Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[sms]

Sorry to have missed your question pal

Your 1st question: Please let us know what does it use as material for nose cone

A: I dont know the classified ram data of J-20.

Your 2nd question: if this material is transparent EM wave how does J20 achieve LO capability? The flat plate (radar antenna and cockpit instruments) will result in huge reflection and detection at long range.

A: RAM is not a transparent EM wave material; in fact RAM commonly according to its name (Radar Absorbent Material) is a material that absorb EM wave. When radar impacts radar absorbent material, the energy acts as though it "sees" infinite free space instead of a boundary. The absorbed electromagnetic energy is dissipated as heat and very little energy is reflected.Therefore no such reflection from radar antena and anything behind the nose of J-20/Raptor.

Your 3rd question: Please advise how did Chinese engineers solved this problem and achieved a marvel gem of extreme engineering?

A: I dont know, as I have no connection with them.

Thanks, for your reply ...
But highlighted portion raises a big question about J20's capability to transmit it's own radar signals. How it's possible to do so if cone is not EMC transparent? If it blocks reflection it must block it's own transmission..does this mean J20 will go blind (without radar) in enemy territory?

Why are you ignoring my question... please reply at the earliest

 

[Perceptron]

Of the above example, at any given airspeed in the subsonic regime for both aircrafts, which is MORE LIKELY to have superior command response?

Now, if this Indonesian kid flunks this part, then he will be the proven for what he is...a child who goes on and on about his shiny new Algebra book even though he has been schooled repeatedly for his SATs. I say kid, drop the pretense and educate yourself. It will give all of us a better opportunity of discussing worthwhile problems afflicting the Drag-Queen.

 

[gambit]

Now, if this Indonesian kid flunks this part,...

He will. The answer is not as obvious as the he thinks. The illustration ties in with previous questions and to today's aircraft. The C-17, to be exact.

 

[amalakas]

He will. The answer is not as obvious as the he thinks. The illustration ties in with previous questions and to today's aircraft. The C-17, to be exact.

He won't answer.

 

[anarchy 99]

Ignore gambit, no one takes that guy seriously except a bunch of Indians.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Ignore gambit, no one takes that guy seriously except a bunch of Indians.

Didn't know

Araz , notorious_eagle, Muradk (former PAF pilot), Taimikhan, Irfan Baloch, etc were all Indians

 

[antonius123]

You could not answer a dozen questions on basic aerodynamics and four on basic flight controls engineering. But we will continue on that in a bit.

You are talking about yourself.

Transmission = reflection, where? you failed again on your last attempt

Not to mention: nacelle, and corner reflector, and dozen questions about control etc.

The illustration showed an absorber allows SURFACE PENETRATION, fool. That is what is meant by PARTIAL TRANSPARENCY.

KTH | Publication database at ETK

The radome is made of such partial transparent material, so is RAM for RCS control purposes.
And what I corrected you was on your comment about how an absorber works.

Your correction is actually totally wrong and fool.

Partially transparent meant in your article is not absorbent like you think and your illustration above, you idiot!

Partially transparent as I said mean: some wave pass/pierce the radome, some not (reflected, or absorbed by RAM).

Again you are demonstrating idiocy, reading comprehension problem, and clueless

Now to continue exposing your ignorance...

Q: What is the most adverse effect in the relationship between the break out force of the stick and friction?
A: Increasing friction increases difficulty in precise command at maneuvers.

You did not know this. And this make 5 basic flight controls engineering questions you failed.

Of the above example, at any given airspeed in the subsonic regime for both aircrafts, which is MORE LIKELY to have superior command response?

Remember on the top of dozen failure in the debates, you have failed to answered my test, as following:

1. What is the disadvantage of controller againts PLC? => you dont know this

2. Explain us what is this equation about:

=> you dont know this too

Then another question goes to you:

3. Explain the term finite aspect ratio or infinite aspect ratio on an airfoil's coefficient of lift?
=> you dont know this too..

 

[antonius123]

Thanks, for your reply ...
But highlighted portion raises a big question about J20's capability to transmit it's own radar signals. How it's possible to do so if cone is not EMC transparent? If it blocks reflection it must block it's own transmission..does this mean J20 will go blind (without radar) in enemy territory?

Cone is semi transparent, some wave is passed some is reflected or absorbed by RAM.

But remember that the semi transparent here is not the same as what Gambit think which actually a misleading clueless concept. He thinks that semi transparent = absorbing

Explain the 'term'? What does the definition of aspect ratio have to do with lift coefficient? Any first year engineer on his first aviation job would recognize it as nonsensical.

The proper question should be: 'What IS aspect ratio and what effect does it have on lift coefficient?'

