What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

From Rupprecht Andreas Deino @RupprechtDeino on 2020.11.29:

I must admit, I'm surprised that I missed this image, but perhaps this is the second J-20A prototype no. 2022 powered by WS-10C engines.

So far I knew only a hand-full of images showing no. 2021, which flew first on 19. Sept. 2017 and reports of a second one in Jan. 2018.


 
Last edited:
.
Sorry, the engine on all early J-20s is exactly the same as the one we see in all J-10B/C fighters, there are no external or even internal differences visible; at least that I know.

If you know some I would be more than happy be corrected but otherwise even if I don't have an explanation for their claim nor do I have the right to claim they are lying, all evidence is against their claim.

As such if a NASA expert claims there is live on Mars and it only looks by coincidence like sand and rock, I would still rate his claim wrong unless he gives an explanation for this ... and it must be a better one than "by coincidence" regardless if he is an expert,

No, these are not the same engines. It looks as different as the American engine from the Russian engine.

WS10.jpg



Here is another military insider General Yin Zhuo who has asserted that the J-20 from 2016 was the WS-10B.

 
.
First of all, I need to correct your statement: "The Su-57 bashing is really strong from China, why is that?"

That is NOT a China's bashing on Su-57.

BUT some individual blogger has opinion as such. Since he has been around for many years, since 2012, and posted with efforts and seriousness seeing all the accompanying graphics, I think it's worth to verify :-)

However, if you have more accurate info then I have no problem to take yours. I myself don't opine in this regard, for I don't know, and also not curious that much to dig deeply in that aspect. So just take it as is... some individual blogger has view like that and made it public with efforts in Twitter. But feel free to counter if his view ain't accurate and you have better info.

You are absolutely correct 100%. My criticism was intended for the subject matter of the tweet and not at you whatsoever. So thank you for pointing that out.

View attachment 691702
You can read up on more RCS tests of the Su-57 ... there are quite a few out there. This is the conclusion of Dr. Karlo Kopp, who performed the most in-depth/accurate RCS analysis at least publicly available of the J-20.
View attachment 691703

Australian Power, ey? Wasn't that the same group that trashed the F-35? Remember all the nonsense they spewed about that aircraft and now they're comparing the J-20 to it. Kinda shifting the goal posts wouldn't you say? :-) Kopp is actually pretty good and I've read a lot of his stuff on radars and much of it is pretty informative. But even still, much of what he lays out here is speculative when you really get down to it despite all the information he uses and lists. Even the section you quoted shows him essentially giving the Su-57 better beam aspect specular RCS behavior than the F-35 but almost in the same breath he compliments the J-20's divertless air intake because it's similar to that of the F-35.

My point is that we really don't know much about the Su-57's stealth performance and until it's actually completed and out there flying with everything on it that it's supposed to have, then have at it. Right now it wouldn't be fair and neither would it be for the J-20 until the engines are also complete and we have stats to go by.

Like how China build a brand new better CV-17 aircraft carrier while Russian still struggle to repair their kuznetsov?

China even build its own LHD 075 while Russian even need to beg France for mistral? I guess you r still living in the past or 90s...

Now is the time for Russian to learn from Chinese or we teaching them a thing or two.

Hey hey hey woah take it easy. No where in my post was there a knock on China whatsoever. lol, that's the thing around here you really have to watch your words as any form of disagreement can be taken badly.

Much of what Russia has suffered through has not been imposed on China whatsoever, and actually quite the opposite and particularly in the form of sanctions. Russia doesn't have the indispensable funding to pursue much of those carrier projects you referred to amongst other things.
 
.
You are absolutely correct 100%. My criticism was intended for the subject matter of the tweet and not at you whatsoever. So thank you for pointing that out.



Australian Power, ey? Wasn't that the same group that trashed the F-35? Remember all the nonsense they spewed about that aircraft and now they're comparing the J-20 to it. Kinda shifting the goal posts wouldn't you say? :-) Kopp is actually pretty good and I've read a lot of his stuff on radars and much of it is pretty informative. But even still, much of what he lays out here is speculative when you really get down to it despite all the information he uses and lists. Even the section you quoted shows him essentially giving the Su-57 better beam aspect specular RCS behavior than the F-35 but almost in the same breath he compliments the J-20's divertless air intake because it's similar to that of the F-35.

My point is that we really don't know much about the Su-57's stealth performance and until it's actually completed and out there flying with everything on it that it's supposed to have, then have at it. Right now it wouldn't be fair and neither would it be for the J-20 until the engines are also complete and we have stats to go by.



Hey hey hey woah take it easy. No where in my post was there a knock on China whatsoever. lol, that's the thing around here you really have to watch your words as any form of disagreement can be taken badly.

Much of what Russia has suffered through has not been imposed on China whatsoever, and actually quite the opposite and particularly in the form of sanctions. Russia doesn't have the indispensable funding to pursue much of those carrier projects you referred to amongst other things.
I would read these two analyses to get a good idea of the RCS features of these two aircrafts. These are probably the most detailed open source RCS estimates we have, even if they are very old (which is all the more surprising).
Australian Power, ey? Wasn't that the same group that trashed the F-35?
Kopp is a F-35 hater yes but he makes quite a few valid points of the F-35s shortcomings that are valid nonetheless. Compared to the F-22, there are quite a few shortcomings with the F-35 indeed. But that doesn't make his analysis less accurate or detailed.
 
.
View attachment 691702
You can read up on more RCS tests of the Su-57 ... there are quite a few out there. This is the conclusion of Dr. Karlo Kopp, who performed the most in-depth/accurate RCS analysis at least publicly available of the J-20.
View attachment 691703
very detailed high quality analysis. Thanks.
 
. . . .
Are we sure that screenshot is not from some kind of movie? Maybe that's not a real J-20 but only mockup
for the movie. And I don't believe there are 2 female J-20 pilots out there.:blink:


I'm not sure, but wasn't this from a PLAAF promotional video?
 
.
Do you perhaps have a link of the promotional video? This New RAM coating Is quite interesting, to me i think the image is a little over saturated or some CC maybe, if there is a video we might get a better idea.
 
.
air break in early design stage, but no more needed in final design,
It's quite normal, most Flanker has air break, such as su-27, su-30. but no more air break in su-35.

Air break is quite efficient, but su-35 and j-20 use other aircraft flight control surfaces combined to do the same thing as air break.

Air break will add around hundreds of kg of weight, so if other control surface can do the job, it will be eliminated.

US fighter jet has air break as well, but neither f-22 nor f-35 has air break.

Nowadays, the aircraft flight control system is much more advanced that, computer can coordinate all those flight control surfaces all together. It wasn't back in 90s.

Cancelling air break is a big step forward in aerodynamics.
 
.
air break in early design stage, but no more needed in final design,
It's quite normal, most Flanker has air break, such as su-27, su-30. but no more air break in su-35.

Air break is quite efficient, but su-35 and j-20 use other aircraft flight control surfaces combined to do the same thing as air break.

Air break will add around hundreds of kg of weight, so if other control surface can do the job, it will be eliminated.

US fighter jet has air break as well, but neither f-22 nor f-35 has air break.

Nowadays, the aircraft flight control system is much more advanced that, computer can coordinate all those flight control surfaces all together. It wasn't back in 90s.

Cancelling air break is a big step forward in aerodynamics.
If the computers fails/crash what happen than, please tell us
 
.
If the computers fails/crash what happen than, please tell us
come on, I am talking about air break.

If the whole system fail, with/without air break it will crash anyway.
Nowadays, aircraft control system has triple/quad modular redundancy. That's common sense.

The whole aircraft control system, has redundancy in Fly-By-Wire system, hydraulic machinery system, and many others.

There is no 100% guarantee especially in fighter jet, you have to balance between safety and performance.

In civil aviation, triple/quad modular redundancy is everywhere.

Let me show you what modern aircraft control system are capable of.

This is a F-15 with only one wing left. Safely come home and landed successfully.
1606795119587.png


1606795129379.png


1606795142414.png
 
.
come on, I am talking about air break.

If the whole system fail, with/without air break it will crash anyway.
Nowadays, aircraft control system has triple/quad modular redundancy. That's common sense.

The whole aircraft control system, has redundancy in Fly-By-Wire system, hydraulic machinery system, and many others.

There is no 100% guarantee especially in fighter jet, you have to balance between safety and performance.

In civil aviation, triple/quad modular redundancy is everywhere.
I know i know but what happened if all system are fails, air brakes are necessary for all jet in case of emergency
 
.
I know i know but what happened if all system are fails, air brakes are necessary for all jet in case of emergency
In J-20, F-22 and F-35, definitely they care more about performance.
It's fighter jet, if there is something can reduce hundreds of kg weight, go for it.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom