Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[Martian2]

No, the fail is on YOU, for failing to understand what I tried to teach you guys a long time ago.

In designing a low radar observable body, there are three main rules of control:

- Quantity of radiators
- Array of radiators
- Modes of radiation

Rule 1: There is no set quantity of radiators. What this rule mean is that you should minimize the quantity of structures that would be in the radar beam.

Rule 2: A single vertical stab for yaw axis control and stability have been the norm for decades. But for a low radar observable design, a single vertical stab would mean a pair corner reflectors created between the vertical stab and the aircraft's body. So in using twin canted vertical stabs to avoid the critical 90 deg corner reflector, you are less obedient to rule 1. You did not violate rule 1. Just less obedient to it.

Rule 2: There are many modes of radiation. The surface wave mode is one of them. Absorber to control surface waves would deny the enemy's radar much of this mode of radiation.

You can have a requirement that a body be low radar observable, but if the quantity of radiators elevates your design above a certain threshold, your design failed your requirement. So just because an experimental design have canards and the low radar observable requirement, that does not mean both are natural allies with each other.

For all we know, those experimental aircrafts may have low radar observable requirement, but it was the canards that raised the overall RCS to over that threshold.

How come I never hear you pointing out the Pak Fa's airfoil?
It's basically a canard attached a little further back on the fuselage.

 

[kungfugymnast]

F-15s are being planned to be upgraded. And no doubt the F-35 will be built in large numbers.

Only newer f15s will be upgraded. Older f15s will be scrapped to avoid risk of airframe breaking apart after taking much punishment and old age. USAF can't retain existing old aging f15s forever. Later on, they'll need new conventional multirole fighters with ease of maintenance or purchase new f15se, f16e and super hornets.

F35s might not be built in large numbers after first few batches entered service when they realize the f35 is just not practical with the fuel guzzling and internal bay that could only hold 4x AMRAAM or 2x Amraam & 2x jdam or 4x jdam or 2x Amraam & 8x sdb (250lb each). F15e, F16, f18 could carry 12x agm65g with 4x aam or mixture of harm, paveway, jsow, jdam, zuni, cluster bombs, anti ship missiles, jammier, etc on 8 or more pylons attacking air & multiple ground targets from AAA, Sams, invasion frce of tanks, etc instantly.

Most likely stealth fighters will complement conventional fighters and not entirely replacing them. They all have in mind that stealth technology could 1 day be defeated by new radar systems

 

[Oldman1]

Only newer f15s will be upgraded. Older f15s will be scrapped to avoid risk of airframe breaking apart after taking much punishment and old age. USAF can't retain existing old aging f15s forever. Later on, they'll need new conventional multirole fighters with ease of maintenance or purchase new f15se, f16e and super hornets.

F35s might not be built in large numbers after first few batches entered service when they realize the f35 is just not practical with the fuel guzzling and internal bay that could only hold 4x AMRAAM or 2x Amraam & 2x jdam or 4x jdam or 2x Amraam & 8x sdb (250lb each). F15e, F16, f18 could carry 12x agm65g with 4x aam or mixture of harm, paveway, jsow, jdam, zuni, cluster bombs, anti ship missiles, jammier, etc on 8 or more pylons attacking air & multiple ground targets from AAA, Sams, invasion frce of tanks, etc instantly.

Only the F-35Bs with shorter range. But remember that the F-35 as a whole can carry external weapons as well.

 

[kungfugymnast]

Only the F-35Bs with shorter range. But remember that the F-35 as a whole can carry external weapons as well.

If they are willing to compromise stealh to just low RCS fighter, they can do so. But most will not because the f35 is too heartache to take damage or risk shot down compared to lighter more fuel efficient f16e/f fitted with CFTs.

 

[Oldman1]

If they are willing to compromise stealh to just low RCS fighter, they can do so. But most will not because the f35 is too heartache to take damage or risk shot down compared to lighter more fuel efficient f16e/f fitted with CFTs.

