What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

So basically you're saying the J-20 is ridiculously stealthy even without its RAM coating that the luneberg lens has to be mounted on it at all times or GC will lose track of it very quickly? That's pretty amazing.
I don't see what's so unusual about it, in every picture of the F-22 in primer I've seen it's had a lens, e.g.,
1862047.jpg

I couldn't find a picture of an F-35 in primer's underside. Even if I did, it has so many bumps I probably wouldn't be able to make out the lens.:lol:
That's an incredible shot. Always wondered why the canards are dihedral.
I'm far from an expert, but if I had to take a guess it might be to get good airflow over the LERX.
 
I'm far from an expert, but if I had to take a guess it might be to get good airflow over the LERX.
CANARD is a vortex generators as well as provide a lift and LERX is also providing a lift as well as main wings so their are 3 lifting surfaces on j20
 
There are many relative reliable rumor source on internet like huahua,pb, 猫版, 席亚洲 and 星海.

Well in CJDBY, I tend to believe two guys, huahua is working in the ship industry, and there is another guy in CJDBY, who is likely to work in the state-owned assert supervion commission (he showed his card and paper reports from AVIC), bu its a shame the CJDBY mod ban his account due to his not so optimistic tune regard the fate of FC-31.

Never heard of the rest through, so no comments.
 
Last edited:
Actually such performance is expected to a true VLO design:

Indeed.

the shape should contribute the majority work of RCS

Couldn't agree more. If you take the 3 major elements of a stealth platform and put them in order or importance, I would put them this way.

1) Shaping
2) Coating
3) Infrared reduction.

Placing a percentage on all those 3 would be a bit difficult, especially the 3rd one since we've seen the US being the only one to really care about reducing the infrared signature in the Raptor (and even in the F-35 with the cooling elements of the engine but not as much as what they did with the F-22) and we haven't really seen that much attention given to reducing the IR signature of either the PAK-FA or the J-20, at least to the level of the F-22.

IR signature also falls a bit out of the stealth spectrum, although it's a very large consideration and so it does get lumped into the conditions, which makes assigning it a percentage of importance a rather difficult proposition.

Radar and avionics also play a role but I think those can be kept out of the "essentials" of stealth.

I don't see what's so unusual about it, in every picture of the F-22 in primer I've seen it's had a lens, e.g.,

Very true. I do think that the lune lenses also give the aircraft a specific signature to not only enhance its RCS, but to be able to identify it specifically.

I'm far from an expert, but if I had to take a guess it might be to get good airflow over the LERX.

It's really an interesting observation because I don't think we see that dihedral in any of the other canard platforms. The Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen, Su-30 and even the J-10's canards are pretty much at the same angle as the main wings. The only reason I can think of is that on all those other aircraft, the canards are elevated on the fuselage from the main wings, whereas on the J-20, they're in the same plane as the main wings. So maybe they needed to separate the disturbance of airflow from the canards to the wings by putting them in a dihedral since they couldn't raise them or put them higher than the same plain of the wings? In a sense it's the same concept as what you just said with getting good airflow over the LERX.
 
Indeed.



Couldn't agree more. If you take the 3 major elements of a stealth platform and put them in order or importance, I would put them this way.

1) Shaping
2) Coating
3) Infrared reduction.

Placing a percentage on all those 3 would be a bit difficult, especially the 3rd one since we've seen the US being the only one to really care about reducing the infrared signature in the Raptor (and even in the F-35 with the cooling elements of the engine but not as much as what they did with the F-22) and we haven't really seen that much attention given to reducing the IR signature of either the PAK-FA or the J-20, at least to the level of the F-22.

IR signature also falls a bit out of the stealth spectrum, although it's a very large consideration and so it does get lumped into the conditions, which makes assigning it a percentage of importance a rather difficult proposition.

Radar and avionics also play a role but I think those can be kept out of the "essentials" of stealth.



Very true. I do think that the lune lenses also give the aircraft a specific signature to not only enhance its RCS, but to be able to identify it specifically.



It's really an interesting observation because I don't think we see that dihedral in any of the other canard platforms. The Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen, Su-30 and even the J-10's canards are pretty much at the same angle as the main wings. The only reason I can think of is that on all those other aircraft, the canards are elevated on the fuselage from the main wings, whereas on the J-20, they're in the same plane as the main wings. So maybe they needed to separate the disturbance of airflow from the canards to the wings by putting them in a dihedral since they couldn't raise them or put them higher than the same plain of the wings? In a sense it's the same concept as what you just said with getting good airflow over the LERX.

In my memory, a journal indicates if the canards parallel to the main wings, it will cause huge RCS.
 
It's really an interesting observation because I don't think we see that dihedral in any of the other canard platforms. The Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen, Su-30 and even the J-10's canards are pretty much at the same angle as the main wings. The only reason I can think of is that on all those other aircraft, the canards are elevated on the fuselage from the main wings, whereas on the J-20, they're in the same plane as the main wings. So maybe they needed to separate the disturbance of airflow from the canards to the wings by putting them in a dihedral since they couldn't raise them or put them higher than the same plain of the wings? In a sense it's the same concept as what you just said with getting good airflow over the LERX.

That's what most J-20 observers think as well.
 
In my memory, a journal indicates if the canards parallel to the main wings, it will cause huge RCS.
Not necessarily true. We have gone thru this before on this forum...

There are three main rules in designing a radar low observable body:

- Control of quantity of radiators
- Control of array of radiators
- Control of modes of radiation

They are not necessarily rules that can be violated. Rather, they are more like guidelines that indicate the degree of obedience to them.

The F-22 has six major flight controls structures. The J-20 has eight. That make the J-20 less obedient to Rule 1. But that does not automatically make the J-20 more visible EM-wise. It forces the engineers to focus on Rule 2.

Rule 2 is what make observers, many of them experts in the field, suspicious of the J-20's canards regarding trying to be as low radar observable as the American fighters.

The canard is a finite body, meaning at some time and somewhere, the radar signal has to leave this structure. How the exiting signals make contact with the other structures is what make the canard detrimental to 'stealth' or not a factor at all. But based upon the current understanding of signal behavior, the J-20's canards with their dihedral is at least suspect to be detrimental to the J-20's attempt to be as 'stealthy' as the American fighters as in Rule 3.

All three rules must work together and this is evident with the UPPER surface of the F-117...

tdyeGRb.jpg


Each 'ridge' is an exit point for an impinging radar signal. So under the three rules, the F-117 has many more structures than the J-20. Lockheed engineers paid close attention to how the three rules interact with each other and the result is that the F-117's RCS is still a secret. Everyone, including China, would love to know that figure. In some ways, the US have been more open with the F-117's RCS than China has with the J-20's RCS. Ben Rich's book at least hinted at that figure.

http://www.f117sfa.org/f117_history.htm
The model was mounted on a 12-foot high pole, and the radar dish zeroed in from about 1,500 feet away. The site radar operator could not see the model on the radar, until a black bird landed right on top of the Hopeless Diamond. The radar was only picking up the bird....
This is why the criticism about the F-35's underside with all the bumps as detrimental to 'stealth' is nonsense. The critics cannot reconcile the F-117's topside and the F-35's underside. As if somehow the laws of physics behaves differently for each jet.

For now, conventional wisdom has it that being parallel in the root plane and no dihedral is ideal. The J-20's canards is one half of that conventional wisdom. Their roots are on the same plane as the main wings, but their dihedral affects how exiting radar signals contact the main wings in terms of direction, angle of approach, and distance.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom