Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[antonius123]

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 ?

I have explained a few times and give you citations on how DSI improve performance on the modified F-16 and JF-17; and why F-35 use DSI for this reasons.

I have also explained how DSI remove the moving parts that necessary for intake ramp and cone, this reduce the weight, complexity, and necessary ram coating to reduce RCS.

Diverterless supersonic inlet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Explain; if Cone has the same performance as DSI, why modern air fighter like F-22, F-35, J-20, even PAKFA/Flanker/Rafale/etc no more using Cone Inlet?

 

[antonius123]

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


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.

This make you look like a clown to readers

Moving parts doesnt mean that the cones is fragmented nor it will transform into something else.

The moving parts is attached to the cone, this moving part will move the cone inward or outward.

Again this is demonstrating your clueless about how the cone is working with the moving part

 

[amalakas]

This make you look like a clown to readers

Moving parts doesnt mean that the cones is fragmented nor it will transform into something else.

The moving parts is attached to the cone, this moving part will move the cone inward or outward.

Again this is demonstrating your clueless about how the cone is working with the moving part

You look like a clown over and over again.

and your usual game is to claim something ridiculous and then after we have all corrected you, to claim something that is still wrong, but at least more relative to the nonsense you claimed initially.

It is clear that you have no idea what you are talking about, and let's all remember that it is you who quoted (WIKI ) but never actually explained what the DSI does...

because you don't know of course.

 

[sms]

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

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

Now I'm confused your answer raises two questions.....

Scenario1 - Cone is semi transparent - it implies that nosecone (Radome) attenuates out going transmission/ reflection and incoming reflected signals from other aircraft/ object or incoming EM transmission from other aircraft/ land based radar.

It’s an ideal situation to avoid detection as J20 nosecone will be very effective to attenuate/ absorb in coming signal to avoid detection. But ..

It will do bad to it's own detection range as it will also attenuate out going transmission from its own radar and incoming reflected signals from other object. In layman's term it will impact J20's ability to effectively locate, track and engage targets at long ranges. It defies the whole idea of gen 5 aircrafts to locate targets at ranges without detected by others.

Scenario 2 - EM Transparent material..
There will be no attenuation for transmission from it’s own radar and no attenuation on reflected signals. SO it will be very good at detecting targets at range.

But, Transparent nosecone will expose it’s own radar (flat metal plate at least 1mtr dia) and other equipments on board beside radar and will result in lot reflection and will be easy to get detected. If detected at range it’s not gen-5 aircraft.


Please clarify how does J20 engineers strike a balance to get good LO and long search n track range.

 

[gambit]

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

Now? I have discussed the RAM issue long before you got on here, little boy. Am willing to bet that this is the first time you ever seen the word 'absorber' used in this context.

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

No, it is YOU who are stupid.

First we have 'Chinese physics'. Now we have 'Indonesian physics'.

The receiver can do its job because it is 'semi EM transparent'. That is simply incredible. Do you have a source for that? Let me guess...That source is your anal orifice?

Do you even know the proper context of the word 'receiver' in radio communication engineering? In this field, the word 'receiver' refers to the data processing of reception operation. But it is the antenna -- ANTENNA -- that have actual contact with EM signals and the antenna does not 'absorb' anything.

Over one hundred yrs of antenna knowledge and engineering down the toilet thanks to 'Indonesian physics'. Induction, polarization, electrical and magnetic fields -- gone. Maxwell, Hertz, Marconi, Popov et al are all spinning in their graves.

Non RAM also has semi EM transparent, otherwise how could the radar receiver receive the reflected wave?

Wow...

So what 'Indonesian physics' say is that any material has some degrees of EM transparency and that mean any material can be used to 'absorb' or ingest EM signals and process them.

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.

This makes no sense. I understand that English is not your native language. It is not mine either. But if anyone is going to get involved in technology, proficiency in English is pretty much mandatory to explain one's argument in a technically coherent manner. This tells me you do not have that technical education.

