Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[Su33KUB]

Can you please stop with these stupid analysis? They are all based on the premise that they are showing the full capabilities, which is plain wrong.

The Chinese have no intention to reveal any notable true capabilities, there is no intention for chest-bumping with hyper-fancy manoeuvres like the Russian's do at MAKS.

All you can deduct from this display is the PLAAF political will to show it to the public and as such it's confidence in the WS-10C.

Anything else like turn-radius, speed of climb, thrust to weight ratio, manoeuvrability and whatever MUST be WRONG, since - in Germany we would say: "Der Pilot is mit angezogener Handbremse geflogen!" - this was just to show the J-20 flying, and not to impress the audience or any armchair analyst!

So please stop it.

I care less about you banning me, as long as I am right, and there are more forums I am happy, any way math does not lie, a bank angle in a turn close to 80 degs means 9Gs, it means corner speed.

Can I say the exact Turn rate of J-20? no of course not, but by looking at that bank I can see it is turning tight, and is a better aproximation by method than just saying "we can not know" , I am using math and physics.

And I have used known data easy to use, that turn on the picture shows a close to 90 degree bank, that approximation by bank angles is a much better method to guess the real capabilities by using physics, now you might think it is stupid but the reality the bank angle method is a scientific approximation since it is a fact that bank angles tell you the G load,

So do as you wish ban me if you want ban me i careless about it, as long as physics and math support me and there are other forums i careless.

 

[kungfugymnast]

J-20 is still limited by TWR, So using a lighter aircraft is better for a naval fighter.

Regardless of opinion, the bank angle tells you the max G load a 82 deg of bank angle generates 9Gs and the aircraft is close to stall, at Zhuhai the J-20 showed bank angles near 80 or more.

When they get WS-15 the turn rate will improve, but now still in underpowered, taking off from an aircraft carrier still will be harder.

With CATOBAR in Type 003, you can launch the heavy F-111 (old TF-30 with only 23,000lb thrust on afterburner) up in the air, no problem.

Only ski ramp Type 001 would require lighter aircraft with enough thrust to dust off safely. That's why Shenyang made the J-15A more aerodynamic to gain speed fast in order to carry more payload than Su-33 which made landing approach speed faster too which is bad. J-15B probably being redesigned to less aerodynamic with max speed just almost mach 2.

You're right on the J-20 flight envelope, just compare the performance of J-20A vs J-10A/B could tell the maneuverability and nimbleness between the 2. Like the F-15, the J-20 would avoid dogfight unless really necessary.

I care less about you banning me, as long as I am right, and there are more forums I am happy, any way math does not lie, a bank angle in a turn close to 80 degs means 9Gs, it means corner speed.

Can I say the exact Turn rate of J-20? no of course not, but by looking at that bank I can see it is turning tight, and is a better aproximation by method than just saying "we can not know" , I am using math and physics.

View attachment 785446

And I have used known data easy to use, that turn on the picture shows a close to 90 degree bank, that approximation by bank angles is a much better method to guess the real capabilities by using physics, now you might think it is stupid but the reality the bank angle method is a scientific approximation since it is a fact that bank angles tell you the G load,

So do as you wish ban me if you want ban me i careless about it, as long as physics and math support me and there are other forums i careless.

Just ignore them and stick to facts talk, they can't do anything other than angering you hoping that you would respond with anger posting wrong words that could get you banned.

 

[kungfugymnast]

I found a yoytube channel called mhdefence or something that show about j20 carrier version with arresting gear. Is it legit?

Is that mean that j20 will become the next csg and not j35? Or is it fake?

Could be real and for testing on mock deck purpose. If they wanted a navalized J-20, the first thing they'll alter will be the wings to less swept angle, too much modification required therefore better for them to come up with totally new design instead. To play safe, they'll pick design from F-35C but with twin engines and longer.

 

[Deino]

...
And I have used known data easy to use, that turn on the picture shows a close to 90 degree bank, that approximation by bank angles is a much better method to guess the real capabilities by using physics, now you might think it is stupid but the reality the bank angle method is a scientific approximation since it is a fact that bank angles tell you the G load,

So do as you wish ban me if you want ban me i careless about it, as long as physics and math support me and there are other forums i careless.

