Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[帅的一匹]

Stop J11 and J10's production, concentrate all resource on producing J20 and J16/J11D.

Dedicated to develop quantum radar.

That's why American stop F22 production at only 200 units, because it's an overkill.

 

[clarkgap]

More rumors about initial exercises of J-20 from reputable members in fyjs, this time J-20 is not equiped with lens so the RCS is not comprised:


http://www.fyjs.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1890684&extra=page=&page=1

Rough translation:

1 J20 vs 4 J-10 in dog-fight, the J-20 leave the rear end to 4 J-10s, but climb suddenly with afterburn, all J-10 lost tracks, the J-20 have not release any countermeasures at all.

2 J20 vs defence array consist of C300/HQ-16A SAM and KJ500 AWACS and several J-10, the first J-20 take down KJ500, the second J-20 take out all SAM batteries, then they finish the mission and leave, neither J-10 nor KJ-500 have any response during the exerise, the senior engineers of the AESA radar developer for KJ-500 is very impressed about J-20's performance.

2 J20 vs 4 J-10 and KJ500 as well as a electronic warfare plane, J-20 climb to 15,000 meter ceil, locate the KJ-500 and the EW plane, rush down to finish them and then take out the 4 J-10s, the whole fight last for 46 mins.

2 J20 vs 4 J-10 and KJ500 as well as a ground radar station, same story, the J-20s climb to high ceil and take out KJ-500, then finish off the J-10s, the whole combat last for 32 mins.

Like some senior scientist in China claimed once: stealth fighter is the nuke weapon in our time.

It's a joke. HQ-16A SAM will not join Air Force exercise because it is the weapon of Army. If you watch the CCTV militory Report, you can find that they used HQ-9 in RedArrow(红箭)-2017 exercise. 磁爷 is not a reliable source. 观察者上席亚洲的文章更有参考价值，这个pupu也是认可的。

 

[52051]

It's a joke. HQ-16A SAM will not join Air Force exercise because it is the weapon of Army. If you watch the CCTV militory Report, you can find that they used HQ-9 in RedArrow(红箭)-2017 exercise. 磁爷 is not a reliable source. 观察者上席亚洲的文章更有参考价值，这个pupu也是认可的。

Not really, as for the joke, the source always say he is kidding to avoid any potential legal problems, so thats common.

And just because news suggesting HQ-16A enter service in the army doesnt mean air-defence force wont equip them, coupling with HQ-9 or C300, the system can provide a complete coverage of airspace.

As for PUPU, actually if you even look at the thread, it is PUPU right below his post, agree with him.

 

[Gomig-21]

The reason I went thru all this explanation is because manual pilot actuation of the canards is the best -- not the only -- way to explain the J-20's canards with their full vertical deflection at ramp speed. But that allowance even when full computer control when needed is still an additional pilot workload and possibly dangerous at critical times in flight, such as combat. And the J-20 is a single-seater.

Interesting observation on whether what's happening during taxiing is manual control or relayed through the FCS in this particular instance that started this discussion. You can see that extreme deflection of the canards is coupled with the flaps up and ailerons down. V-stabs are also inward and leading edge flaps are not engaged at all.

It looks like the J-20 behind this one also has its canards, flaps & ailerons in the same position. I'd venture to say that it is more likely all the control surfaces are engaged through the FCS rather than manually during taxiing.

 

[clarkgap]

Not really, as for the joke, the source always say he is kidding to avoid any potential legal problems, so thats common.

And just because news suggesting HQ-16A enter service in the army doesnt mean air-defence force wont equip them, coupling with HQ-9 or C300, the system can provide a complete coverage of airspace.

As for PUPU, actually if you even look at the thread, it is PUPU right below his post, agree with him.

In another forum, PUPU said he only agree part of these rumor. And 席亚洲 had posted that part before 磁爷. There is not any video, image or official report about PLAAF's HQ-16.

 

[52051]

In another forum, PUPU said he only agree part of these rumor. And 席亚洲 had posted that part before 磁爷. There is not any video, image or official report about PLAAF's HQ-16.

Many of the equipments in PLA has not seen with pic or video, but that doesnt prevent PLA from equip them. Espeically since HQ-16 will most likely fill the void of middle range defence, which is coupling with HQ-9 or C300, so it is very reasonble the air-defence force will get this latest type of middle-range SAM as well.

Since airforce will most likely equip these missiles in their air defence array, how many pictures/videos about PLA air-defence array have ever been revealed from media? It could simply because it get higher classify level, the army are more open since HQ-16A for the army are mobile depolyed, but for airforce, thats part of its defence network, and therefore could be classified.

As for PUPU, PUPU in other threads simply imply he dont agree with the source's many views regarding 601/611, we all know FYJS is more favor 611, and the source love to belittle and make fun of 601's incompentence, whilst in CJDBY, there could be some guys on 601's payroll who love to promote fake postive news about 601, ridculus news like how PLA plan to only buy 200 J-20 yet 3000 FC-31 or how PLAAF/PLAN and all other will order FC-31 are all over there.

Yet, with more and more open news revealed like Yang Wei's various signficant promotion by CCP, 611's ex-head now return to 611, and airforce chief's openly high praise about J-20 in front of state media (probably be the first type PLA equipments recieved such honor), suggesting FYJS's many "biased" view regarding 601, actually could hold more water than you thought.

My mother side actually has NE root, but if you know anything about the problem of NE working culture, you tend to believe the stories about 601/SAC, it fit their working culture right, if China need a serious competitor to 611/CAC, then 601/SAC is not the right choice, they need to get a new one elsewhere.

 

[clarkgap]

Many of the equipments in PLA has not seen with pic or video, but that doesnt prevent PLA from equip them. Espeically since HQ-16 will most likely fill the void of middle range defence, which is coupling with HQ-9 or C300, so it is very reasonble the air-defence force will get this latest type of middle-range SAM as well.

Since airforce will most likely equip these missiles in their air defence array, how many pictures/videos about PLA air-defence array have ever been revealed from media? It could simply because it get higher classify level, the army are more open since HQ-16A for the army are mobile depolyed, but for airforce, thats part of its defence network, and therefore could be classified.

As for PUPU, PUPU in other threads simply imply he dont agree with the source's many views regarding 601/611, we all know FYJS is more favor 611, and the source love to belittle and make fun of 601's incompentence, whilst in CJDBY, there could be some guys on 601's payroll who love to promote fake postive news about 601, ridculus news like how PLA plan to only buy 200 J-20 yet 3000 FC-31 or how PLAAF/PLAN and all other will order FC-31 are all over there.

Yet, with more and more open news revealed like Yang Wei's various signficant promotion by CCP, 611's ex-head now return to 611, and airforce chief's openly high praise about J-20 in front of state media (probably be the first type PLA equipments recieved such honor), suggesting FYJS's many "biased" view regarding 601, actually could hold more water than you thought.

My mother side actually has NE root, but if you know anything about the problem of NE working culture, you tend to believe the stories about 601/SAC, it fit their working culture right, if China need a serious competitor to 611/CAC, then 601/SAC is not the right choice, they need to get a new one elsewhere.

Again, please do not take regional discrimination to this thread. My hometown is Henan, and I have no any preference or stereotypical view for 611 and 601.

Please tell me if you heared any rumor or new about PLAAF's HQ-16.

In another forum, PUPU said:"第一第二不清楚（此处指前两个战例，包括HQ-16那个），第三第四应该是一个事情。20带龙伯透镜，击落500 (此处指空警500)，被10c群殴掉一架。" and "别说我石锤，看过席亚洲那个叛徒的文章，里面说的很清楚。"

http://www.guancha.cn/XiYaZhou/2018_02_11_446687_2.shtml （Page 2-3）

 

[星海军事]

Garbage in, garbage out. That's what Internet is all about. Never take it too serious.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Garbage in, garbage out. That's what Internet is all about. Never take it too serious.

What do mean garbage care to explain or you're trolling @"星海事

 

[Deino]

What do mean garbage care to explain or you're trolling @"星海事

Why so offensive? If you know the internet you know what he means with that advice: There's always too much garbage around in the internet - and that's a fact - so you better don't take everything too serious.

Why should this be trolling?

Deino

 

[gambit]

I'd venture to say that it is more likely all the control surfaces are engaged through the FCS rather than manually during taxiing.

Same here. But for what purpose?

