What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

Turbofan powered fighter jet technology has already reached its max level, there's no further progress like end of ww2 fighters as the next stage will involve something totally different either drone or hypersonic capable fighters.

In military world, major super powers don't share technology and would rely on reverse engineering done on captured, shot down or bought enemy machines. Export version machines bought by customers such as Japan, UK, Germans will secretly reverse engineer on their newly bought F35s. US itself can't build 5th generation chobm armor fitted on Challenger 2, their Abrams with 3rd generation chobm armor are fitted by British. If British became US enemy, Americans will reverse engineer chobm gen 3 armor and that's all they could do, still inferior to challenger 2 chobm.

US became top mainly because they had hired the most engineers and scientists since ww2 from Britain, Germany, Russia, etc. Also they obtained almost every Russian equipments captured or bought from other countries such as mig29 from East Germany, Moldova and Su30 from Ukraine.

China hired numbers of engineers and scientists that were once working for US military manufacturers that were downsizing or closing down when US no longer has high demand for war machines especially aviation.

When Lockheed Martin.became dominant sole military aircraft manufacturer, they became corrupted building overpriced fighter jets with unreliable parts yet expensive to replace like BMW to milk cash out of US military. That's why the US didn't place high numbers of f22.



F22 is surely the best fighter today despite heavy maintenance. Its stealth is better than F35 of course.

The F35, I don't think US would allow the same stealth materials fitted on the export version F35. Most likely with toned down materials like the avionics fitted in export version F35. NATO despite being US allies, they too are military manufacturers and are direct competitors to US. EF2000, Rafale are answers to US F16. They are more likely to replicate F35 stealth, engine, avionics to come up with their equivalent tomorrow.

As for the J20, it all depends on how well they could steal tech from US to beat the F22. J20 stealth tech derived from F117 stealth materials. There's rumor that B2 engineers were hired to assist in J20 development so it could have somewhere close stealth capability. If war happened, both J20 and F22 will still get into miles just before visual range engagement.
So according to your post above, all the Chinese scientists can do are STEALING from the United States. It implies that the Chinese scientists are too dumb to be capable to do R&D on their own, in particular on those areas regarding the Stealth and Engine matters, in developing the J-20. And the figure of Yang Wei is simply a hoax.

All one need is just the BOLDNESS to write all the accusations backed by own words wrapped in many unrelated matters, or parroting the NATO MSM lines that the Chinese are stealing from the U.S. in this forum about the "Chinese Military" :disagree::devil:

You are just amazing in your defiance and agitation here!!
 
.
So according to your post above, all the Chinese scientists can do are STEALING from the United States. It implies that the Chinese scientists are too dumb to be capable to do R&D on their own, in particular on those areas regarding the Stealth and Engine matters, in developing the J-20. And the figure of Yang Wei is simply a hoax.

All one need is just the BOLDNESS to write all the accusations backed by own words wrapped in many unrelated matters, or parroting the NATO MSM lines that the Chinese are stealing from the U.S. in this forum about the "Chinese Military" :disagree::devil:

You are just amazing in your defiance and agitation here!!

When you have nothing to begin with, you will start by replicating technology from existing. You can only start making your own after you managed to replicate and understand how it works. Regardless of how good you are being a scientist or engineer, invention is not something can be easily done. Innovation is easier way to go.

US started with reverse engineering (replicating French and British before ww2 then Germans, Soviets after ww2), they too are not exempted. Nothing wrong with China started the same way, check history they only started building their own after replicating Russian, American & European technology.
 
.
So according to your post above, all the Chinese scientists can do are STEALING from the United States. It implies that the Chinese scientists are too dumb to be capable to do R&D on their own, in particular on those areas regarding the Stealth and Engine matters, in developing the J-20. And the figure of Yang Wei is simply a hoax.

All one need is just the BOLDNESS to write all the accusations backed by own words wrapped in many unrelated matters, or parroting the NATO MSM lines that the Chinese are stealing from the U.S. in this forum about the "Chinese Military" :disagree::devil:

You are just amazing in your defiance and agitation here!!

More important thing is if those R&D progresses in Chinese firms are organic and sustainable. Obviously they are and have been further pushed forward amid recent trade wars.
 
.
When you have nothing to begin with, you will start by replicating technology from existing. You can only start making your own after you managed to replicate and understand how it works. Regardless of how good you are being a scientist or engineer, invention is not something can be easily done. Innovation is easier way to go.

US started with reverse engineering (replicating French and British before ww2 then Germans, Soviets after ww2), they too are not exempted. Nothing wrong with China started the same way, check history they only started building their own after replicating Russian, American & European technology.
I can accept the notions of "imitating", "duplicating", "replicating", "inspiring", in the learning process… every nation follows such development steps… the US even had its Paperclip Operations to net the many brilliant Nazi scientists during the World War II, which pushed forward the substantial progresses in many scientific and technological areas in the United States and laid out the sound foundation for the subsequent progresses over the past decades (1960s~1990s)... as well as to host the many brilliant scientists from around the globe incl. those smart brains from China (yeah, brain drains for the rest of the world, but in the last decades China succeeded to much reduce such brain drains)... but accusation of STEALING is a totally different creature!! :devil:

One should NOT present such insulting notion about STEALING without being backed by any hard PROOF!!! And the burden to prove lies on the accuser!!


Are the United States authorities or its military corporations so incompetent in protecting their confidential works that nations like China can just STEAL (the blueprints) from them????

I recall many years ago (possibly more than 5 years) I once read some article in the US think tank publication wrote that the US might better slow down its introduction of the new weaponry systems for China did match or emulate new advancements rapidly any new military stuffs the US introduced, and came out even at larger scale at the lower costs, and at the end the US faced its own great difficulties to maintain its superiority lead, the technology gap got narrower over time. At that time I didn't really grasp the true intent of that article, but later I got what did it mean to not stimulate the arm competitions. Just look at the EM Railgun, Hypersonic Craft, Quantum Satellite, Laser Weapons…
 
.
Science
Chinese scientists hail ‘incredible’ stealth breakthrough that may blind military radar systems
  • Researchers at academy of science believe electromagnetic wave model is key that will herald new era in radar detection and avoidance for military ships and aircraft

Stephen Chen

Published: 1:00am, 19 Jul, 2019

d0c998ac-a855-11e9-862b-600d112f3b14_image_hires_151628.JPG

China’s J-20 stealth fighter. Photo: AFP

Chinese scientists have achieved a series of breakthroughs in stealth materials technology that they claim can make fighter jets and other weaponry lighter, cheaper to build and less vulnerable to radar detection.

Professor Luo Xiangang and colleagues at the Institute of Optics and Electronics, Chinese Academy of Sciences in Chengdu, Sichuan province, said they had created the world’s first mathematical model to precisely describe the behaviour of electromagnetic waves when they strike a piece of metal engraved with microscopic patterns, according to a statement posted on the academy’s website on Monday.

With their new model and breakthroughs in materials fabrication, they developed a membrane, known as a meta surface, which can absorb radar waves in the widest spectrum yet reported.

At present, stealth aircraft mainly rely on special geometry – their body shape – to deflect radar signals, but those designs can affect aerodynamic performance. They also use radar absorbing paint, which has a high density but only works against a limited frequency spectrum.
In one test, the new technology cut the strength of a reflected radar signal – measured in decibels – by between 10 and nearly 30dB in a frequency range from 0.3 to 40 gigahertz.

A stealth technologist from Fudan University in Shanghai, who was not involved in the work, said a fighter jet or warship using the new technology could feasibly fool all military radar systems in operation today.

“This detection range is incredible,” the researcher said. “I have never heard of anyone even coming close to this performance. At present, absorbing technology with an effective range of between 4 and 18 GHz is considered very, very good.”
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/mil...igh-frequency-radar-system-could-spot-stealth
China’s new radar system could spot stealth aircraft from at long range


The lower the signal frequency, the longer a radar’s detection range. But detailed information about a moving target can only be obtained with higher frequency radio waves. Militaries typically use a combination of radars working at different frequencies to establish lines of defence.

The Medium Extended Air Defence System, Nato’s early warning radar, operates at a frequency range of 0.3 to 1 GHz. The American Terminal High Altitude Area Defence system, the missile defence radar that caught Beijing’s attention when it was deployed in South Korea in 2017, operates at frequencies around 10 GHz.

Some airports use extremely short-range, high-frequency radars running at 20 GHz or above to monitor vehicle and plane movements on the ground, but even they might not be able to see a jet with the new stealth technology until it is overhead.

“Materials with meta surface technology are already found on military hardware in China, although what they are and where they are used remains largely classified,” the Fudan researcher said.

f555c84c-a857-11e9-862b-600d112f3b14_1320x770_151628.jpg

Professor Luo Xiangang. Photo: Baidu

Luo and his colleagues could not be reached for comment. But according to the academy’s statement and a paper the team published in the journal Advanced Science earlier this year, the stealth breakthroughs were based upon a discovery they made several years ago.

They found that the propagation pattern of radio waves – how they travelled – in extremely narrow metallic spaces was similar to a catenary curve, a shape similar to that assumed by chains suspended by two fixed points under their own weight.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...now-you-dont-china-tests-stealth-invisibility
China tests stealth ‘invisibility cloaks’ on regular fighter jets


Inspired by catenary electromagnetics, the team developed a mathematical model and designed meta surfaces suitable for nearly all kinds of wave manipulation.

These included energy-absorbing materials for stealth vehicles and antennas that can be used on satellites or military aircraft.

Zhu Shining, a professor of physics specialising in meta materials at Nanjing University, said the catenary model was a “novel idea”.

“The Institute of Optics and Electronics in Chengdu has conducted long-term research in this area which paved a solid foundation for their discoveries. They have done a good job,” Zhu said.

“Scientists are exploring new features of metal materials, some of them are already in real-life applications.”
 
.
but accusation of STEALING is a totally different creature!! :devil:

Yes, it is.

Are the United States authorities or its military corporations so incompetent in protecting their confidential works that nations like China can just STEAL (the blueprints) from them????
There is little to no protection from HUMINT.

In industrial espionage, an employee from one company can be employed by another company and that employee can literally steal proprietary information.

We can start about 300 yrs ago...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/photo-essays/2011-09-20/famous-cases-of-corporate-espionage
Père d'Entrecolles was a French Jesuit missionary in the early 1700s. By some descriptions, he was also an industrial spy.
Breaking past a corporate firewall and gained access to electronics storage qualifies as industrial espionage.

If the information is kept off Internet access, then HUMINT is the only resort. The question is not confined to the technical competency of the target, but also to the technical competency of the aggressor. If the aggressor have superior technical skills, then it is easy to cast the target as broadly 'incompetent' without context, fully satisfying one's own emotional needs to see the target as 'incompetent'. But with proper context, HUMINT is the most time consuming and labor intensive of all crafts of industrial espionage and in this arena, aggressor and target have mutual respects.

If China engaged in HUMINT, then it is/was theft in every sense of the word.

Finally, the US military does not have its own corporations to manufacture large scale items like ships, tanks, and jet fighters.
 
.
Turbofan powered fighter jet technology has already reached its max level, there's no further progress like end of ww2 fighters as the next stage will involve something totally different either drone or hypersonic capable fighters.

In military world, major super powers don't share technology and would rely on reverse engineering done on captured, shot down or bought enemy machines. Export version machines bought by customers such as Japan, UK, Germans will secretly reverse engineer on their newly bought F35s. US itself can't build 5th generation chobm armor fitted on Challenger 2, their Abrams with 3rd generation chobm armor are fitted by British. If British became US enemy, Americans will reverse engineer chobm gen 3 armor and that's all they could do, still inferior to challenger 2 chobm.

US became top mainly because they had hired the most engineers and scientists since ww2 from Britain, Germany, Russia, etc. Also they obtained almost every Russian equipments captured or bought from other countries such as mig29 from East Germany, Moldova and Su30 from Ukraine.

China hired numbers of engineers and scientists that were once working for US military manufacturers that were downsizing or closing down when US no longer has high demand for war machines especially aviation.