Sure the F-35 would compromise its stealth, but its sensors can see further than the F-16. Most aircraft are pretty delicate against bullets so I don't think its a heartache when risking it.

 

[BoQ77]

Set the target for J20 to reach F-35 or even F-22 level made its design outdated right at the design phase, and much worse when it come into service much later than scheduled.
So I always expect the parameters would be better in the paper and shorter development duration.
No one can pursuade others that a design is still advance if it atlast come into service 10 years later than initial schedule.

 

[Beast]

Set the target for J20 to reach F-35 or even F-22 level made its design outdated right at the design phase, and much worse when it come into service much later than scheduled.
So I always expect the parameters would be better in the paper and shorter development duration.
No one can pursuade others that a design is still advance if it atlast come into service 10 years later than initial schedule.

Haters will always be haters. May I know does F22 has EOTS? No. May I know F-35 has the flight capabilities of F-22? No.

J-20 being the latter has the combination of both. Super maneuverability while possessing the latest sensor. Of cos haters who cant bear to see the advancement of China will spread lies to ease their pain.

 

[Ind4Ever]

Where is the supposed "futuristic engine" for PAK-FA? It's an AL-31 derivative. Russia has yet to develop to develop the 117 engine. Don't count your chicken before it hatches, especially when Russia aviation industry suffered from chronic funding shortage and brain drain for the past 20 years.

The 117S engine had grounded 1 prototype and destroyed another already:

No, you should think about these below. The presence of canard does not automatically mean RCS return will be put above the low observable threshold, nor does having a larger airframe.

Northrop Gruman

SAAB

KF-X

X-36

JAST

No, the fail is on you. Canard designs were proposed for SAAB's next generation fighter, US Naval Advanced Tactical Fighter, South Korean KF-X as well as Boeing's 6th generation concept. All of those have the requirement of being low observable, so obviously the presence of canard does not exclude a design from being considered "stealth".

Brother you are comparing Nation which supply engines for many decades or since you bought their aircraft with a nation which still imports engine . And can you explain why canard configuration omitted by all advanced fighter producers ? And saab has their own story to tell. Canard makes design easier than plan configuration . Even though canard will increase its rcs it aids in sharp turning . Still details are not out so let's not claim good or bad as far as SAAB or J20 it's very immature

 

[55100864]

@Deino @Hu Songshan
can't we just ban these indian and viet troll permanently？？？？

 

[Beast]

Brother you are comparing Nation which supply engines for many decades or since you bought their aircraft with a nation which still imports engine . And can you explain why canard configuration omitted by all advanced fighter producers ? And saab has their own story to tell. Canard makes design easier than plan configuration . Even though canard will increase its rcs it aids in sharp turning . Still details are not out so let's not claim good or bad as far as SAAB or J20 it's very immature

Really?

THis video show a J-11BS flown during the changsun using domestic Taihang engine performing tight sharp turn. In the video the Chinese pilot is proud to flown in these plane. Mind you, these planes has squadron serial number and they are no demonstration aircraft. They are fully operational ready fighter and rumour is latest J-10B has tested on WS-10B domestic made engine. You can check out Chinese thread. China no longer imports AL-31 engine from Russia.

 

[S10]

No, the fail is on YOU, for failing to understand what I tried to teach you guys a long time ago.

In designing a low radar observable body, there are three main rules of control:

- Quantity of radiators
- Array of radiators
- Modes of radiation

Rule 1: There is no set quantity of radiators. What this rule mean is that you should minimize the quantity of structures that would be in the radar beam.

Rule 2: A single vertical stab for yaw axis control and stability have been the norm for decades. But for a low radar observable design, a single vertical stab would mean a pair corner reflectors created between the vertical stab and the aircraft's body. So in using twin canted vertical stabs to avoid the critical 90 deg corner reflector, you are less obedient to rule 1. You did not violate rule 1. Just less obedient to it.

Rule 2: There are many modes of radiation. The surface wave mode is one of them. Absorber to control surface waves would deny the enemy's radar much of this mode of radiation.

