The J-20-engine discussion is over and other speculative topics ... to separate from the J-20-news !

[Deino]

Pardon to be sceptical, but given Your track record on estimating a +210 kN (upps, sorry You are now already at about 240 kN), Mach 3 capability, calculating climb- and turn-rates from 3sec-gifs, fabricating theories on customised downgraded WS-10-powered varaints for traing or export and so on or mis-identifying PSed images against any reliable big shrimp or TVC ... I prefer to stay in reality.

Deino

 

[Asoka]

The Senior Colonel has strongly indicated, in this 2011 interview, that such integration of TVC with J-20's Engine FDIC and Digital FCS has already achieved. And he wholeheartedly praised the J-20 design team's courage and innovative spirit.

Pardon to be sceptical, but given Your track record on estimating a +210 kN (upps, sorry You are now already at about 240 kN), Mach 3 capability, calculating climb- and turn-rates from 3sec-gifs, fabricating theories on customised downgraded WS-10-powered varaints for traing or export and so on or mis-identifying PSed images against any reliable big shrimp or TVC ... I prefer to stay in reality.

Deino

I, firmly, stand by, on all my predictions. Thank you for mentioned them.

The Senior Colonel has strongly indicated, in this 2011 interview, that such integration of TVC with J-20's Engine FDIC and Digital FCS has already achieved. And he wholeheartedly praised the J-20 design team's courage and innovative spirit.




I, firmly, stand by, on all my predictions. Thank you for mentioned them.

"turn-rates from 3sec-gifs, "

Correction! I got the turn-rate time from the actual videos, and made the gifs to show the members. The time was not deduced from the gifs. I am well aware that gifs do not show the real time.

"I prefer to stay in reality."

That would be fine with me, if you don't mean stick your head into the ground, and prefer not to see reality.

 

[Deino]

I, firmly, stand by, on all my predictions. Thank you for mentioned them.

 

[Asoka]

Take a another look with my old post:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-524#post-9226200

And watch the actual video, not just the gifs, I have made, to get a sense of how insanely fast J-20 was turning.

The F-22 could do the same, it's hard to believe your eyes, fishhook or hair pin, 3-4 seconds, 180 degrees U-turns, with its powerful TVC enabled F119 engine. I don't see that in planes with non-TVC engine.

 

[Deino]

The J-20 would literally tear apart at Mach 3. That’s more impossible than his 210kN theory ...

Well, this is now an academic or even more philosophical question: is "more than impossible" even possible ?

 

[Asoka]

Well, this is now an academic or even more philosophical question: is "more than impossible" even possible ?

What's "impossible" is according to one's state of understanding or knowledge.

What was once thought to be "impossible" is now common place, in many things.

It was once thought to be "impossible" for China to produce a 5-Gen. fighter before 2020.

"The J-20 would literally tear apart at Mach 3. That’s more impossible than his 210kN theory"

Excuse me! This is more laughable the gambler guy's claim that:

"This [canards] will make it difficult for the J-20, to go below, a clean F-18E/F, in terms of total RCS."

 

[Deino]

...But Asoka, I find your Mach 3 claim even more laughable than the 210 kN WS-15 ... what makes you think the J-20s design is suitable for such supersonic/interception speed?

PLAESE don't ask him proving his theories ... That will only end up in the same long nonsense he already posted more than 10-times. If You are really interested, go and search on Your own thru this topic, but please not that trash again.

Deino

 

[Asoka]

"But Asoka, I find your Mach 3 claim even more laughable than the 210 kN WS-15 ... what makes you think the J-20s design is suitable for such supersonic/interception speed?"

What does it take for a fighter plane to reach and cruise at the speed of Mach 3?

1.) Two very powerful engines.
2.) A very aerodynamic airframe optimized for supersonic flight at that speed. That is, it has low supersonic drag.
3.) An incredibly tough airframe, that is super strong enough, to withstand the tremendous stress that will be experienced, during intense high-g maneuvers, at that high supersonic speed, for many years to come, at the typical flight load.