When Lockheed Martin.became dominant sole military aircraft manufacturer, they became corrupted building overpriced fighter jets with unreliable parts yet expensive to replace like BMW to milk cash out of US military. That's why the US didn't place high numbers of f22.



F22 is surely the best fighter today despite heavy maintenance. Its stealth is better than F35 of course.

The F35, I don't think US would allow the same stealth materials fitted on the export version F35. Most likely with toned down materials like the avionics fitted in export version F35. NATO despite being US allies, they too are military manufacturers and are direct competitors to US. EF2000, Rafale are answers to US F16. They are more likely to replicate F35 stealth, engine, avionics to come up with their equivalent tomorrow.

As for the J20, it all depends on how well they could steal tech from US to beat the F22. J20 stealth tech derived from F117 stealth materials. There's rumor that B2 engineers were hired to assist in J20 development so it could have somewhere close stealth capability. If war happened, both J20 and F22 will still get into miles just before visual range engagement.
If I recall, the head J-20 or J-10 test pilot said back in 2011 that the F-117 stealth technology were already outdated back then ... do you really think the Chinese are stupid enough to rely on obsolete tech for their top of the line fighter?Please read up on facts before spewing such ignorance.
 
.
Yes, it is.


There is little to no protection from HUMINT.

In industrial espionage, an employee from one company can be employed by another company and that employee can literally steal proprietary information.

We can start about 300 yrs ago...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/photo-essays/2011-09-20/famous-cases-of-corporate-espionage

Breaking past a corporate firewall and gained access to electronics storage qualifies as industrial espionage.

If the information is kept off Internet access, then HUMINT is the only resort. The question is not confined to the technical competency of the target, but also to the technical competency of the aggressor. If the aggressor have superior technical skills, then it is easy to cast the target as broadly 'incompetent' without context, fully satisfying one's own emotional needs to see the target as 'incompetent'. But with proper context, HUMINT is the most time consuming and labor intensive of all crafts of industrial espionage and in this arena, aggressor and target have mutual respects.

If China engaged in HUMINT, then it is/was theft in every sense of the word.

Finally, the US military does not have its own corporations to manufacture large scale items like ships, tanks, and jet fighters.
You're simply parroting the USA politicians, from Trump to Pence to Pompeo and the cohorts, all accusations without providing any evidence or proof ... just empty accusations. So boring!

Just stupid who think that only the USA can produce some stuffs then other major nations incl China cannot produce them for good!
 
.
You're simply parroting the USA politicians, from Trump to Pence to Pompeo and the cohorts, all accusations without providing any evidence or proof ... just empty accusations. So boring!

Just stupid who think that only the USA can produce some stuffs then other major nations incl China cannot produce them for good!

Yes he indeed the PARROT, rather being PROFESSIONAL, forget that guy.
 
. .
If I recall, the head J-20 or J-10 test pilot said back in 2011 that the F-117 stealth technology were already outdated back then ... do you really think the Chinese are stupid enough to rely on obsolete tech for their top of the line fighter?Please read up on facts before spewing such ignorance.
Here is an important clue -- by the time ANY product is in manufacture, its base technology is ALREADY outdated. Whether that product is a car, an airplane, or a computer chip, it is outdated at time of mass production.

But there is a difference between 'outdated' and 'obsolete'. To be 'outdated' mean the item is still functional, productive, and desirable by the users, even though its base technology improves. To be 'obsolete' is to be planned for discard from use or to be used until end of life with no plan for equivalent replacement. You used the two words -- highlighted -- without understanding their proper contexts.

The F-117 is dated but its 'stealth' technology is still functional -- shaping. For now, outside of the labs, there is nothing that can functionally replace shaping. The outer appearance of the F-117 is different from the F-22, but its foundation -- shaping -- is still the same.

In the same vein, the quadruple redundant voting technology that is the foundation for modern fly-by-wire flight controls systems remains the top with no feasible replacement in line. The individual components that make up one application of the technology maybe dated but the core concept that contains these items -- air data, input, gyros, accelerometers, computers -- remains. The computer maybe digital instead of analog, like the older F-16A/B to the newer F-16C/D, but in order for the flight controls system to work, there must be a computer. The flight controls systems of the F-16, F-117, F-22, F-35, B-2, and J-20 are conceptually and technically identical.

