Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[gambit]

So silly...

The thing is...If you go there, you will find they cannot rebut because they know they got caught with their pants down. The USAF have been climbing around our 'stealth' aircrafts while the Chinese were still dreaming of a 'stealth' aircraft. Sometimes I cannot feel but feel a bit sorry for how gullible they are to every claim, no matter how baseless, just to put the J-20 over.

 

[DARKY]

The thing is...If you go there, you will find they cannot rebut because they know they got caught with their pants down. The USAF have been climbing around our 'stealth' aircrafts while the Chinese were still dreaming of a 'stealth' aircraft. Sometimes I cannot feel but feel a bit sorry for how gullible they are to every claim, no matter how baseless, just to put the J-20 over.

I seriously think that they could've done better than J-20.... however would wait and watch.

 

[gambit]

I seriously think that they could've done better than J-20.... however would wait and watch.

I doubt that. The J-20 is an admirable accomplishment for China, however, the US already had at least two iterations of 'stealth' gains in knowledge and experience.

 

[SQ8]

Doesn't the F-22 use newer Zip strips for its RAM coating?

The fact remains, apart from "leaks" what do we know of the J-20?
Compared to that, there are over a hundred books on the F-22 detailing all declassified stuff.
The same goes for many of the other Chinese things..
Till Victor Belenko defected, the west thought the Mig-25 to be a monster. ..
Is the J-20 a monster?.. unless there is similar public exposure, we will never be sure.

 

[DARKY]

I doubt that. The J-20 is an admirable accomplishment for China, however, the US already had at least two iterations of 'stealth' gains in knowledge and experience.

yes they do... in case of USAF.... and that's why they're a generation ahead... by the time the J-20s and PAK FAs come out they would've started working on their own 5.5th gen....

---------- Post added at 08:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:10 PM ----------

Doesn't the F-22 use newer Zip strips for its RAM coating?

The fact remains, apart from "leaks" what do we know of the J-20?
Compared to that, there are over a hundred books on the F-22 detailing all declassified stuff.
The same goes for many of the other Chinese things..
Till Victor Belenko defected, the west thought the Mig-25 to be a monster. ..
Is the J-20 a monster?.. unless there is similar public exposure, we will never be sure.

The monster is still taking baby steps... so lets wait until we get some more leaks which have reasonable explanations about the electronics and weapons package...

 

[gambit]

Doesn't the F-22 use newer Zip strips for its RAM coating?

What are called 'zip strips' are advantageous for exposing panel gaps for quicker access to the internals. Absorbers for the F-22 and F-35 are for controlling the initial development of specular reflections, the rest of 'stealth' is achieved mainly through shaping. What this mean is that even if absorber, new or old, is NOT used, the F-22 will still be a formidable goal to match in terms of low radar observability.

The fact remains, apart from "leaks" what do we know of the J-20?
Compared to that, there are over a hundred books on the F-22 detailing all declassified stuff.
The same goes for many of the other Chinese things..
Till Victor Belenko defected, the west thought the Mig-25 to be a monster. ..
Is the J-20 a monster?.. unless there is similar public exposure, we will never be sure.

The US military rightly overestimated the MIG-25. We can criticize in highsight the excess of that overestimation, but we cannot fault the motivation behind it.

 

[SQ8]

What are called 'zip strips' are advantageous for exposing panel gaps for quicker access to the internals. Absorbers for the F-22 and F-35 are for controlling the initial development of specular reflections, the rest of 'stealth' is achieved mainly through shaping. What this mean is that even if absorber, new or old, is NOT used, the F-22 will still be a formidable goal to match in terms of low radar observability.


The US military rightly overestimated the MIG-25. We can criticize in highsight the excess of that overestimation, but we cannot fault the motivation behind it.

Considering the result was a fighter with an unbroken 105.5 to zero kills.. in over four wars..
I would be an idiot to critique that.

 

[gambit]

Considering the result was a fighter with an unbroken 105.5 to zero kills.. in over four wars..
I would be an idiot to critique that.

I hope you are not trying to infer that the F-15 came from the MIG-25 in any stretch of the imagination. The truth is difficult to bear for many: The MIG-25 came from the North American A-5 Vigilante.