As far as I can see, both F-22 and J-20 meets those requirements. The fact that the top speed of F-22 is still classified, is what aroused my curiosity. The USAF or LockeedMartin don't even bother to put out, an lowball figure like Mach 2.5 (F-15c and F-111's top speed), which will probably, seen as false, immediately.

F-22 has two very powerful engines, a very low supersonic drag airframe that enables it to supercruise at Mach 1.5 w/o AB turned on.

And it has an incredibly strong airframe that could pull, at least, 6.5g at Mach 1.6. And its airframe lifespan has rating of at least 8000hrs, possibly more than 12,000hrs. That is, 30-40 years of active service.

Those combination of factors is what give F-22 incredible maneuverability at subsonic and supersonic speeds.

Like F-22, J-20 is built with all titanium bulkheads, hydraulically forged, in one piece of titanium alloy, under 50,000-80,000 tons of high pressure. That, alone, will guaranteed the airframe's bulkheads will have incredible strength and density. It's a very expensive and time-consuming manufacturing process, which takes 90 days, to manufacture one forged bulkhead, from start to finish.

The F-22 titanium forged bulkheads.

The F-35 Bulkhead. Note, it's made of Aluminum not Titanium, to save money.

The last bulkhead above is Chinese made with Titanium, using laser 3D addictive and micro-forging technique, that was reportedly able to save 90% of the materials and save 90% of the time. I don't know how strong it is, compared, to the fully forged bulkheads.

We still don't know a lot about J-20's ability. But it's safe to say, J-20 was design to match and exceed F-22, in all areas.

Whether that has been achieved, I will leave that to future observers.

 

[Ultima Thule]

"But Asoka, I find your Mach 3 claim even more laughable than the 210 kN WS-15 ... what makes you think the J-20s design is suitable for such supersonic/interception speed?"

What does it take for a fighter plane to reach and cruise at the speed of Mach 3?

1.) Two very powerful engines.
2.) A very aerodynamic airframe optimized for supersonic flight at that speed. That is, it has low supersonic drag.
3.) An incredibly tough airframe, that is super strong enough, to withstand the tremendous stress that will be experienced, during intense high-g maneuvers, at that high supersonic speed, for many years to come, at the typical flight load.

As far as I can see, both F-22 and J-20 meets those requirements. The fact that the top speed of F-22 is still classified, is what aroused my curiosity. The USAF or LockeedMartin don't even bother to put out, an lowball figure like Mach 2.5 (F-15c and F-111's top speed), which will probably, seen as false, immediately.

F-22 has two very powerful engines, a very low supersonic drag airframe that enables it to supercruise at Mach 1.5 w/o AB turned on.

And it has an incredibly strong airframe that could pull, at least, 6.5g at Mach 1.6. And its airframe lifespan has rating of at least 8000hrs, possibly more than 12,000hrs. That is, 30-40 years of active service.

Those combination of factors is what give F-22 incredible maneuverability at subsonic and supersonic speeds.

Like F-22, J-20 is built with all titanium bulkheads, hydraulically forged, in one piece of titanium alloy, under 50,000-80,000 tons of high pressure. That, alone, will guaranteed the airframe's bulkheads will have incredible strength and density. It's a very expensive and time-consuming manufacturing process, which takes 90 days, to manufacture one forged bulkhead, from start to finish.

View attachment 432398View attachment 432399

The F-22 titanium forged bulkheads.

View attachment 432400
The F-35 Bulkhead. Note, it's made of Aluminum not Titanium, to save money.


View attachment 432401

The last bulkhead above is Chinese made with Titanium, using laser 3D addictive and micro-forging technique, that was reportedly able to save 90% of the materials and save 90% of the time. I don't know how strong it is, compared, to the fully forged bulkheads.

We still don't know a lot about J-20's ability. But it's safe to say, J-20 was design to match and exceed F-22, in all areas.

Whether that has been achieved, I will leave that to future observers.

