Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[amalakas]

France hasn't that much experiences as China in AESA and rafale has 10kw. So it seems to me that J-20 radar would have a much better profile, not 10kw( typo?) but something along the line of Russian's or slightly better.

I don't disagree, but you have to think what kind of power generation a plane has to produce 100kw just for its radar. A bit too much maybe?

 

[ptldM3]

I don't disagree, but you have to think what kind of power generation a plane has to produce 100kw just for its radar. A bit too much maybe?

Like licking a transformer...

 

[Project 627]

The official confirmation from CCTV, the engine of J-20 is WS-10B, and its AESA is a 100 kW peak power one.

2011年12月31日止共飞行65次。
由中航成飞研制黑丝带J-20；
装备两台WS-10B发动机；
十万瓦有源相控阵雷达；
鸭翼机身；
光传操纵系统。

The most funny thing about this clam is the WS-10B cannot produce anywhere near the power needed for that kind of a radar.

So it looks like a another media screw up.

 

[conworldus]

The most funny thing about this clam is the WS-10B cannot produce anywhere near the power needed for that kind of a radar.

So it looks like a another media screw up.

Of course it can produce 100kw. A diesel generator for 800 kw costs about 200,000 dollars. My pickup truck produces 100kw!

Fight jet engines usually produce several megawatts of power. Hell, even helicopter engines produce several mega watts.

In other words, radar, even at 100kw, will consume only a fraction of the power produced. Basically, a 100kw radar will just require the engine to burn a bit more fuel that's it.

the only question is, how do you fit a huge radar that consumes 100kw into the little nose cone. For that, the 100kw claim is a bit suspicious.

 

[amalakas]

Of course it can produce 100kw. A diesel generator for 800 kw costs about 200,000 dollars. My pickup truck produces 100kw!

Fight jet engines usually produce several megawatts of power. Hell, even helicopter engines produce several mega watts.

In other words, radar, even at 100kw, will consume only a fraction of the power produced. Basically, a 100kw radar will just require the engine to burn a bit more fuel that's it.

the only question is, how do you fit a huge radar that consumes 100kw into the little nose cone. For that, the 100kw claim is a bit suspicious.

yes we know, but you are missing the point.

a car can produce indeed about 800 to 1000kW . .BUT .. it is using all that to push itself forward !

so does the jet engine. The electrical power generation is a different thing

 

[Alpery]

peak 100kw ..not 100kw...you can use batteries power to rise total power generation..for a second..may be milisecond.
you dont need to a 100kw/h generator run always

 

[Speeder 2]

peak 100kw ..not 100kw...you can use batteries power to rise total power generation..for a second..may be milisecond.
you dont need to a 100kw/h generator run always

Then with peak power of "only" 10kw, the best of French toys must be very pathetic in comparison...

 

[ptldM3]

Then with peak power of "only" 10kw, the best of French toys must be very pathetic in comparison...

None of you know a thing about radars and it shows. High kw output is like bragging about high HP in a heavy V8 truck only to be badly beat by a small 4 banger compact.

High kw does give improved jam resistance but with frequency hoping that is really not necessary, and it may, and I say, may, improve range if complimented by a larger antenna. And simply having more range does not mean you have the ability to engage the other guy first. And do not assume that just because one aircraft may have a high kw output that he will automatically have the ability to see you first--think Beam width and antenna.

And try to figure what happens if one aircraft has his radar cranked to a high kw output--hint it may not end well for him.

 

[conworldus]

yes we know, but you are missing the point.

a car can produce indeed about 800 to 1000kW . .BUT .. it is using all that to push itself forward !

so does the jet engine. The electrical power generation is a different thing

Revisit your grade school physics teacher again and he will tell you that kinetic energy and electric energy are easily converted... That's what generators are for. They spin, yeah... All the friction, heat, etc. generated by a moving jet is utilizable wasted energy. Wonder how your car is powered? Like I said, even the power is not enough, just apply a bit more gas and 100kw for a jet is peanut...

Btw, cars typically produce between 80 and 200 kw, unless you buy a Bughatti or Lamborghini. Bughatti Veyron I think produces about 700-800kw or 1100hp. Don't exaggerate my number. My Ford Ranger produces about 100 kw.

NO CAR produces 1000 kw. The only moving land thing that produces that much is called Main Battle Tank.

 

[ptldM3]

Wonder how your car is powered? Like I said, even the power is not enough, just apply a bit more gas and 100kw for a jet is peanut....

By an alternator that produces as many kw as you can count on your fingers.

Btw, cars typically produce between 80 and 200 kw, unless you buy a Bughatti or Lamborghini. Bughatti Veyron I think produces about 700-800kw or 1100hp. Don't exaggerate my number. My Ford Ranger produces about 100 kw..

I belive the kw is just a way to measure power just like HP and all cars suffer drivetrain losses, this can be well over 15%. Moreover, depending on rpm an alternator can only operate on whatever is driving it; for instance, some alternators may only work at 50% efficiency or less. Alternators also do not operate a 100% efficiency to to power being lost through belts and so on.

 

[amalakas]

By an alternator that produces as many kw as you can count on your fingers.





I belive the kw is just a way to measure power just like HP and all cars suffer drivetrain losses, this can be well over 15%. Moreover, depending on rpm an alternator can only operate on whatever is driving it; for instance, some alternators may only work at 50% efficiency or less. Alternators also do not operate a 100% efficiency to to power being lost through belts and so on.

in any case, 100kW is a bit too much for a fighter size plane.

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

High angle of attack. It is so maneuverable.

The above video is a RC model of the J-20, demostrate its ability to maneuver at very high angle of attack.

 

[j20blackdragon]

Feel free to argue against Bill Sweetman.

The J-20 echoes the canard configuration of the J-10, but with canards level with, and immediately in front of, the wing. Two small, canted, all-moving vertical stabilizers are fitted. Although no U.S. manned stealth aircraft have flown with canards, a tail-first layout was featured by early Joint Strike Fighter designs, including Lockheed Martin’s—which the J-20 resembles—and McDonnell Douglas’ X-36 unmanned demonstrator.

Stealth design features mostly follow Lockheed Martin F-22 and X-35 practice. A high chine line around the forebody continues through the inlets and upper body, and flat, canted side surfaces blend into a flat underside via a small-radius edge. The canopy shape is also reminiscent of the F-22. The J-20 uses a diverterless supersonic inlet (DSI)—originally developed by Lockheed Martin, DSI technology is now used on the J‑10B, JF-17 and (according to one report) the Saab Gripen JAS 39E/F.

Chinese J-20 Stealth Fighter Advances | AVIATION WEEK

 

[conworldus]

KW and HP are exactly the same thing except that KW is closer to the metric system and HP is closer to the English system.

My point is, you can't say the WS-10B can't even produce 100kw spare power for the radar. The numbers are not even close.

By an alternator that produces as many kw as you can count on your fingers.





I belive the kw is just a way to measure power just like HP and all cars suffer drivetrain losses, this can be well over 15%. Moreover, depending on rpm an alternator can only operate on whatever is driving it; for instance, some alternators may only work at 50% efficiency or less. Alternators also do not operate a 100% efficiency to to power being lost through belts and so on.

 

[kurutoga]

100 KW = 135.96 HP

I watched the video. The report is highly unreliable since it mentioned something like "optical fly by wire" or "fly-by optics". I honestly do not believe J-20 is that advanced.

Also, think of the air conditioning needed to cool down a 100kw AESA radar?