J-20... The New Generation Fighter II

Originally Posted by nameless

Actually PAK-FA looks like a its based on the flanker design and some parts do not look stealthy at all.

I guess that's expected. It looks similar to the Flanker, but at the same time it's a mix of F-22/F-23.
The F-22 itself looks like it was based on the F-15 airframe as if they just took a F-15 and canted the shape all around, extended the LEX and chines a bit.

Originally Posted by A.Man

From what we have seen: the design, the material, aerodynamic and workmanship of the Chinese J-20 are way ahead of any Russian airplanes. I personally believe, the Chinese aerospace production technologies is at least 15 years more advanced than Russian's. MIG 1.44 has no connections to J-20 at all. All Toyota's, Honda's, Fords, BMW's, VW's and Hyundai's, as well as Tata's are all look alike. Were they all copies of the Ford Model-T?

You guys don't find it odd that J-20's body is as smooth as silk? Its so unlike any production prototype fighters I have seen in the past.

Originally Posted by Asymptote

You guys don't find it odd that J-20's body is as smooth as silk? Its so unlike any production prototype fighters I have seen in the past.

So far there are no photos that are showing us close enough shots and angles that would show rivets...

And even if there is less number of plates and rivets used, there might be plenty of explanation that the J-20's body was 'smooth'... one of them being design. They might have designed the aircraft with large and wide composite material, so there are essentially lesser joints and so lesser gaps and rivets.

As for the black colours vs normal production colour... black colour might be a good idea for stealth aircraft (look at Y-23, B-2, F-117). And there is also chances that the RAM coating that the Chinese have apply to their aircraft are black in colour... afterall it is just a colour.

Finally, a simple explanation of the different in the prototype of J-20 as compared to previous production prototype, might be because the chinese are doing a better job? They are getting better, or there will be lesser changes expected in this prototype to manufacturing lot.

Originally Posted by Asymptote

Let's just put it this way, the J-20 looks like a mock-up. It has none of the finishes of a proper flyable prototype plane. If you look at J-10, J-11B, J-10B, F-35 and PAK-FA's prototype airframes, they are usually in yellow colour (or light green in F-35's case) with lots of rivets, trims, and details on the airframes. The J-20 on the other hand looks to me like a one piece fiberglass mock up that's not really flyable.

So its a just one piece fiberglass mock up?

Talk about ventral fins, that's another detail that reminds me of Mig 1.42/1.44. Infact, the whole plane practically resembles Mig 1.42/1.44 if not for the fact it has a pair of side engine air intacts. Another detail I notice is the canted "all moving tailplane" which is also another signature of Mig 1.42/1.44.

J10, Su27 and many other aircraft all have ventral fins, its dishonest to somehow claim that Mig 1.42 was the first or the only one.
And the mig 1.42 does not have an "all moving tailplane" just a conventional tail that is slightly canted. J20's tail is much more similar to FAK-FA and F117. Again Mig 1.42 was not the first to have canted tail.

That's the question I am also asking - what cuase the Russians to throw away the Mig 1.42/1.44 in the first place? From the photos, all I can gather is that it could be the canard configuration and their plasma stealth tech. The canard for whatever the reason is probably not very stealthy airframe design, and their plasma steath tech probably failed so they eventually opted to throw the whole airframe design away and opted to copy the more conventional F-22/F-23 design.

IMO They ran out of money so they has to rely on the stealthified Su27 design.

Originally Posted by latenlazy

The Russians went through a series of designs because their defence firms needed intermediate proof of concepts to attract funding (both domestic and abroad) while their military budgets were bleeding to death. China doesn't have that problem. While this thing may look a bit rough around the edges, the amount of attention it has been getting from leadership and the lack of need to market to their designs tells us this is it. Lots of details will change but the basic airframe is what it is.

And except for the delta canard configuration it's nothing like the mig 1.44. The thing has side intakes.

Its not just the Russians, the Americans, the Europeans, practically everyone goes through the same process of aircraft design (or any type of design - its standard design process / evolution). The americans call it "lineage", where a new product is the result of hundreds of prototypes, mock ups and aggregation of previous generation's design. The F-22 itself was the result of F-119/B-2 stealth tech, with decades of experiences designing various previous generation fighters that finally came to fruition in F-22. The F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, are all part of that lineage. (And the extent to which american explore the airframe design + their XF series of experimental airframes). And even when they finally nail down the specification, they still put up a competitive tendering process, with Lockheed Martin/Boeing pitted against Northrop/McDonnell Douglas - with 2 VERY different designs, with both designs very mature and production capable.

The J-20 on the other hand, seems to be evoluted out of J-10 and J-11B, with both platform still very new and "shaky" (with lots of kinks and problems still needs to be work through / find out after decade of use).

If you look at the development of F-22, it was build upon decades of previous generation design (F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18) it took almost 25 years from beginning of 1980's ATX program until it enter service in 2005, with several concurrent developments such as F-117/B-2 that aided to its design in the final product.

The Russian pretty much were the same, they developed from decades of previous generation experience, from Mig-29/Su-27/Su-30/Su-35/Mig-35/ Su-37 until they begin the Mig 1.42/1.44, and the horizontal development of Su-47 (composite body, radical airframe) until they finally settle on the PAK-FA.