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

It is over. You can say we 'lie' over and over but no one is going to believe you. If anyone ask, we can give them post by post where your lame-*** challenge questions were answered. It is YOU who lied about answering mine.

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

Show everyone where you answered that question. It does not matter if I answered yours or not. If you have the aviation 'background' or 'study' like you claimed and tried to use to shut down the Indians, then it does not matter if ANYONE else have any aviation knowledge or not. You should be able to answer that basic first year aerodynamics question -- easily. So show us where you answered it.

Q: Name two major advantages in having a reasonably circular/elliptical fuselage.
A: No flow separation at moderate AoA/slideslip. And under pressurization, a circular/elliptical fuselage is better at withstanding tension stresses than non circular/elliptical fuselages.

Q: What else does a flap change, other than the physical layout of the wing?
A: Pressure distribution over the wing.

Q: What does the leading edge flap (slat) do in relation to lift? Hint: Does not affect lift.
A: The LE flap extends the range of angles that flow can remains attached to the wing.

Show everyone where you answered those questions...But even though we know that you are nothing more than an ignorant tweenager pretending to be an adult, we shall continue to treat your claim to have aviation 'background' and 'study' at least as a source of entertainment.

Q: Of the above example, at any given airspeed in the subsonic regime, which is the MORE LIKELY to have a better command response?
A: The prop jobber.

Here is why...

XF5U "Flying Pancake" Vought-Sikorsky V-173 "Zimmer Skimmer"

The propellers are so placed relative to the remainder of the craft that the 'propeller slip-streams "are at all times directed over the lifting and control surfaces. With the fairly high loading of the propellers employed the slip-stream velocity will always be high, 60 to 100 miles per hour, so that the control surfaces will be very effective in hovering and low-speed flight.

This question directly tied in with the previous question on thrust line and stability. If you have any real aviation 'background' or 'study' you would have recognized the relationship. The F-5U's design exploited the principle that thrust directly over the flight controls surfaces give the aircraft greater lifting forces than airstream through forward motion.

The modern day C-17 exploited this as well to give the aircraft its exceptionally short take-off distance...

Boeing C-17 Globemaster III

the engine exhaust flow is directed below and through slotted flaps to produce additional lifting force and allow steeper landing descents.

Thrust over flight control surfaces is what give model aircrafts their amazing maneuverability. But I doubt that you would know why. Hint: It has to do with scalability.

This is now a dozen basic aerodynamics and 5 flight controls engineering questions you could not answer despite your claim to have aviation 'background' and 'study'. Instrumentation is the next challenge subject to you.

Next...

Q: In designing a variable sweep wing system, like that on the F-111, what role does the wing's pivot point have on its aerodynamics?

Now...We know that there is no widespread use of the swing wing design in the civilian world. However, that does not mean the aspiring engineer should be ignorant of an implied relationship posed by that question.

You are not doing the J-20 crowd any favor by continuing to make a fool out of yourself.

 

[gambit]

This make you look like a clown to readers

Moving parts doesnt mean that the cones is fragmented nor it will transform into something else.

The moving parts is attached to the cone, this moving part will move the cone inward or outward.

Again this is demonstrating your clueless about how the cone is working with the moving part

Fine...Then show everyone a source where a conical intake system have EXPOSED moving parts. Remember, it was YOU who said that those exposed moving parts will increase RCS.

Do you understand that Cone will be heavier, and the moving parts contributes bigger RCS?

So show us a source of a jet engine aircraft with a conical intake that have exposed moving parts.

Yours is a very juvenile debating tactic: Make claims but provide no sources to back them up, but when someone does provide sources to back up their arguments, you criticize them for using the Internet.

And you think this make you look smart? No, it make you look stupid and it is YOU who are the clown to the readers.

 

[antonius123]

Now? I have discussed the RAM issue long before you got on here, little boy. Am willing to bet that this is the first time you ever seen the word 'absorber' used in this context.