MR @Asoka your Jets top speed will Mach-3 you lost maneuverability and agility, and its become a interceptor not 5th gen AD jet like those
MIG-25

MIG-31

SR-71

and By the way tell me @Asoka what is purpose of attaining such a high speed J-20 is not a spy plane or interceptor but a maneuverable and agile 5th gen jet

 

[Asoka]

Hey pakistani guy, aren't you the one, who was keep demanding the Mod, to ban me permanently, because you don't like what I posted? Shouldn't you ask your guru/expert, the gambler guy, for information?

"MR @Asoka your Jets top speed will Mach-3, you lost maneuverability and agility, and its become a interceptor, not 5th gen AD jet, like those MIG-25"

Not necessarily.

The Mig-25 has poor maneuverability and agility, because it's airframe was made of high strength steel, instead of Titanium like the SR-71. The reason being, Titanium was still very difficult to work with, in the early 1960's.

The CIA used a phoney front company to purchased the Titanium from the Russian, and go to great length and expense to produce the titanium SR-71 airframe. So only a few dozen SR-71 was produced, whereas, the Russian need to produce thousands of Mig-25 to intercept the American bombers, so they can't afford the titanium Mig-25.

To compensate the extra weight of the steel frame, the Russian has to use as little steel as possible. That means the resultant aircraft will not as strong as they would like, so it would not able to pull high-g.

In fact, it is reported, the early Mig-25 could pull only max. 3-g. The current Mig-31, the successor to Mig-25, could pull maximum 5-g, making it, having limited maneuverability and agility. (The ability to pull high-g depends on the speed. Pulling high-g at subsonic speed, is not the same on the airframe, as pulling high-g at Mach 3. So, if you could pull only 5-g at subsonic, you could pull much less g at Mach 3. You probably could fly only, at a almost straight line, at those speed.)

But that's not really a problem. They are meant to use to intercept the heavy bombers like B-52 and cruise missiles, which have even less maneuverability and agility.

The 5-Gen fighter will all have one piece forged Titanium bulkheads, and other forged titanium airframe component for exceptional strength. Thus, it is guaranteed that they will have the super strength to pull high-g, at those supersonic speed, so, to achieve the superior supersonic maneuverability and agility, which is the signature of 5-gen. fighters, that no 3-gen or 4-gen fighters will be able to match.

This is the most important feature of 5-gen fighter. The 3-gen or 4-gen fighters (like J-10, Rafael, Typhoon, Flankers, F-15, F-16, F-18) could reduce their RCS, in their future variants, but they will never have the massive engine power, and super airframe strength, required to have supercruise and superior supersonic maneuverability and agility. This requires a total redesign from the ground up.

That is, if you have the strength and power to pull high-g at Mach 1.6, you will have the strength and power to pull those high-g, at even higher speed, like Mach 3. Your maneuverability and agility, will be reduced, as you go faster. Yes. that's true. But that will be still a whole lot better than the previous generation of fighter.

Look at this chart from an old post of mine, last year. https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-485#post-9034688

The Astonishing Supersonic Maneuverability Difference Between 4th and 5th Generation Fighters.

I have again and again emphasized the importance of Supersonic Cruise and Supersonic Maneuverability to 5th Gen. fighter. Without ability to do Supersonic Cruise, there could be no Supersonic Maneuverability.

Here is the picture that illustrate the astonishing difference between Supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22. Supersonic Maneuverability is a measure of how agile of a plane is in Supersonic Speed at various height. Because the air density at different height, the Maneuverability will be greatly affected.

Why is there such a great difference between supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22?

Because F-22 has TVC that will enable it turn very effectively at high altitude and high speed, whereas, the effectiveness of traditional control surfaces of F-15, and F-35 will be much less effective at those high speed and high altitude.

Here is the 5G Maneuver Envelope. The Maximum Speed of a plane able to maneuver at 5G at various height.