Design just doesn't come about suddenly, it has to be built on SOLID GROUND.

Originally Posted by 70092

It would have been much more convincing if some of these Russian military fans could open their somewhat loud mouths about how Chinese have copied their 5th generation technologies AFTER Russia has successfully developed a real 5th generation fighter in the first place:




Sure it looks like China have copied alot of Russian techs to develop a 5th generation fighter.

My opinion is the T-50 is not as stealthy as the F-22 and J-20. What measure they're going to take to hide the engine blades without hindering the engine performance? Btw, the nose shaping of the T-50 is similar to F-35 which is said to be less steathier than the F-22. See, I can easily use the words "is a copy of" just to flame, but I didn't.

As for the future changes to the J-20, I don't see much changes except for maybe the nozzles and the ventral fins.

Originally Posted by Asymptote

Its not just the Russians, the Americans, the Europeans, practically everyone goes through the same process of aircraft design (or any type of design - its standard design process / evolution). The americans call it "lineage", where a new product is the result of hundreds of prototypes, mock ups and aggregation of previous generation's design. The F-22 itself was the result of F-119/B-2 stealth tech, with decades of experiences designing various previous generation fighters that finally came to fruition in F-22. The F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, are all part of that lineage. (And the extent to which american explore the airframe design + their XF series of experimental airframes). And even when they finally nail down the specification, they still put up a competitive tendering process, with Lockheed Martin/Boeing pitted against Northrop/McDonnell Douglas - with 2 VERY different designs, with both designs very mature and production capable.

The J-20 on the other hand, seems to be evoluted out of J-10 and J-11B, with both platform still very new and "shaky" (with lots of kinks and problems still needs to be work through / find out after decade of use).

If you look at the development of F-22, it was build upon decades of previous generation design (F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18) it took almost 25 years from beginning of 1980's ATX program until it enter service in 2005, with several concurrent developments such as F-119/B-2 that aided to its design in the final product.

The Russian pretty much were the same, they developed from decades of previous generation experience, from Mig-29/Su-27/Su-30/Su-35/Mig-35/ Su-37 until they begin the Mig 1.42/1.44, and the horizontal development of Su-47 (composite body, radical airframe) until they finally settle on the PAK-FA.

Design just doesn't come about suddenly, it has to be built on SOLID GROUND.

From your explanation, then no other nations in the world, other than those with aircraft design and building should be allowed to design 5th generation aircraft.

By the way, the Chinese do have a long history in building aircraft (although in the past, many are copies and modified Russian fighters) such as J-6, J-7, J-8, J-10 and J-11). US and Russian might had a harder start as compared to the Chinese. They designed their aircraft from scrap and with nothing to fall back on or check. The Chinese started their design at a later stage, saw what others had done, reverse engineered some of their older products, learn from what others had failed and so the entire process might be faster.

Look at the Japanese's automobile industry. During the 60s, they are no where as good as the Europeans who have decades of experience in automobile design and creation. And the Japanese copied many of the design with modification... and now? We are seeing Japanese cars booming in almost any markets.

So a latecomers might not necessary means to fall flat on his face.

Originally Posted by Asymptote

Its not just the Russians, the Americans, the Europeans, practically everyone goes through the same process of aircraft design (or any type of design - its standard design process / evolution). The americans call it "lineage", where a new product is the result of hundreds of prototypes, mock ups and aggregation of previous generation's design. The F-22 itself was the result of F-119/B-2 stealth tech, with decades of experiences designing various previous generation fighters that finally came to fruition in F-22. The F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, are all part of that lineage. (And the extent to which american explore the airframe design + their XF series of experimental airframes). And even when they finally nail down the specification, they still put up a competitive tendering process, with Lockheed Martin/Boeing pitted against Northrop/McDonnell Douglas - with 2 VERY different designs, with both designs very mature and production capable.

Last I checked the B-2 and F-117 were production designs, as were the teen series fighters. They weren't demonstration aircraft meant to fill a gap in the production process, so I don't see how that supports your argument that the J-20 is a demonstration aircraft.

The competition aspect between airframes for the US has always been a marketing gimmick to aid the exportability of new designs, just like with the Russians. Who's to say China has to follow the same model? The only exception to this has been the x-projects and independently funded projects by different defence firms.

The J-20 on the other hand, seems to be evoluted out of J-10 and J-11B, with both platform still very new and "shaky" (with lots of kinks and problems still needs to be work through / find out after decade of use).

Which problems do the J-10 and J-11B need worked out? Why the J-11B when it's just an improved variant (or copy) of the Su-27?

If you look at the development of F-22, it was build upon decades of previous generation design (F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18) it took almost 25 years from beginning of 1980's ATX program until it enter service in 2005, with several concurrent developments such as F-119/B-2 that aided to its design in the final product.

The Russian pretty much were the same, they developed from decades of previous generation experience, from Mig-29/Su-27/Su-30/Su-35/Mig-35/ Su-37 until they begin the Mig 1.42/1.44, and the horizontal development of Su-47 (composite body, radical airframe) until they finally settle on the PAK-FA.