The Chinese are smart enough to realize that if they use the 'angular faceting' shaping technique, they would still be behind the US, but if they want to leapfrog the application of the technology, they must have assistance. How they got that assistance is for a different debate, but there is no denying the reality that without that assistance, the J-20 would not come to be.
 
.
Here is an important clue -- by the time ANY product is in manufacture, its base technology is ALREADY outdated. Whether that product is a car, an airplane, or a computer chip, it is outdated at time of mass production.

But there is a difference between 'outdated' and 'obsolete'. To be 'outdated' mean the item is still functional, productive, and desirable by the users, even though its base technology improves. To be 'obsolete' is to be planned for discard from use or to be used until end of life with no plan for equivalent replacement. You used the two words -- highlighted -- without understanding their proper contexts.

The F-117 is dated but its 'stealth' technology is still functional -- shaping. For now, outside of the labs, there is nothing that can functionally replace shaping. The outer appearance of the F-117 is different from the F-22, but its foundation -- shaping -- is still the same.

In the same vein, the quadruple redundant voting technology that is the foundation for modern fly-by-wire flight controls systems remains the top with no feasible replacement in line. The individual components that make up one application of the technology maybe dated but the core concept that contains these items -- air data, input, gyros, accelerometers, computers -- remains. The computer maybe digital instead of analog, like the older F-16A/B to the newer F-16C/D, but in order for the flight controls system to work, there must be a computer. The flight controls systems of the F-16, F-117, F-22, F-35, B-2, and J-20 are conceptually and technically identical.

The Chinese are smart enough to realize that if they use the 'angular faceting' shaping technique, they would still be behind the US, but if they want to leapfrog the application of the technology, they must have assistance. How they got that assistance is for a different debate, but there is no denying the reality that without that assistance, the J-20 would not come to be.
Hey do you know if there are ethnically Chinese pilots flying F35’s? Or we they taking extra precautions to prevent espionage?
 
.
You're simply parroting the USA politicians, from Trump to Pence to Pompeo and the cohorts, all accusations without providing any evidence or proof ... just empty accusations. So boring!

Just stupid who think that only the USA can produce some stuffs then other major nations incl China cannot produce them for good!
No value to follow his posting
You're simply parroting the USA politicians, from Trump to Pence to Pompeo and the cohorts, all accusations without providing any evidence or proof ... just empty accusations. So boring!

Just stupid who think that only the USA can produce some stuffs then other major nations incl China cannot produce them for good!

Can you guys just simply ignore his posts as what I've been doing? No need to pay any attention to some waste.
 
.
No value to follow his posting
Technically speaking -- a lot more value than all of you guys' combined. That is not in dispute.

Can you guys just simply ignore his posts as what I've been doing? No need to pay any attention to some waste.
Like I have been all these yrs -- you guys do not know why you debate. Not how, but why?

Why? It is the silent readers out there. That is why. Just because you ignore me does not mean they will follow suit.

This is a military oriented forum. I am a veteran. So right from the starting line, who is going to appear to have more credibility? Not only that, this is about military aviation and I am USAF veteran, F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. Then I have nearly 9 yrs as a radar field specialist in civilian life. So who is going to be more believable in terms of technical issues? You? :lol:
 
.
Technically speaking -- a lot more value than all of you guys' combined. That is not in dispute.


Like I have been all these yrs -- you guys do not know why you debate. Not how, but why?

Why? It is the silent readers out there. That is why. Just because you ignore me does not mean they will follow suit.

This is a military oriented forum. I am a veteran. So right from the starting line, who is going to appear to have more credibility? Not only that, this is about military aviation and I am USAF veteran, F-111 Cold War, then F-16 Desert Storm. Then I have nearly 9 yrs as a radar field specialist in civilian life. So who is going to be more believable in terms of technical issues? You? :lol:

With your bias....certainly not you
 
.
Back
Top Bottom