The A-5 originally had twin vertical stabs, which the US Navy at that time thought it was too 'radical' of a design. North American then redesigned the A-5 to have a single large vertical stab. The Soviets got a hold of the A-5's design, who knows how, and built the MIG-25. The F-15 also has the same parentage.

 

[SQ8]

I hope you are not trying to infer that the F-15 came from the MIG-25 in any stretch of the imagination. The truth is difficult to bear for many: The MIG-25 came from the North American A-5 Vigilante.

The A-5 originally had twin vertical stabs, which the US Navy at that time thought it was too 'radical' of a design. North American then redesigned the A-5 to have a single large vertical stab. The Soviets got a hold of the A-5's design, who knows how, and built the MIG-25. The F-15 also has the same parentage.

I think Ive been into aviation enough not to make that assumption.
What I meant was, that the hype of the Mig-25 was partially responsible for spurring on the F-X program...which for those who dont know...led to the F-15.

 

[amalakas]

I hope you are not trying to infer that the F-15 came from the MIG-25 in any stretch of the imagination. The truth is difficult to bear for many: The MIG-25 came from the North American A-5 Vigilante.

The A-5 originally had twin vertical stabs, which the US Navy at that time thought it was too 'radical' of a design. North American then redesigned the A-5 to have a single large vertical stab. The Soviets got a hold of the A-5's design, who knows how, and built the MIG-25. The F-15 also has the same parentage.

I don't know how well documented this theory is, but simply theorising about it, I would say that it doesn't sound very likely, first of all, the MiG-25 and the F-15 are two drastically different airplanes,just because the US thought it to be a super fighter, it never meant that the russians intended it to be anything else than a long range, high speed interceptor. Actually I think the MiG-25/31 may be the best interceptor airplanes ever built. They had a very different goal and mission than what the F-15 has or will have. as for the A-5 it was meant to be a bomber.

 

[gambit]

I don't know how well documented this theory is, but simply theorising about it, I would say that it doesn't sound very likely, first of all, the MiG-25 and the F-15 are two drastically different airplanes,just because the US thought it to be a super fighter, it never meant that the russians intended it to be anything else than a long range, high speed interceptor. Actually I think the MiG-25/31 may be the best interceptor airplanes ever built. They had a very different goal and mission than what the F-15 has or will have. as for the A-5 it was meant to be a bomber.

Those who claimed that the F-15 'came from' the MIG-25 did so based upon appearance and timeline. If that is the method, then my argument stands equally valid. We cannot avoid the fact that many (not all) Soviet-era aircrafts have strikingly similar appearances to US ones. As for the A-5, it is irrelevant what was its original mission. That aircraft became a tactical reconnaissance aircraft as well. So did the MIG-25 and the F-4.

 

[amalakas]

Those who claimed that the F-15 'came from' the MIG-25 did so based upon appearance and timeline. If that is the method, then my argument stands equally valid. We cannot avoid the fact that many (not all) Soviet-era aircrafts have strikingly similar appearances to US ones. As for the A-5, it is irrelevant what was its original mission. That aircraft became a tactical reconnaissance aircraft as well. So did the MIG-25 and the F-4.

How is it irrelevant Gambit? a plane's intended mission plays a crucial role in the design.
And that is why I mentioned the intended mission of the MiG-25 & A-5 & F-15. If one was a bomber and the other was an interceptor and the other a air-superiority figher, then how can they have striking similarities ?

 

[houshanghai]

That pic of J-20 losing its paint was PSed, it has been proved.

BRO.ChineseTiger report has been certified correct now,J20's paint have never come off.

the latest photo of J20

THX FENGBUBEI

 

[houshanghai]

----------

There are three photographs of the J-20 Mighty Dragon with its side-bay doors opened. The important thing to remember about the side-bay is that it is smaller than the underside main weapon bay. Each side-bay can only hold one short-range missile, such as the "PL-9 infrared-homing air-to-air missile (AAM)." The main weapon bay can hold longer-range missiles and more of them.

THX Martian AND FENGBUBEI

 

[houshanghai]

thx hk299792458 and 向老大哥致敬