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...raft-updates-discussions-175.html#post3276087

And it is clear the answer to his challenge question went over his head because he simply dismissed it.

That is because you have no clue about the topic, thats why you cant answer

 

[antonius123]

A cone has no moving parts, so there is nothing that will cause an increase in RCS. All of the parts/retractable mechanisms that control the cone are housed inside the aircraft. Your source was talking about an inlet ramp, you than tried to claim that the inlet cone has moving parts and that it will increase RCS.

Then explain to all readers how the cone without moving parts is moved with moving parts/mechanism that is housed inside the aircraft which is not a moving part attached to the cone?

Me shocked? I knew that a Mig-21 cone is retractable since I was like 6 years old, in fact I mentioned it before you did.

But you dont know that Cone has moving parts attached to the cone

You are stupidly think that moving parts of the cone is not attached to the cone, but somewhere else and not connected to cone.

Maybe I am, i certainly schooled you many times or maybe I am a military pilot that holds real degrees, than again maybe I run a successful internet business from Nigeria. Or maybe I tend to my rice field? I can be all or none of those things, heck i can be batman if that is what you want to hear but what i am not is someone that lied about a 'backround' that they did not have.

You and your master Gambit is a liar about background.

What comprehension problems? You constantly ask for sources and demand answers when in fact those sources and answers are literally in front of your face. It goes like this (you) Where is my source? (me) you quoted it.

You cant prove your claim that Cone has same performance with DSI.

You are using your own perception that you claim as a prove

By the way am I going to have to weight 5 months for you to answer my question? Actually it’s not even my question, I asked you to explain what your own quote meant. You said you would if I answered your question about canopies, I lived up to my end of the bargain.

Which questions?

 

[gambit]

Partially transparent meant in your article is not absorbent like you think and your illustration above, you idiot!

This is how stupid you really are.

The word 'absorb' denote a feature. The words 'pass through' mean an ACTION. An 'absorber' cannot absorb unless it 'pass through' its surface whatever the medium that comes into contact with it. Therefore, an 'absorber' must always have SOME DEGREES of transparency on its surface, otherwise it cannot 'absorb' or 'pass through' anything.

Radiative properties of semi-transparent particles

Many substances are semi-transparent in the visible and infrared spectral ranges. The well-known example is pure water, which is practically transparent in the visible and semi-transparent in the short-wave part of the near-infrared range (Hale and Querry, 1973; Zolotarev and Dyomin, 1977).

http://thenauticalsite.com/NauticalNotes/Radar/MyRadar-Lesson04-NatureTarget.htm

Surfaces that are semi-transparent to radar energy – GRP/fibre glass boats

So there you have it, the proper definitions and contexts that you never knew before. Until now.

Partially transparent as I said mean: some wave pass/pierce the radome, some not (reflected, or absorbed by RAM).

Wrong...A surface can be partially transparent as well as the entire layer of the material can be partially transparent.

Remember on the top of dozen failure in the debates, you have failed to answered my test, as following:

1. What is the disadvantage of controller againts PLC? => you dont know this

2. Explain us what is this equation about:

=> you dont know this too

Then another question goes to you:

3. Explain the term finite aspect ratio or infinite aspect ratio on an airfoil's coefficient of lift?
=> you dont know this too..

All of those have been answered by me and others while you repeated failed to answer any at all.

Last chance, little buddy...

Of the above example, at any given airspeed in the subsonic regime for both aircrafts, which is MORE LIKELY to have superior command response?

If you have any real aviation 'background' and 'study' at all, the answer should come very easily based upon previous questions I posed for you. But then again, since you never knew the answer to all of them, odds are not very good that you would know the answer to this one.

Cone is semi transparent, some wave is passed some is reflected or absorbed by RAM.

He was asking on what is that method or mechanism. Looks like you do not know this one either.

That is because you have no clue about the topic, thats why you cant answer

But not only did I answered, I corrected your inappropriately worded question. The answer just happened to go whoooossshh over your head.

Then explain to all readers how the cone without moving parts is moved with moving parts/mechanism that is housed inside the aircraft which is not a moving part attached to the cone?

Wrong. If you said that a conic intake system have exposed moving parts, the burden is upon YOU to show it. We know the MIG-21 have a translating cone and we do not see any exposed moving parts. This mean you have no clue on mechanical engineering.

 

[amalakas]

Wrong. If you said that a conic intake system have exposed moving parts, the burden is upon YOU to show it. We know the MIG-21 have a translating cone and we do not see any exposed moving parts. This mean you have no clue on mechanical engineering.

he has no clue about anything. I begun to make a list of all the things we answered and all the questions he dodged. It is just too long.

