heading, speed and aspect angle. It only give general direction. For aspect angle, if the IR source is fluctuating and there is a highest read, that could be accurately guessed to be the target's engines, meaning the target is heading away from the sensor.

However, this does not mean the F-22 will ALWAYS be in such a disadvantaged situations.

 

[gambit]

See again the sentence, idiot.

You have poor reading comprehension.

Experience could be one ingredient of the background.

Do you think one without field/working experience = having no background at all?

In your case, you have no experience at all, correct?

Do you think you will have a credit by showing off your internet copy and paste?
Do you think people will fall to believe you are an expert by copy and paste?



I've told you that you have lost your credibility since you claim: Airduct/intake = Nacelle. What kind of aviation expert that unable to distinguish Air Intake with Nacelle?

If you can't accept my citation, explanation and evidence when I busted you regarding Nacelle = air intake, then what can we expect you to accept my valid answer?

I give you another chance to prove your claim. Tell me why do you call the PAKFA's air intake as a nacelle? What is nacelle?

Since you failed to answer another first year aerodynamics/aviation question, the answer to: 'What motivate the propulsion engineering?'

Is: Initial cruise altitude, balanced field length, cruise speed and maximum cruise speed.

So here is what we do know about you and your lie about your 'background':

You tried to use your 'background' to shut down the Indians. But when challenged about what 'background' you sputtered something about 'study' and gave a link about an Indonesian aviation college source.

You do not know a basic first year aerodynamics question: 'What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?'

You do not know the three main engineering points in designing an aircraft: minimum takeof weight (MTOW), wing area and propulsion. As well what factors motivate them. That mean you have no education in aviation at all.

So if you have no education and experience, that mean you have no training and that mean your 'background' is completely empty.

 

[antonius123]

In your case, you have no experience at all, correct?

No relevant experience, but relevant education have.

How about your education and experience? Please no more fake.

Since you failed to answer another first year aerodynamics/aviation question, the answer to: 'What motivate the propulsion engineering?'

Is: Initial cruise altitude, balanced field length, cruise speed and maximum cruise speed.

So here is what we do know about you and your lie about your 'background':

You tried to use your 'background' to shut down the Indians. But when challenged about what 'background' you sputtered something about 'study' and gave a link about an Indonesian aviation college source.

You do not know a basic first year aerodynamics question: 'What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?'

You do not know the three main engineering points in designing an aircraft: minimum takeof weight (MTOW), wing area and propulsion. As well what factors motivate them. That mean you have no education in aviation at all.

So if you have no education and experience, that mean you have no training and that mean your 'background' is completely empty.

I dont answered yet, not failed. It is your bad habit in twisting other people statement.

I am still waiting your answer on my question that is very much relevant to our debate.

If you fail, then no need for me to answer any question you like to throw.

You have ruin your credibility you have built by dragging and copy & past internet article, as you failled in many topics. Aviation expert should know what nacelle is and what air intake is, why cant you?

That is because the engines in the pak fa are in nacelles maybe ??

The engines in the MiG 29,Su-27-xx and the PakFa are in a Nacelle each. the front part of any nacelle is the air intake genius ....

keep coming back comedy man, we'll kindly respond to anything...

Well, you are slapping your own master Gambit

Since he claims that the uneven "Air Intake" I referred as the contributor to RCS should have been called "Nacelle" according to your master the expert

There are certain areas in the flight envelope considered "super maneuverability".
Besides the EF2000 has HMQS and IRST, it makes things easier than the simple F-16.

the Typhoons scored several Raptor kills during the Red Flag Alaska. On one day a German pilot, recounting a succesfull mission ironically commented: “yesterday, we have had a Raptor salad for lunch.”

If both EF2K and Raptor each has it's own flight envelope of super maneuverability as the reason, then it doesnt answered yet.

The article has indicate the "clue", if you have adequate reading comprehension

 

[amalakas]

No relevant experience, but relevant education have.

How about your education and experience? Please no more fake.



I dont answered yet, not failed. It is your bad habit in twisting other people statement.

I am still waiting your answer on my question that is very much relevant to our debate.

If you fail, then no need for me to answer any question you like to throw.

You have ruin your credibility you have built by dragging and copy & past internet article, as you failled in many topics. Aviation expert should know what nacelle is and what air intake is, why cant you?