You can have a requirement that a body be low radar observable, but if the quantity of radiators elevates your design above a certain threshold, your design failed your requirement. So just because an experimental design have canards and the low radar observable requirement, that does not mean both are natural allies with each other.

For all we know, those experimental aircrafts may have low radar observable requirement, but it was the canards that raised the overall RCS to over that threshold.

Heh, if it isn't the biggest fail himself. First you do not know the requirement or threshold on the RCS return set out by the J-20 program. Second, canards being considered for half a dozen of low observable designs clearly indicate that it is not mutually exclusive, otherwise it would not be considered in the first place.

While some observers have suggested that canards are incompatible with stealth, an engineer who was active in Lockheed Martin’s early Joint Strike Fighter efforts says the final quad-tail configuration was no stealthier than the earlier canard-delta design.

J-20 Stealth Fighter Design Balances Speed And Agility | Zhuhai 2014 content from Aviation Week

Brother you are comparing Nation which supply engines for many decades or since you bought their aircraft with a nation which still imports engine . And can you explain why canard configuration omitted by all advanced fighter producers ? And saab has their own story to tell. Canard makes design easier than plan configuration . Even though canard will increase its rcs it aids in sharp turning . Still details are not out so let's not claim good or bad as far as SAAB or J20 it's very immature

China has been producing engines for its own J-11 fleet for the past 5 years in the form of WS-10A. The improved version is also being introduced on J-10B and WS-13 is slated to replace RD-93 within the year. In addition, China's R&D budget and manufacturing sector is many times greater than Russia's, so the two are not progressing at the same rate. Canard is or has been considered for at least half a dozen low RCS platforms. You keep saying it's being "omitted" despite only F-35 and F-22 are in service. Immaturity is drawing conclusions from visual examination.

 

[Ind4Ever]

Really?

View attachment 258826

THis video show a J-11BS flown during the changsun using domestic Taihang engine performing tight sharp turn. In the video the Chinese pilot is proud to flown in these plane. Mind you, these planes has squadron serial number and they are no demonstration aircraft. They are fully operational ready fighter and rumour is latest J-10B has tested on WS-10B domestic made engine. You can check out Chinese thread. China no longer imports AL-31 engine from Russia.

Brother I don't have time for this . If you think having j11b engine on J20 the next good luck

Really?

View attachment 258826

THis video show a J-11BS flown during the changsun using domestic Taihang engine performing tight sharp turn. In the video the Chinese pilot is proud to flown in these plane. Mind you, these planes has squadron serial number and they are no demonstration aircraft. They are fully operational ready fighter and rumour is latest J-10B has tested on WS-10B domestic made engine. You can check out Chinese thread. China no longer imports AL-31 engine from Russia.

Brother I don't have time for this . If you think having j11b engine on J20 the next good luck with that.

 

[S10]

Brother I don't have time for this . If you think having j11b engine on J20 the next good luck.

Why not? WS-10A has more thrust than AL-31F, as well as longer periods between servicing. Remaining issues with the engine has long been resolved several years ago. I love how Indians talk about problems with the WS-10A using present tense.

 

[Ind4Ever]

Why not? WS-10A has more thrust than AL-31F, as well as longer periods between servicing. Remaining issues with the engine has long been resolved several years ago. I love how Indians talk about problems with the WS-10A using present tense.

OK what is the super cruise you can achieve with this engine? And what is solution you found to reduce oil leakage which happens like tons with these 4gen engines ? There are lots of issues to be sorted out with engine and nozzles to reduce heat thus RCS or else heat seeking missiles will we have free run like they have with 4th Gen fighters.

Guys let's wait for final configuration let's not jump into the conclusion .

 

[SQ8]

THe indian is just spreading lies to ease their ego of not able to compete on the same ground. They are at least 2-3 level lower than the Chinese when comes to aviation fighter development.

This I will agree with. His "personal" views are based on their envy and not actual knowledge of aerospace.