As we can see, F-15, one of the most agile 4th gen. fighter in the world, could only pull a 5G Maneuver at Mach 0.8 at sea level, and at 32,000 ft, only Mach 0.7. No Supersonic Maneuverability at 5G over Mach 0.8. Basically, it could only fly pretty much in a straight line with a huge turn radius at higher speed.

Whereas, F-22 could pull 5G at nearly Mach 2 at the Maximum altitude of 65,000ft. At sea level, it could still able to reach Mach 1.3 while pulling a 5G turn.

Basically, sustained Supersonic Maneuverability is determined by Aerodynamics of the airframe, Power of the engine and structural strength of the airframe.

If you don't have outstanding Aerodynamics design, your air speed will quickly drop below supersonic during high G maneuvers. If you don't have a powerful engine in the first place, you can't do Supersonic Cruise without afterburner. If you turn on your afterburner in order to go supersonic, you will quickly run out of fuel. If your airframe isn't strong enough, your plane will fall apart at high G during Supersonic Maneuvering. If you have a very tough airframe, but a weak engine, you will be overweighted. And if you have a very powerful engine, but overweighted and have a lousy aerodynamics design, you will end up being clubbed like baby seals like F-35.

As if we can see, even the mightily powerful F-15 don't have much Supersonic Maneuverability, it is useless to talk about that for 4th Generation fighters, instead they concentrate on subsonic maneuverability. But Supersonic Maneuverability is such an awesome ability. F-15 and F-16 pilots said whenever F-22 goes into Supersonic, the fight is over. They can't follow it into those Supersonic speed without turning on the afterburner, and if they did, they would run out of fuel in minutes.

 

[Asoka]

********************************

In Summary, the notion that a high speed Supersonic Interceptor, could only have limited maneuverability and agility, and could only fly in an almost straight line, at Mach 3, is a thing of the past.

Today's new 5-Gen fighters are equipped with two very powerful turbofan engines, to quickly replenish lost energy, during intense high-g maneuvers; a low supersonic drag airframe, to allow supercruise at Mach 1.6; and a super tough airframe, to withstand the tremendous stress, and a very effective Thrust Vector Control for outstanding turning performance.

Those combination of factors makes the 5-Gen fighter (like F-22 and J-20) a very effective, very fast, very lethal, very low observability, Supersonic Interceptor and Air Superiority Fighter, with extreme maneuverability and agility.

There is nothing that will prevent them fulfill these role effectively. With today's advance technology, being a Supersonic Interceptor and Air Superiority Fighter, are not mutually exclusive.

In the event of conflict, the Chinese air force will, mercilessly, exploit the American weakness of relying on aerial refuel tankers, over the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean.

They will send a cloud of stealthy J-20 fighters/interceptors, to go after their tankers and Awacs and other supporting aircrafts first, intercept them from a long distance away, from the Chinese mainland, with their long range missiles.

The American tankers, will not see, what is coming, before they got turning into huge fireballs in the sky, over the Pacific Ocean.

Basically, dogfights with the F-22 are for the losers. The chinese will not make this dumb mistake of tangle with the formidable Raptors, while leaving the oil tankers and AWACS, untouched.

 

[Deino]

....

In the event of conflict, the Chinese air force will, mercilessly, exploit the American weakness of relying on aerial refuel tankers, over the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean.

They will send a cloud of stealthy J-20 fighters/interceptors, to go after their tankers and Awacs and other supporting aircrafts first, intercept them from a long distance away, from the Chinese mainland, with their long range missiles.

The American tankers, will not see, what is coming, before they got turning into huge fireballs in the sky, over the Pacific Ocean.

Basically, dogfights with the F-22 are for the losers. The chinese will not make this dumb mistake of tangle with the formidable Raptors, while leaving the oil tankers and AWACS, untouched.

And from here on we are off-topic since:

1. it is no longer a dedicated J-20&engine question.

2. it is again - as everything by You - all speculative. Therefore You should add in all sentences the for of "maybe", "by my estimation", "eventually" and so on in front of each will. You however again try to draw an images as if this is a fact written in stone.

Anyway ....