P.S. His explanation on the radome is pure comedy.

 

[gambit]

he has no clue about anything. I begun to make a list of all the things we answered and all the questions he dodged. It is just too long.

P.S. His explanation on the radome is pure comedy.

This kid have a serious reading and technical comprehension problem, and I mean at the elementary reading level...

A cone has no moving parts, so there is nothing that will cause an increase in RCS.

Then explain to all readers how the cone without moving parts is moved with moving parts/mechanism that is housed inside the aircraft which is not a moving part attached to the cone?

A cone has no moving parts -- true. Meaning the cone itself. Meaning the cone's surface is not fragmented. The translating mechanisms are independent of the cone. This Indonesian tweenager does not know the proper use of the words 'moving' and 'translating'. He genuinely believes the cone itself transform into something else -- moving -- and therefore increasing its surface area for reflection. He really does not have ANY technical education at all.

 

[amalakas]

Then explain to all readers how the cone without moving parts is moved with moving parts/mechanism that is housed inside the aircraft which is not a moving part attached to the cone?



But you dont know that Cone has moving parts attached to the cone

You are stupidly think that moving parts of the cone is not attached to the cone, but somewhere else and not connected to cone.




You and your master Gambit is a liar about background.


You cant prove your claim that Cone has same performance with DSI.

You are using your own perception that you claim as a prove


......

I have no idea what you were trying to say on this one... but here is the F-104, one of my favorites.

It has FIXED inlet cones. A maximum speed or M 2.1.

The MiG-21 had a retractable cone and top speed of M 2.0 ,
so how come the Cone hasn't the same performance as the DSI ?

 

[Esc8781]

Bro,You've forget how PLA kicked US armys' *** in North Koear in 1950th .American and President Obama set misellaneous barriers on China's development only to grab limited resource on this pathetic little planet called earth. I bet you guys only have the courageous to blow those countries of week defence technology like Irak,Libria. Why don't you just try it again to provoke us ?? China defence will teach you what really a war is like. And i was so pissed of the Nato bomed Pakistan defence soldiers nearby Afganistan boundry, you test our bottom line . F-22 is God on Iraq sky, but just loads of trash against our Defence system.

I know this is an old post but wouldn't the j-20 be a load of trash (to you) against the United States technology because you are using our technology, plus the US already got its teaching of what war really was in WWII, so shush.

 

[antonius123]

This is how stupid you really are.

The word 'absorb' denote a feature. The words 'pass through' mean an ACTION. An 'absorber' cannot absorb unless it 'pass through' its surface whatever the medium that comes into contact with it. Therefore, an 'absorber' must always have SOME DEGREES of transparency on its surface, otherwise it cannot 'absorb' or 'pass through' anything.

Radiative properties of semi-transparent particles

http://thenauticalsite.com/NauticalNotes/Radar/MyRadar-Lesson04-NatureTarget.htm

So there you have it, the proper definitions and contexts that you never knew before. Until now.

Now you know that absorber cannot absorb unless it pass through its surface.

But before you said this:

"The reason why the material is called an 'absorber' is because it it EM transparent TO SOME DEGREE."

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...ft-updates-discussions-177.html#ixzz23D0sP4TJ

That is stupid! because "EM transparent to some degree" is not the reason why it is called "absorber". Non RAM also has semi EM transparent, otherwise how could the radar receiver receive the reflected wave? Semi EM transparent always exist in non ram coated or ram coated, therefore your argument that material is called "absorber" because its semi EM transparent is TOTALLY WRONG! and stupid.

You are busted again, and cannot run away

Wrong...A surface can be partially transparent as well as the entire layer of the material can be partially transparent.

Did I say not?

You have severe reading comprehension problem.

All of those have been answered by me and others while you repeated failed to answer any at all.

Last chance, little buddy...

Of the above example, at any given airspeed in the subsonic regime for both aircrafts, which is MORE LIKELY to have superior command response?

If you have any real aviation 'background' and 'study' at all, the answer should come very easily based upon previous questions I posed for you. But then again, since you never knew the answer to all of them, odds are not very good that you would know the answer to this one.




He was asking on what is that method or mechanism. Looks like you do not know this one either.


But not only did I answered, I corrected your inappropriately worded question. The answer just happened to go whoooossshh over your head.


Wrong. If you said that a conic intake system have exposed moving parts, the burden is upon YOU to show it. We know the MIG-21 have a translating cone and we do not see any exposed moving parts. This mean you have no clue on mechanical engineering.

Nope, you LIE

You failed those questions.

You only drag internet article when somebody has guess answer no.2 and I agree (with following confirmation test, which is not answered yet).

Now all readers can see LIE is your bad habit