Well, you are slapping your own master Gambit

Since he claims that the uneven "Air Intake" I referred as the contributor to RCS should have been called "Nacelle" according to your master the expert



the Typhoons scored several Raptor kills during the Red Flag Alaska. On one day a German pilot, recounting a succesfull mission ironically commented: “yesterday, we have had a Raptor salad for lunch.”

If both EF2K and Raptor each has it's own flight envelope of super maneuverability as the reason, then it doesnt answered yet.

The article has indicate the "clue", if you have adequate reading comprehension

Your posts deteriorate with time, do you know that? it is harder and harder to understand what you are on about.

 

[antonius123]

Your posts deteriorate with time, do you know that? it is harder and harder to understand what you are on about.

Which one? about the Raptor salad lunch for Typhoon?

Which part you dont understand?

There is no excuse for you to say you dont understand what I am telling as the above; you claim yourself as one with military/aviation experience, right?

 

[amalakas]

Which one? about the Raptor salad lunch for Typhoon?

Which part you dont understand?

There is no excuse for you to say you dont understand what I am telling as the above; you claim yourself as one with military/aviation experience, right?

everything you wrote is a mess.

On the raptors issue I have nothing more to comment. The question is why do some people think that EF2000 scoring kills in exercises with Raptors is news?

Until relatively recently (or maybe still even, Gambit will know more about this), the aggressors where still using F-5Es!

These planes regularly sweep the floor with much more advanced aircraft because of their agility and performance.

The point is exercises are mostly to sharpen a pilot's skills and get him to use his aircraft to the limit.

Combat operations have little to do with these exercises in terms of goals and use of assets.

Greek F-16s decimated the aggressors in RED FLAG a few years ago. What is that supposed to mean? That we could beat the USAF ? It simply means the pilots are excellent and they performed excellent in the test!

It is known that a Raptor would very rarely get caught in a dogfight. Why? its pilot would simply choose NOT to.

 

[gambit]

No relevant experience, but relevant education have.

Bullsh1t.

Q: What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?
A: Power.

You did not know it. There goes your claim about having aviation education.

How about your education and experience? Please no more fake.

I have proven myself to many here many times over long before you got here, little boy.

I dont answered yet, not failed.

You do not answer at all but simply danced around the question.

I am still waiting your answer on my question that is very much relevant to our debate.

Your question about PLC is irrelevant. This is about aviation of which you claimed to have education.

If you fail, then no need for me to answer any question you like to throw.

You do not answer my questions because you have no education. You lied.

You have ruin your credibility you have built by dragging and copy & past internet article, as you failled in many topics. Aviation expert should know what nacelle is and what air intake is, why cant you?

Say that I do not know a damn thing about aviation. Why does that prevent you from answering?

So here is another one...

Q: Name two major advantages in having a reasonably circular/elliptical fuselage.

 

[gambit]

everything you wrote is a mess.

He is scrambling to cover his exposed ****.

Until relatively recently (or maybe still even, Gambit will know more about this), the aggressors where still using F-5Es!

F-16s.

 

[eachus]

Yes, I did. Here is the significant passage that others and you ignored because it is too inconvenient...

F-22 Raptor kill markings shown off by German Eurofighter Typhoons. “The F-22 is not invincible” saga continues. « The Aviationist

We do not know what those rules were at that time. Probably unknown to you, the reality is that instructors often lose to students, not because they are inferior pilots, but because they set themselves up in inferior positions to illustrate principles, to teach students how to maintain advantages, and how to cope with dissimilar flight capabilities. Anyone can be an instructor for a short amount of time in Red Flag. That comment by the German pilot could be simple bravado. I know you do not like to know facts that may challenge your made up mind about this, especially when the pull of China is strong in you.


No one is immuned from his own IR radiation, meaning no one has yet able to control his own IR radiation the way we could with EM via shaping. So there is nothing new here. Further, IR sensor do not give vital target resolutions like: altitude, heading, speed and aspect angle. It only give general direction. For aspect angle, if the IR source is fluctuating and there is a highest read, that could be accurately guessed to be the target's engines, meaning the target is heading away from the sensor.

However, this does not mean the F-22 will ALWAYS be in such a disadvantaged situations.

gambit, lets go back to the point of argument, dont drive too far off.
you still playing the old trick, "I can not convince you, I will confuse you.". I read your link and replies carefully, those are unprofessional replies(or too professional replies). not convince at all.

first, you win the game, then you say certainly is since the rule is good, when you lose the game, you said something else that blame "almost meaningless", let me borrow your word once, "LOL"! In an international contest with Germany Typhoon invited, do you think the game rule is not fare? the rules were not evaluated, passed by both sides? I doubt it. if the rules were not meaningful, what was the point to try?

2nd, in some domestic long range trial, the F22 may carry your device 'Luneberg lens' to keep the bird in track, for short distance WBR, who needs it? lets say the front RCS of F22 is baseball size, Typhoon can detects in 30km, or can engage it in 20+km. IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is a backup to keep F22 under control. and by the way, dogfighting, how many chance F22 can nose to nose face the Typhoon? everyone already aware the side, the top, the bottom, and from the rear F22 has much large RSC. arguing the Typhoon can not lock and kill F22 is glossy under estimate Germany.

Dogfighting should be within 20km or 10km, you insisted that Typhoon requires handicap to lock F22 even from side, from rear? that must be a joke of the day. do you apply same logic on other arguments?


I am actually more interested on the score ratio, if Typhoon make "several kills" were clean kills in that day, I will say my goodness.... God bless the F22.

 

[gambit]

gambit, lets go back to the point of argument, dont drive too far off.
you still playing the old trick, "I can not convince you, I will confuse you.". I read your link and replies carefully, those are unprofessional reply. not convince at all.

first, you win the game, then you say certainly is since the rule is good, when you lose the game, you said something else that blame "almost meaningless", let me borrow your word once, "LOL"! in an international contest with Germany Typhoon invited, do you think the game rule is not fare? the rules were not valuated, passed by both sides? I doubt it. if the rules were not meaningful, what was the point to try?

2nd, in some domestic long range trial, the F22 may carry your device 'Luneberg lens' to keep the bird in track, for short distance WBR, who needs it? lets say the front RCS of F22 is baseball size, Typhoon can detects in 30km, or can engage it in 20+km. IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is a backup to keep F22 under control. and by the way, dogfighting, how many chance F22 can nose to nose face the Typhoon? everyone already aware the side, the top, the bottom, and from the rear F22 has much large RSC. arguing the Typhoon can not lock and kill F22 is glossy under estimate Germany.


I am actually interested on the score ratio, if Typhoon make "several kills" were clean kills in that day, I will say my goodness.... God bless the F22.

I do not care to convince you. I have nearly 20 yrs in aviation, in and out of the military. I am interested in presenting technical and experiential aspects of events, things that you clearly do not have. So if you are not interested in being open minded, then I have no interested in convincing you of anything. It is clear to me that you are no different than those who ALREADY made up their minds about this. Any reasonable arguments, technical or else, will never convince you.

By the way, God does not need to bless the F-22, He knows what it can do without His help.

Let me know when you are ready to be objective about this.

 

[amalakas]

He is scrambling to cover his exposed ****.

Too late I think for that.

F-16s.

I was under the impression that the VFC-13 still uses F-5 E's . I could be wrong.

 

[amalakas]

gambit, lets go back to the point of argument, dont drive too far off.
you still playing the old trick, "I can not convince you, I will confuse you.". I read your link and replies carefully, those are unprofessional reply. not convince at all.

first, you win the game, then you say certainly is since the rule is good, when you lose the game, you said something else that blame "almost meaningless", let me borrow your word once, "LOL"! In an international contest with Germany Typhoon invited, do you think the game rule is not fare? the rules were not evaluated, passed by both sides? I doubt it. if the rules were not meaningful, what was the point to try?

2nd, in some domestic long range trial, the F22 may carry your device 'Luneberg lens' to keep the bird in track, for short distance WBR, who needs it? lets say the front RCS of F22 is baseball size, Typhoon can detects in 30km, or can engage it in 20+km. IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is a backup to keep F22 under control. and by the way, dogfighting, how many chance F22 can nose to nose face the Typhoon? everyone already aware the side, the top, the bottom, and from the rear F22 has much large RSC. arguing the Typhoon can not lock and kill F22 is glossy under estimate Germany.


I am actually interested on the score ratio, if Typhoon make "several kills" were clean kills in that day, I will say my goodness.... God bless the F22.

Ok, I am not an American, nor have I any "considerable" experience with the F-22. I will however try to explain to you a couple of things as I know them.

