Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I wouldn't trust an article that says this ... "While the J-20 was considered unable to match the capabilities of the F-22".He is right.
The U.S. Air Force’s ability to improve the capabilities of the Raptor is limited largely due to the termination of production of the fighter, meaning it is no longer a “live program” undergoing continuous development in the same way as the F-35, F-15, and J-20. The age of the Raptor’s design, meaning it uses software and computer architecture developed in the 1990s with a core processor speed of just 25MHz, further complicates upgrades – causing particular issues when attempting to equip the fighter with newly developed weapons systems. The J-20’s far newer computer architecture is far easier to work with for China’s own military. While the J-20 was considered unable to match the capabilities of the F-22 upon its induction into service, the far faster rate at which upgrades can be applied are set to rapidly narrow the gap and could well lead the Chinese fighter to soon surpass the capabilities of its U.S. counterpart and in future go on to transcend them entirely. With both fighters representing the elite of each country’s respective aerial warfare capabilities, this will inevitably have significant implications for the balance of power in the Pacific.Raptor's electronic technology is old 90's technology that need upgrade
Abraham Ait is a military analyst specializing in Asia-Pacific security and the role of air power in modern warfare. He is chief editor of Military Watch Magazine.
https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/how...ighter-could-soon-surpass-the-us-f-22-raptor/
And overrate yourself is equally perilous.I wouldn't trust an article that says this ... "While the J-20 was considered unable to match the capabilities of the F-22".
Underestimate the enemy at your peril ...
For decades, backup instruments were raw air data sourced. The technology -- spinning gyros, bellows, gears -- remains the same from one era to another. Each manufacturer can only make superficial changes to their products such as a thinner glass or lighter casing. The FEATURES and the EXECUTION of these mechanical and analog devices were the same from one aircraft to another.In a recent policy statement, the FAA gave the regulatory green light to replace traditional vacuum-driven attitude instruments with electronically driven replacement indicators. This means you can remove the vacuum system from the aircraft, since the policy doesn’t require a backup spinning gyro. In many cases, you won’t need a backup at all.
Today's fighters have some of the same sensing capabilities and subsystems to be controlled, but their federated architecture (that is, each avionics function has its own processor and essentially works independently) makes the pilot the integrator of data and the manager of all the supporting subsystems.
The word 'federated' implies other notions such conjoining or cooperative. The F-22's CIP architecture removed all separation, physical and/or notional. The analogy is instead of having distinct states or provinces, each with its own administrator, all boundaries are dissolved. All decision making are centralized. All data sources can be better collated thru faster rerouting to accommodate situational changes. If the radar detects a cluster of target in one sector, the CIP architecture can faster collect OTHER information, such as air defense threats or even weather, in that sector, and display it. In the older -- federated -- design, it is the pilot who has to turn his head towards the RWR display and find threat information for that sector. And so on and on...Workload.Coherent presentation and control (the pilot's view of integration) is not simply a way of organizing functions or routing lots of data to a single display. It actually includes additional functionality, such as situation assessment and weapons fire control.
Does the J-20 have this avionics design? If not, then it does not matter if its electronics have capacitors with newer dielectrics or its processor speed is faster. In short, if the J-20 remains with the federated architecture, its pilot workload are the same as '4th-gen' fighters, making it a far less capable platform than the F-22.There are two CIPs in each F-22, with 66 module slots per CIP.
...if the CIP module that is acting as radio dies, one of the other modules would automatically reload the radio program and take over the radio function. This approach to avionics makes the equipment extremely tolerant to combat damage as well as flexible from a design upgrade point of view.
we don't know whether J-20 using federated system/CIP architecture or something new @gambitDoes the J-20 have this avionics design? If not, then it does not matter if its electronics have capacitors with newer dielectrics or its processor speed is faster. In short, if the J-20 remains with the federated architecture, its pilot workload are the same as '4th-gen' fighters, making it a far less capable platform than the F-22.
Deal with it.
Do not know? That is the problem. We should not make blanket statements from ignorance. Like these guys continually does.we don't know whether J-20 using federated system/CIP architecture or something new @gambit
Did anyone notice the LEVCON on the J/H-20?
But isn't this JH-20 not more a fan-art yet?
Strange ... looks very much a Russian Ch-29 AGM and not like any known Chinese store??!!
View attachment 480364
It looks more like PGM than AGM inside the J-20 weapon bay. The fin and shape is all wrong as a AGM.
Fan art or not, did you notice it? : )But isn't this JH-20 not more a fan-art yet?
Strange ... looks very much a Russian Ch-29 AGM and not like any known Chinese store??!!
View attachment 480364
Fan art or not, did you notice it? : )