In the chocks before TO, the pilot will engage automatic FLCS self checks. The FLCC will cycle all the surfaces thru preset movements that will take each of them thru mid and maximum ranges of movements. Any displacement signal that is out of tolerance will trigger an alert and the pilot will call for maintenance. If the self tests are done with no incident, the pilot will manually cycle the surfaces again and this time it will be thru the control stick. Full pitch up and down, then full roll left and right, finally full rudder left and right. The crew chief will stand in full view and thru hand signals will let the pilot know where the surfaces are and they should correlate with pilot commands. Many pilots for final measure will then move the stick in a circular motion and the surfaces would be flapping like crazy. Uninformed observers would think there is something wrong going on. But those knowledgeable of flightline events will know that the jet is ready to taxi out.

So for the image posted, the hangars on both sides means the J-20s are out of the chocks and in the ramp, not the runway, so it is very curious as to why they are with surfaces at full deflections seemingly commanded by the FLCC self tests. We cannot tell if they are ready for TO or just landed.

 

[BHarwana]

A new year gift to all my Chinese friends. J-20 fitted with WS-10 engine and a New RADAR Dome.

 

[Brainsucker]

A new year gift to all my Chinese friends. J-20 fitted with WS-10 engine and a New RADAR Dome.

Wait a minutes. It is 2021. If my memory serve right, there were another 2021 some time ago. This is the same aircraft, or a different one. @Deino, can you give a confirmation about this?

 

[BHarwana]

Wait a minutes. It is 2021. If my memory serve right, there were another 2021 some time ago. This is the same aircraft, or a different one. @Deino, can you give a confirmation about this?

Look at the cover of front landing gear it is the 2021 dragon.

 

[Gomig-21]

Same here. But for what purpose?

In the chocks before TO, the pilot will engage automatic FLCS self checks. The FLCC will cycle all the surfaces thru preset movements that will take each of them thru mid and maximum ranges of movements. Any displacement signal that is out of tolerance will trigger an alert and the pilot will call for maintenance. If the self tests are done with no incident, the pilot will manually cycle the surfaces again and this time it will be thru the control stick. Full pitch up and down, then full roll left and right, finally full rudder left and right. The crew chief will stand in full view and thru hand signals will let the pilot know where the surfaces are and they should correlate with pilot commands. Many pilots for final measure will then move the stick in a circular motion and the surfaces would be flapping like crazy. Uninformed observers would think there is something wrong going on. But those knowledgeable of flightline events will know that the jet is ready to taxi out.

Very cool the way you described that whole process. I've actually seen it in full display several times at various airshows, with the F-16, the F/A-18F and even the F-22. When they do it for an airshow, they go all out with the crew in military motion, kinda like robots as they accentuate all the little things to make an enjoyable theatrical out of it.

You can see exactly what you described happening here with the F-22 @3:36 & again @4:55.

So for the image posted, the hangars on both sides means the J-20s are out of the chocks and in the ramp, not the runway, so it is very curious as to why they are with surfaces at full deflections seemingly commanded by the FLCC self tests. We cannot tell if they are ready for TO or just landed.

If the jet is taxiing the ramp for takeoff, isn't the FCS on manual anyway? Up until it reaches the end of the runway and ready for takeoff, the pilot switches the controls to the automated system prior to putting it in full throttle?

Not sure in the case of these latest and greatest aircraft with FBWSs if the front landing gear is on casters or does it actually have independent turning ability, separate from the pilot using the brakes on the rear landing gears to turn the aircraft one way or the other? It looks like the front gear is tied in to the rudders (V-stabs in the case of the J-20) when the aircraft is grounded but I'm not sure if the front gear turns independently or casts with the rear brakes in these new, computerized jets. The reason I ask is maybe that might have something to do with the J-20 when it's grounded and is taxiing. Either it automatically goes into manual mode or the pilot sets it that way so he can turn and control the aircraft himself and as a result, the canards deflect to that position, sort of as either an indicator that the aircraft is in that mode or just as a result of just being in manual mode?

There's also the standard operating procedure that you, as a former USAF vet are familiar with the way US jets operate but that begs the question, are the systems operating the same way with let's say, French aircraft? British or Swedish? What about Russian? I'm guessing there's probably a standard, where computerized elements are the same across the board but there has to be some differences here and there that create these unusual operations, or ones that we're not familiar with.

Another thing to consider is that the US doesn't operate any canard-style platforms, so the process has to be different I would think. That said, the canards are essentially the horizontal stabilizers moved forward of the wings and fuselage and as a result there has to be certain differences in the way those surface controls react, just by default of being placed forward.