First of all, no aircraft is an absolute killer of all.
Aircraft are built according to a very specific requirement and are trying to meet this requirement.
To understand better, think of the F-15.
The F-15 is an air superiority fighter plane. Its primary mission is to achieve air superiority over the given battle space.
If one carefully examines the F-15 however, one will notice that the F-15 is not a dedicated dogfighter. That doesn't mean it cannot dogfight. It means it is not the best in dogfights. Other planes have the lead on the dogfighting skills and that is not necessarily a bad thing.
If I were to enter a dogfighting training exercise, I would choose an F-16 or even better a MiG-29. These two planes are far better dogfighters than the F-15.
If I needed to hit the enemy air assets hard over the battle space and deny them operations over a given area for a given time however I would be forced to use the F-15. Higher capability Radar, higher weapons load, more fuel etc etc.

When you consider the F-22 you have a higher expression of the air-superiority fighter, the air supremacy fighter.
That means that the F-22 can use its major advantages, VLO, passive target tracking, supercruise, to its advantage in order to carry out a number of high probability kills on a significant number of enemy assets.

If an F-22 has scored let's say a 50% kill rate with its medium range weapons and can see due to its excellent situational awareness capabilities that an enemy plane (for argument's sake we will call it a MiG-29) is nearing a range were its weapons and sensors can pose a threat. I can tell you with a reasonable degree of certainty that any pilot would take the easy option out,
in other words, use the fact that you have momentum due to your high speed, alter course and put distance between yourself and the potentially dangerous target, use the fact that you have VLO and higher fuel load on your side, and when you have achieved a safe distance again, turn, target and fire on the target.

Just because the F-22 is currently the most dangerous fighter plane we know, doesn't mean it has to be used carelessly or that it is untouchable. It is deadly out of a combination of technology and tactics.

 

[gambit]

Ok, I am not an American, nor have I any "considerable" experience with the F-22. I will however try to explain to you a couple of things as I know them.

First of all, no aircraft is an absolute killer of all.
Aircraft are built according to a very specific requirement and are trying to meet this requirement.
To understand better, think of the F-15.
The F-15 is an air superiority fighter plane. Its primary mission is to achieve air superiority over the given battle space.
If one carefully examines the F-15 however, one will notice that the F-15 is not a dedicated dogfighter. That doesn't mean it cannot dogfight. It means it is not the best in dogfights. Other planes have the lead on the dogfighting skills and that is not necessarily a bad thing.
If I were to enter a dogfighting training exercise, I would choose an F-16 or even better a MiG-29. These two planes are far better dogfighters than the F-15.
If I needed to hit the enemy air assets hard over the battle space and deny them operations over a given area for a given time however I would be forced to use the F-15. Higher capability Radar, higher weapons load, more fuel etc etc.

When you consider the F-22 you have a higher expression of the air-superiority fighter, the air supremacy fighter.
That means that the F-22 can use its major advantages, VLO, passive target tracking, supercruise, to its advantage in order to carry out a number of high probability kills on a significant number of enemy assets.

If an F-22 has scored let's say a 50% kill rate with its medium range weapons and can see due to its excellent situational awareness capabilities that an enemy plane (for argument's sake we will call it a MiG-29) is nearing a range were its weapons and sensors can pose a threat. I can tell you with a reasonable degree of certainty that any pilot would take the easy option out,
in other words, use the fact that you have momentum due to your high speed, alter course and put distance between yourself and the potentially dangerous target, use the fact that you have VLO and higher fuel load on your side, and when you have achieved a safe distance again, turn, target and fire on the target.

Just because the F-22 is currently the most dangerous fighter plane we know, doesn't mean it has to be used carelessly or that it is untouchable. It is deadly out of a combination of technology and tactics.

Now you have done it...!!! You just confused the hell out of him......Best to just stick to what he already convinced himself.

 

[eachus]

Now you have done it...!!! You just confused the hell out of him......Best to just stick to what he already convinced himself.

he does learning fast, try to drive off the road and confuse everybody.
the latest argument was focus on these key words, please stay on.
"WVR and (Within Visual Range), dogfight, salad and super maneuverability".


he claimed "If I were to enter a dogfighting training exercise, I would choose an F-16 or even better a MiG-29. These two planes are far better dogfighters than the F-15.", already, I trust him. but F-16 was hands down against F22 in number of dogfighting, 10-0 lost to F22 on domestic testing. can you explain why the result is far off on Typhoons?

F-15, F16, Typhoons,,, those are older generation, they may be "good", just good in maneuverability. none of these are super. guess what, only F22 is truly claimed as "super maneuverability", which was easily killed by Typhoons --- in dogfights.


fifth-generation fighters F-22 defined as big "3S".
1) Stealthy, having all-aspect stealth even when armed.
2) Super maneuverability achieve through thrust vectoring.
3) Supercruise capability.