I#m not interested in banning you, but in a decent discussion and all you do is extrapolating - or by your definition "calculating" - something as facts based on a wrong premise! The J-20 at Zhuhai did not demonstrate its full potential and manoeuvrability - in fact not even close to - and therefore I ask you again:

Why do you think it did and even more why do you think that any reasonable conclusions can be drawn from it?

Otherwise I beg you both - including @kungfugymnast not again to derail this thread with baseless stupid claims since this will lead to consequences.

 

[Su33KUB]

I#m not interested in banning you, but in a decent discussion and all you do is extrapolating - or by your definition "calculating" - something as facts based on a wrong premise! The J-20 at Zhuhai did not demonstrate its full potential and manoeuvrability - in fact not even close to - and therefore I ask you again:

Why do you think it did and even more why do you think that any reasonable conclusions can be drawn from it?

Otherwise I beg you both - including @kungfugymnast not again to derail this thread with baseless stupid claims since this will lead to consequences.

First let me tell you this:

If in the past I was rude with you, I beg you to forgive me for such behavior, I do not like feel I have disrespect any one, so please forgive me if I was rude, offensive or unpolite.

Now I do not want to speak pages, basically I have said all.

The video has a turn where the aircraft is doing a turn in 20 seconds or around that time so you can guess estimation of 18 deg/s turn.

In order to know if the aircraft is doing its max turn rate, you can use the bank amgle G load chart,

Beyond 80 deg bank angle you get 9Gs,

The stall speed means at a very high AoA or bank angle the aircraft is close to stall thus sustained turn rates are lower than instantaneous turn rates.

Pretty much the video shows a J-20 banking a lot,

If you look at the picture taken from the bellow video the J-20 is turning almost in a 90 deg bank angle.


now see this

To make a maximum rate turn, you need to turn at the highest angle of bank that can be sustained at the lowest possible airspeed – just above VS – that is why the stall warning is used to indicate maximum rate.

Maximum rate turns | aviation.govt.nz

www.aviation.govt.nz

In the aforementioned videos J-20 is flying at sea level which is the highest density thus it can generate the most of lift and the aircraft is flying with a very high angle of attack.

Thus the J-20 is showing low speed high bank angles at low altitude so basically you are seeing turning at its best see the engine factor

to turn at maximum rate we need maximum centripetal force and maximum lift. The increased angle of attack means increased drag, so full power is used. As rate of turn is proportional to velocity, the limiting factor in a maximum rate turn is power.

Maximum rate turns | aviation.govt.nz

www.aviation.govt.nz

What I am saying is by the low speed and high bank angles you know it is turning at its best or close to it, but still the J-20 is not turning very well the result of still not having WS-15


Now 18 deg/sec is like a F-18 Hornet, so J-20 now very likely can keep up with the Hornet.

 

[lcloo]

I found a yoytube channel called mhdefence or something that show about j20 carrier version with arresting gear. Is it legit?

Is that mean that j20 will become the next csg and not j35? Or is it fake?

I can assure you that MH Defence youtube video are unreliable. You can go thro' several of his past video if you have time.

 

[Deino]

First let me tell you this:

If in the past I was rude with you, I beg you to forgive me for such behavior, I do not like feel I have disrespect any one, so please forgive me if I was rude, offensive or unpolite.

Now I do not want to speak pages, basically I have said all.

.....

You have not been rude in the past, only too often far too much off topic and too long and this post is it again:

Please just a short answer to short question: Why do you think it did and even more why do you think that any reasonable conclusions can be drawn from it?

I am asking for any open source doc.

via these books: https://www.harpia-publishing.com/serieschina

 

[FuturePAF]

@Deino Have you seen the videos by the YouTuber “Binkov’s Battlegrounds” called “Is F-22 early retirement a gift to China?” And “Chinese Air Forces: Flaming Dragons or a Baby Tiger?”.

If so, what are you thought on his speculations on the inventory of the USAF and PLAAF by today and by 2030 and 2040? Do you think his estimations are reasonable or just speculations?

 

[White and Green with M/S]

That's not your expertise neither since you don't have certs in aeronautics engineering. Everyone here only took general aeronautical physics knowledge to post

Do you know that US General Dynamics had landed F-16N (navalized variant F-16) on carrier deck before? A-7 Corsair 2, F-8 Crusader are single engine aircraft that used to operate from USS Saratoga, USS Kitty Hawk.

J-10C wing area + fuselage bottom surface area are good enough to land on carrier with slower approach speed than J-15. FC-31 copied design cue from F-35 to get similar RCS and aerodynamic, you think it can't land on carrier better than J-15?

Whereas, J-20A & F-22 can't because they would approach the carrier too fast.

you're claiming to be an expert, not me, and your expertise on aerodynamics, aeronautics really sucks man, mostly based on pictures

 

[Deino]

@Deino Have you seen the videos by the YouTuber “Binkov’s Battlegrounds” called “Is F-22 early retirement a gift to China?” And “Chinese Air Forces: Flaming Dragons or a Baby Tiger?”.

If so, what are you thought on his speculations on the inventory of the USAF and PLAAF by today and by 2030 and 2040? Do you think his estimations are reasonable or just speculations?

Nope ... which video is it?

 

[FuturePAF]

Nope ... which video is it?

Primarily this one

But a second follow up to that video is this

 

[kungfugymnast]

Nope ... which video is it?

It's on YouTube, you can watch it when you're really free because it's waste of time watching Binkov's opinion that always rated Russia & China as weak incompetent adversaries. F-22 is not retiring until there's better replacement. Unless USAF wanted to revive the YF-23.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

It's on YouTube, you can watch it when you're really free because it's waste of time watching Binkov's opinion that always rated Russia & China as weak incompetent adversaries. F-22 is not retiring until there's better replacement. Unless USAF wanted to revive the YF-23.

Most of 6th gen jets will be inspire YF23 design i think

 

[Su33KUB]

You have not been rude in the past, only too often far too much off topic and too long and this post is it again:

Please just a short answer to short question: Why do you think it did and even more why do you think that any reasonable conclusions can be drawn from it?




via these books: https://www.harpia-publishing.com/serieschina

I will tell you my final conclusion:

When you see an aircraft turning you must ask 2 questions?

Did it turn at its max turn rate?
To answer that you need to see the bank angle, a 82 deg turn rate is telling you 9Gs are applied no human pilot seated will endure for more than 9Gs for the entire turn, 86 deg the G forces are exponentially increased. (see chart of G load and Bank angle)

Second question what was the altitude?
The answer is:
The best turn of any aircraft is always at sea level (Zhuhai airport is at sea level and the J-20 flew very close to the crowd at very low altitude )

If you look at any aircraft manual the best turn will be at sea level, however some manuals give you 1 km like in the case of Russian aircraft manuals.

So the conclusion is J-20 was turning at sea level and very high bank angles, thus its near its max instantaneous turn rate but low thrust will reduce its sustained turn rate a lot.

My personal conclusion, and here I will leave it here and perhaps in 3 or 4 months or 1 year we can talk about it. it is.

WS-15 must be in the class of 16000-19000kg of thrust, because the J-20 must be as heavy as F-22, or even heavier because stealth demands too much internal volume and the materials and technologies of both aircraft are contemporary ( just a few years difference and China is playing catch up)


Zhuhai showed an unimpresive flight display, because the J-20 has not TVC nozzles, the engines are not WS-15 but an interim engine however the main highlight it was using WS-10s showing at least they can build it with domestic engines, once it has the WS-15 very likely will match or even surpass F-22.

The J-20 flying at Zhuhai was not fully loaded, it did not even have external stores,

Any way I will not extend any more and I really beg you to forgive my unpolite ways, I was rude ( and younger) but you are very nice by forgiving my rude ways.

Saludos

 

[kungfugymnast]

Most of 6th gen jets will be inspire YF23 design i think

yes, YF-23, B-2 & UCAV x-45/47 will be the inspirational trend for 6th generation aircraft design. Russian took design from YF-23 for Su-57 and X-32 for checkmate fighter rather than Lockheed Martin F-22 & F-35.