Deino

 

[Ultima Thule]

Hey pakistani guy, aren't you the one, who was keep demanding the Mod, to ban me permanently, because you don't like what I posted? Shouldn't you ask your guru/expert, the gambler guy, for information?

"MR @Asoka your Jets top speed will Mach-3, you lost maneuverability and agility, and its become a interceptor, not 5th gen AD jet, like those MIG-25"

Not necessarily.

The Mig-25 has poor maneuverability and agility, because it's airframe was made of high strength steel, instead of Titanium like the SR-71. The reason being, Titanium was still very difficult to work with, in the early 1960's.

The CIA used a phoney front company to purchased the Titanium from the Russian, and go to great length and expense to produce the titanium SR-71 airframe. So only a few dozen SR-71 was produced, whereas, the Russian need to produce thousands of Mig-25 to intercept the American bombers, so they can't afford the titanium Mig-25.

To compensate the extra weight of the steel frame, the Russian has to use as little steel as possible. That means the resultant aircraft will not as strong as they would like, so it would not able to pull high-g.

In fact, it is reported, the early Mig-25 could pull only max. 3-g. The current Mig-31, the successor to Mig-25, could pull maximum 5-g, making it, having limited maneuverability and agility. (The ability to pull high-g depends on the speed. Pulling high-g at subsonic speed, is not the same on the airframe, as pulling high-g at Mach 3. So, if you could pull only 5-g at subsonic, you could pull much less g at Mach 3. You probably could fly only, at a almost straight line, at those speed.)

But that's not really a problem. They are meant to use to intercept the heavy bombers like B-52 and cruise missiles, which have even less maneuverability and agility.

The 5-Gen fighter will all have one piece forged Titanium bulkheads, and other forged titanium airframe component for exceptional strength. Thus, it is guaranteed that they will have the super strength to pull high-g, at those supersonic speed, so, to achieve the superior supersonic maneuverability and agility, which is the signature of 5-gen. fighters, that no 3-gen or 4-gen fighters will be able to match.

This is the most important feature of 5-gen fighter. The 3-gen or 4-gen fighters (like J-10, Rafael, Typhoon, Flankers, F-15, F-16, F-18) could reduce their RCS, in their future variants, but they will never have the massive engine power, and super airframe strength, required to have supercruise and superior supersonic maneuverability and agility. This requires a total redesign from the ground up.

That is, if you have the strength and power to pull high-g at Mach 1.6, you will have the strength and power to pull those high-g, at even higher speed, like Mach 3. Your maneuverability and agility, will be reduced, as you go faster. Yes. that's true. But that will be still a whole lot better than the previous generation of fighter.

Look at this chart from an old post of mine, last year. https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-485#post-9034688

The Astonishing Supersonic Maneuverability Difference Between 4th and 5th Generation Fighters.

I have again and again emphasized the importance of Supersonic Cruise and Supersonic Maneuverability to 5th Gen. fighter. Without ability to do Supersonic Cruise, there could be no Supersonic Maneuverability.

Here is the picture that illustrate the astonishing difference between Supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22. Supersonic Maneuverability is a measure of how agile of a plane is in Supersonic Speed at various height. Because the air density at different height, the Maneuverability will be greatly affected.

Why is there such a great difference between supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22?

Because F-22 has TVC that will enable it turn very effectively at high altitude and high speed, whereas, the effectiveness of traditional control surfaces of F-15, and F-35 will be much less effective at those high speed and high altitude.

Here is the 5G Maneuver Envelope. The Maximum Speed of a plane able to maneuver at 5G at various height.

As we can see, F-15, one of the most agile 4th gen. fighter in the world, could only pull a 5G Maneuver at Mach 0.8 at sea level, and at 32,000 ft, only Mach 0.7. No Supersonic Maneuverability at 5G over Mach 0.8. Basically, it could only fly pretty much in a straight line with a huge turn radius at higher speed.