Again all you can do just force your claim as an undisputed claim but fail in prove/bring evidence.

We dont accept unproven claim, instead bust the wrong claim like yours

No, it is YOU who are stupid.

First we have 'Chinese physics'. Now we have 'Indonesian physics'.

There is only International physics vs Vietnam physics sponsored by you in this thread

The receiver can do its job because it is 'semi EM transparent'. That is simply incredible. Do you have a source for that? Let me guess...That source is your anal orifice?

It is you who are demonstrating idiocy and severe reading comprehension problem,

Who said the receiver can do the job due to semi transparent??
But in fact you are claiming that absorbing happen because of "semi transparent", but in the wrong perception.

Now you are demonstrating antique "Vietnam Physics"

Do you even know the proper context of the word 'receiver' in radio communication engineering? In this field, the word 'receiver' refers to the data processing of reception operation. But it is the antenna -- ANTENNA -- that have actual contact with EM signals and the antenna does not 'absorb' anything.

Over one hundred yrs of antenna knowledge and engineering down the toilet thanks to 'Indonesian physics'. Induction, polarization, electrical and magnetic fields -- gone. Maxwell, Hertz, Marconi, Popov et al are all spinning in their graves.

And who said Antena absorb something? except your stupid reading comprehension?

Wow...

So what 'Indonesian physics' say is that any material has some degrees of EM transparency and that mean any material can be used to 'absorb' or ingest EM signals and process them.


This makes no sense. I understand that English is not your native language. It is not mine either. But if anyone is going to get involved in technology, proficiency in English is pretty much mandatory to explain one's argument in a technically coherent manner. This tells me you do not have that technical education.

Who said so??

You are not only demonstrating poor English reading comprehension, but also technical standard terminology.

Remember "nacelle = air intake"? remember "transmission = reflection", and many other else?

You cant prove those misconception as acceptable technical terminology, right

It is over. You can say we 'lie' over and over but no one is going to believe you. If anyone ask, we can give them post by post where your lame-*** challenge questions were answered. It is YOU who lied about answering mine.

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

Show everyone where you answered that question. It does not matter if I answered yours or not. If you have the aviation 'background' or 'study' like you claimed and tried to use to shut down the Indians, then it does not matter if ANYONE else have any aviation knowledge or not. You should be able to answer that basic first year aerodynamics question -- easily. So show us where you answered it.

Q: Name two major advantages in having a reasonably circular/elliptical fuselage.
A: No flow separation at moderate AoA/slideslip. And under pressurization, a circular/elliptical fuselage is better at withstanding tension stresses than non circular/elliptical fuselages.

Q: What else does a flap change, other than the physical layout of the wing?
A: Pressure distribution over the wing.

Q: What does the leading edge flap (slat) do in relation to lift? Hint: Does not affect lift.
A: The LE flap extends the range of angles that flow can remains attached to the wing.

Show everyone where you answered those questions...But even though we know that you are nothing more than an ignorant tweenager pretending to be an adult, we shall continue to treat your claim to have aviation 'background' and 'study' at least as a source of entertainment.

Q: Of the above example, at any given airspeed in the subsonic regime, which is the MORE LIKELY to have a better command response?
A: The prop jobber.

Here is why...

XF5U "Flying Pancake" Vought-Sikorsky V-173 "Zimmer Skimmer"


This question directly tied in with the previous question on thrust line and stability. If you have any real aviation 'background' or 'study' you would have recognized the relationship. The F-5U's design exploited the principle that thrust directly over the flight controls surfaces give the aircraft greater lifting forces than airstream through forward motion.

The modern day C-17 exploited this as well to give the aircraft its exceptionally short take-off distance...

Boeing C-17 Globemaster III

Thrust over flight control surfaces is what give model aircrafts their amazing maneuverability. But I doubt that you would know why. Hint: It has to do with scalability.

This is now a dozen basic aerodynamics and 5 flight controls engineering questions you could not answer despite your claim to have aviation 'background' and 'study'. Instrumentation is the next challenge subject to you.

Next...

Q: In designing a variable sweep wing system, like that on the F-111, what role does the wing's pivot point have on its aerodynamics?

Now...We know that there is no widespread use of the swing wing design in the civilian world. However, that does not mean the aspiring engineer should be ignorant of an implied relationship posed by that question.

You are not doing the J-20 crowd any favor by continuing to make a fool out of yourself.

Are you sick?

Not only you are answering your own questions. But you force your self (the incompetent one) to test other people.

Remember how you failed in numerous test

 

[antonius123]

Fine...Then show everyone a source where a conical intake system have EXPOSED moving parts. Remember, it was YOU who said that those exposed moving parts will increase RCS.

Now you understand that you are exposing your clueless when you claim that cone has no moving parts?

What do you mean by exposed moving parts here?
And show me my statement saying the cone has EXPOSED moving parts!

So show us a source of a jet engine aircraft with a conical intake that have exposed moving parts.

Yours is a very juvenile debating tactic: Make claims but provide no sources to back them up, but when someone does provide sources to back up their arguments, you criticize them for using the Internet.

And you think this make you look smart? No, it make you look stupid and it is YOU who are the clown to the readers.

Which of my claim? Show me my statement saying the cone has EXPOSED moving parts!
But before that, please explain what you mean by exposed moving parts here?

It is you who is immature here, as you always force your own claim without evidence.

 

[gambit]

Again all you can do just force your claim as an undisputed claim but fail in prove/bring evidence.

We dont accept unproven claim, instead bust the wrong claim like yours

I have supported my arguments far better than you -- and the Chinese who you sucked up to -- have done regarding this issue.

If you think you handle yourself, go here...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/jf-17-thunder/68207-jf-17-thunder-multirole-fighter-thread-4-a-499.html

Never mind what I say. Mind only what you say and support yourself. Let us see how much you know.

Who said the receiver can do the job due to semi transparent??

YOU did, here...

Non RAM also has semi EM transparent, otherwise how could the radar receiver receive the reflected wave?

In communication engineering, the 'receiver' have nothing to do with absorber. That statement by you is completely nonsensical and it further confirms what we know so far: That you are technically uneducated, foolish and is capable of only patching together words and hope that it make sense.

But in fact you are claiming that absorbing happen because of "semi transparent", but in the wrong perception.

It is not 'wrong perception'. I provided sources on what it means. The answer just went over your head, just like everything else.

Now you are demonstrating antique "Vietnam Physics"

I work with real physics, kid.

And who said Antena absorb something? except your stupid reading comprehension?

I was educating you on what happens at the reception process in communication. It is clear that you did not know that it is the antenna that have actual contact with EM signals.

Remember "nacelle = air intake"? remember "transmission = reflection", and many other else?

You cant prove those misconception as acceptable technical terminology, right

Those 'misconception' are YOURS because you have no real aviation 'background' or 'study' like you claimed. And because you have no real technical education, the real answers will -- and did -- went over your head.

Are you sick?

Not only you are answering your own questions. But you force your self (the incompetent one) to test other people.

Remember how you failed in numerous test

Last chance, buddy...

Q: In designing a variable sweep wing system, like that on the F-111, what role does the wing's pivot point have on its aerodynamics?

You claimed to have an aviation 'background' which you tried to use to shut down the Indians. When challenged as to what is inside that 'background', you diverted to 'study'. The vagueness of it tells us that you really do not know what you are talking about regarding aviation in general. Aviation have many disciplines. Do you even know what that word 'disciplines' means when it comes to professions? It does not mean self control. It means specialties under the larger heading.

It does not matter if I or everyone else in this forum have no aviation experience at all. The moment you claimed to have it and tried to shut down others with it, you have an obligation to prove yourself. We are trying to establish what kind of aviation 'study' do you have. You failed to answer a dozen questions on basic aerodynamics. Why? Now there are 5 questions on flight controls engineering that you failed to answer as well. There are coming Instrumentation, Navigation, Communication and Radar coming up.

So last chance...

Q: In designing a variable sweep wing system, like that on the F-111, what role does the wing's pivot point have on its aerodynamics?

 

[gambit]

Now you understand that you are exposing your clueless when you claim that cone has no moving parts?

What do you mean by exposed moving parts here?
And show me my statement saying the cone has EXPOSED moving parts!



Which of my claim? Show me my statement saying the cone has EXPOSED moving parts!
But before that, please explain what you mean by exposed moving parts here?

It is you who is immature here, as you always force your own claim without evidence.

Right here...

Do you understand that Cone will be heavier, and the moving parts contributes bigger RCS?

A 'bigger RCS' is possible only if those moving parts are exposed to radar bombardment.

Here is the F-111 that have a quarter cone, called a 'spike', that not only translate fore/aft but also expand or 'blossom' to become larger...

F-111 Inlets

I was on the F-111 for 5 yrs. Never have I seen any exposed moving parts on the spikes. So if we can do it for the F-111's intake system, we can do the same for the conical intake.

So show us a source that have a jet engine aircraft with a conical intake that have exposed moving parts.

 

[Alpery]

a RADAR uses radio beam or radio waves?

 

[gambit]

a RADAR uses radio beam or radio waves?

What else does it use?

Radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...an acronym for RAdio Detection And Ranging.

There is no such thing as radar specific type of EM wave. Believe it or not, technically speaking, radar is a method of communication and it uses radio type waves.

 

[Alpery]

so..something is wrong at this illustration..
what is the wavelength and ferrite particle's length supposed?
isn't that effect reflection and passing?

 

[gambit]

so..something is wrong at this illustration..
what is the wavelength and ferrite particule's length supposed?
isn't that effect reflection and passing?

An 'absorber' is a composite material, meaning it has many discrete constituents from different materials bind in some ways into a 'new' material.

To give you a basic understanding of composites...

- Atomic. Another word for this is 'elemental'. This level is where the material has different atoms bound together. Technically speaking, a molecule is a composite.

- Molecular. Another word for this is 'microstructural'. This level is where the material has different molecules bound together. Technically speaking, water is a composite. Different crystalline structures can be combined to be a composite such as steel.

- Gross. Another word for this is 'macrostructural'. Concrete and plywood are composites.

So the general public have a very different perception and definition of 'composite'. They think that it has to do with only 'high tech' items and 'stealth'. The reality is that in military aviation, composites are used MAINLY for weight savings measures. It is a type of composites called 'radar absorber' that is specifically for 'stealth'.

So for the 'radar stealth' composites, the ferrite particles type is the most common design and its formulation, from particle size to distribution, are quite 'Top Secret'.

Other types and designs of absorber are...

IEEE Xplore - The two-sheet capacitive Jaumann absorber

Many Jaumann absorber designs rely on purely resistive sheets spaced λ/4 apart, and the designs are based on the requirement that the voltage reflection coefficient and its derivatives vanish at the center frequency.

IEEE Xplore - Optimum design of a Salisbury screen radar absorber

...Salisbury screen radar absorber which will yield the maximum bandwidth for a specified level of reflectivity performance, angle of incidence and polarisation.

And there are many other hybrid designs out there.

An absorber, unlike 'Chinese physics' and 'Indonesian physics', does not have to be completely 'pass-through'. Because an absorber is a composite, we can design one constituent material, usually the surface material, to be 100% pass-through in order to initiate the process. The underlying constituent materials will then begin to do their jobs.

For the basic ferrite particles, the goal is to 'bounce' or create multiple reflections INSIDE this substrate layer. The downside to this design is weight and because weight is a limitation, the wavelengths being affected is very narrow. Technically, we can make a ferrite particle based absorber that can handle the meters length HF/VHF/UHF bands but that would mean the layer must be meters thick as well. Not practical at all.