Whereas, F-22 could pull 5G at nearly Mach 2 at the Maximum altitude of 65,000ft. At sea level, it could still able to reach Mach 1.3 while pulling a 5G turn.

Basically, sustained Supersonic Maneuverability is determined by Aerodynamics of the airframe, Power of the engine and structural strength of the airframe.

If you don't have outstanding Aerodynamics design, your air speed will quickly drop below supersonic during high G maneuvers. If you don't have a powerful engine in the first place, you can't do Supersonic Cruise without afterburner. If you turn on your afterburner in order to go supersonic, you will quickly run out of fuel. If your airframe isn't strong enough, your plane will fall apart at high G during Supersonic Maneuvering. If you have a very tough airframe, but a weak engine, you will be overweighted. And if you have a very powerful engine, but overweighted and have a lousy aerodynamics design, you will end up being clubbed like baby seals like F-35.

As if we can see, even the mightily powerful F-15 don't have much Supersonic Maneuverability, it is useless to talk about that for 4th Generation fighters, instead they concentrate on subsonic maneuverability. But Supersonic Maneuverability is such an awesome ability. F-15 and F-16 pilots said whenever F-22 goes into Supersonic, the fight is over. They can't follow it into those Supersonic speed without turning on the afterburner, and if they did, they would run out of fuel in minutes.

View attachment 432532

only you can change natural physics Mr @Asoka , at Mach-3 you can only go straight with minimum/ no maneuverability/ agility and by the way who told you that J-20 will super cruise on Mach-3, just some initial rumors with no prove and tell me what purpose of attaining such a high speed please tell me, yeah yeah i am in a favor to ban you permanently because not the reasons you posted above but your too much bashing and wishful thinking about J-20, @Asoka please tell me what is the prove that J-20 using WS-15 from day one, what is the prove WS-15 is based on R-79, what is the prove that WS-15 has a thurst of 210-240kn, what is the prove that WS-15 has a TVC nozzles you have no prove but just has a some your false assumptions and false eye catching assessment of J-20/WS-15, prove it if you have a reliable sources, but i think you don't have a single reliable source MR crazy @Asoka

 

[Deino]

@pakistanipower

Relax ... it's not good for Your health. The blood pressure rises to high ... You only will get a heart attack.

We will not - never ever - change his opinion. He can deduct that all; only he. He can surely cannot change physics but he is the one - the only one - who always finds a solution even to the most confirmed facts and can explain why they are not that way and why they are the way he explains. Only he is able to see these mysteries ...

The only strange thing on this is ... why on earth does nobody outside takes care of these theories??

Anyway, it's just like looking a strange comedy - sometimes in fact more a tragedy - in theatre or cinema.
As such, relax, calm down ... take some popcorn or - in my case a good French red wine - and enjoy the show.
The only problem is that the muscle ache/hangover next morning due to the enless laughter always hurts so terribly.

Deino

 

[Asoka]

"by the way ,who told you, that J-20 will super cruise on Mach-3"

I have never said 5-Gen fighters could supercruise at Mach 3, w/o AB.

I said F-22 and J-20 could reach Mach 3, and cruise around that speed, with Afterburner turned on, like Mig-25 or Mig-31 or SR-71.

Surely, you could understand that there is a big difference.

As for your other questions, read my previous posts, to get answers. If you can't understand them, well, that not my problem, its your IQ level problem.

"at Mach-3, you can only go straight with minimum/ no maneuverability/ agility"

How do you know that? That was true for 3-gen and 4-gen aircrafts.

I am talking about 5-Gen fighters like F-22 with TVC, that give it extreme maneuverability at subsonic, as well as, supersonic speed.

And as for J-20, it will have even better maneuverability, because it has big full moving canards, at the front, and 3-D TVC, at the back, and full moving vertical tails, to give it, unprecedented maneuverability and agility.

"The only strange thing on this is ... why on earth, does nobody outside, takes care of these theories??"

Because, they are not thinking about those issues, like me. Using what's publicly available informations, and deduce what's possible and what's impossible, using only standard high school level physics.