And here is why...

The above is a reasonable approximation scaling of commonly used freqs/wavelengths in radar detection.

Most radar operations are pulsed operations, meaning each transmission is composed of a series of on/off smaller transmissions.

Like this...

So for a pulse of the centimetric (ghz) freq, we can have a single pulse that is 1 or 2 centimeters long.

For an absorber to do its job, it must absorb or 'ingest' the pulse completely, or more like 90%. For a crude example, if a pulse is 1cm long, the absorber should be 1.1cm thick. There will be some inevitable reflection on the surface because nothing is perfect. So as the pulse is allowed pass-through by the surface, the ferrite particles will begin to do their jobs. But if the absorber paint thickness is less than pulse length, then we will have less effective negation of that pulse, meaning more of the pulse will be reflected.

This principle is applicable to all of the above wavelengths illustration. So the problem for the meters length HF/VHF/UHF bands is that we must have an absorber layer thickness to match -- meters thick. Not practical in aviation at all.

 

[Esc8781]

An 'absorber' is a composite material, meaning it has many discrete constituents from different materials bind in some ways into a 'new' material.

To give you a basic understanding of composites...

- Atomic. Another word for this is 'elemental'. This level is where the material has different atoms bound together. Technically speaking, a molecule is a composite.

- Molecular. Another word for this is 'microstructural'. This level is where the material has different molecules bound together. Technically speaking, water is a composite. Different crystalline structures can be combined to be a composite such as steel.

- Gross. Another word for this is 'macrostructural'. Concrete and plywood are composites.

So the general public have a very different perception and definition of 'composite'. They think that it has to do with only 'high tech' items and 'stealth'. The reality is that in military aviation, composites are used MAINLY for weight savings measures. It is a type of composites called 'radar absorber' that is specifically for 'stealth'.

So for the 'radar stealth' composites, the ferrite particles type is the most common design and its formulation, from particle size to distribution, are quite 'Top Secret'.

Other types and designs of absorber are...

IEEE Xplore - The two-sheet capacitive Jaumann absorber


IEEE Xplore - Optimum design of a Salisbury screen radar absorber


And there are many other hybrid designs out there.

An absorber, unlike 'Chinese physics' and 'Indonesian physics', does not have to be completely 'pass-through'. Because an absorber is a composite, we can design one constituent material, usually the surface material, to be 100% pass-through in order to initiate the process. The underlying constituent materials will then begin to do their jobs.

For the basic ferrite particles, the goal is to 'bounce' or create multiple reflections INSIDE this substrate layer. The downside to this design is weight and because weight is a limitation, the wavelengths being affected is very narrow. Technically, we can make a ferrite particle based absorber that can handle the meters length HF/VHF/UHF bands but that would mean the layer must be meters thick as well. Not practical at all.

And here is why...

The above is a reasonable approximation scaling of commonly used freqs/wavelengths in radar detection.

Most radar operations are pulsed operations, meaning each transmission is composed of a series of on/off smaller transmissions.

Like this...

So for a pulse of the centimetric (ghz) freq, we can have a single pulse that is 1 or 2 centimeters long.

For an absorber to do its job, it must absorb or 'ingest' the pulse completely, or more like 90%. For a crude example, if a pulse is 1cm long, the absorber should be 1.1cm thick. There will be some inevitable reflection on the surface because nothing is perfect. So as the pulse is allowed pass-through by the surface, the ferrite particles will begin to do their jobs. But if the absorber paint thickness is less than pulse length, then we will have less effective negation of that pulse, meaning more of the pulse will be reflected.

This principle is applicable to all of the above wavelengths illustration. So the problem for the meters length HF/VHF/UHF bands is that we must have an absorber layer thickness to match -- meters thick. Not practical in aviation at all.

Sir does the ellipsoid like the j-20's actuators apply to the 10-lambda rule?