Design just doesn't come about suddenly, it has to be built on SOLID GROUND.

I agree with you that designs don't come suddenly and have to be built upon, but who's to say that one country has to follow the same design timeline and process of another country? Who's to say that countries catching up need to go through the same process as countries that are already ahead?

You're basic argument is "This thing can't fly because China hasn't done what the US and Russia have". That's not a very good argument I'm afraid.

Asymptote, I'm sure it's not some kind of empty fiber-glass shell that can't fly, but I won't argue the point. I'll only suggest that we all wait for higher quality, close-up images to appear, because honestly, with the quality of images that have been released so far, no rivets or panels would be visible anyway...

As for being a technology demonstrator, I honestly wouldn't mind if it simply meant that the the real production J-20 would be more compact and refined or something.

Originally Posted by AssassinsMace

Remember when they use to declare low quality worksmanship because you can see the rivets on Chinese fighters?

The French seem to be claiming it's a rip-off of the Typhoon.

I am just curious why the body of J-20 is so smooth, and painted black all over as if its a production run fighter. The body material reminds me of the Anjian "Dark Sword" UCAV presented back in 2007 that's all.

And would any aviation expert shed some light on this? Why is it most of the prototype planes were painted in either dark green or light yellow, and they all seem to be made of different materials too (perhaps those colours are actually the colour of composite material?)

Originally Posted by Asymptote

And would any aviation expert shed some light on this? Why is it most of the prototype planes were painted in either dark green or light yellow, and they all seem to be made of different materials too (perhaps those colours are actually the colour of composite material?)

The keyword here is 'MOST'. Well it is not necessary true that a prototype aircraft had to be yellow in colour, or blue or whatever colour. Look at Y-23, it was black in colour... X-35 (F-35) prototype was in silver or grey colour. I think that is the same case for Y-22 (F-22).

So as you can see, there really had no indication on what colour to use. And I think someone in this forum mentioned that some of the colours are prime colour, or something like that. And, I think, some company or country like to differentiate the different type of material used on the plane with different colour (might be for the reason that in the case of failure, it is quickly identified what or which material went wrong).

So it is perfectly alright for the new J-20 to be in black. Even if it was in yellow, blue, green, rainbow colour, there simply is no real indication of whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Asymptote

I am just curious why the body of J-20 is so smooth, and painted black all over as if its a production run fighter. The body material reminds me of the Anjian "Dark Sword" UCAV presented back in 2007 that's all.

And would any aviation expert shed some light on this? Why is it most of the prototype planes were painted in either dark green or light yellow, and they all seem to be made of different materials too (perhaps those colours are actually the colour of composite material?)

the yellow or green are primer paints used by the companies. different companies use different colour paint. it doesnt mean yellow equates a certain material and green another. like i mentioned before from some of the previous photos we can see that one of the j-20 prototypes has exposed yellow panels in the nose and we can also see that the parachute compartment is still painted yellow on the inside. all these points to the fact that CAC gave the J-20 a coat of paint so that it looks presentable as they know that ppl will be taking photos of it and being chinese it has to look good. the j-10 prototype had a white colour paint when it was first revealed and the JH-7 and L-15 were all painted when they were first made public. it doesnt mean that one country has a certain way of presenting prototypes so all other countries must follow-suit, same as with military tech development.

we live in a time of computer simulation and modelling. any defects or design flaws can and will be worked out on the computers - bare in mind that china currently has the fastest super-computer in the world - and the final prototype will be a product of years of ironing out kinks on computers. that is the reason why most planes nowadays do not have many variants. the only reason there are variants now is so that the same plane can fulfill different combat roles, not because there's a problem with it. so by making the assumption that china is still having problems with J-10 and J-11B because there's no variants is flawed and non-congruent with modern day tech development. im quite sure that IF the J-10 and J-11 still had problems the chinese would not be fielding them in the quantity that they currently are.

Originally Posted by Deino

Hmmm ... Seems as if it is part of one picture that was intentionally blurred ... Any ideas ???

Deino

It seems like the same blurring effect was used. Have to check with the previous blurred pictures. If the blurring effect is the same, then this picture probably comes from the same source and is probably the real thing. This then would mean the J-20 did already has its first flight previously.

Originally Posted by Asymptote

No, I am not saying that, trust me.
What I am saying is, I felt its a little premature to show off the piece.

Allow me elaborate. When I look at design, I look at the lineage, and when you look at lineage, you look at the most variants a design can offer - And currently J-10/J-11B seems still fresh off the production/under production line, with almost no variants to speak of. The last fighter that seems to me to be very well understood by the Chinese aviation industry seems to be the J-7 and J-8, with almost hundreds of variations. It shows the level of confidence and understanding in modifying the design because of the thorough understanding and knowledge gain in those design.

Just imagine if you design something, let's say a car, and because its a new design, you are just happy it "works" (magic!) and is afraid modifying it will result in failure - and that's normal in almost every field of engineering/design process. And it took a long time until designers thoroughly understood the principles of the design, that they start really tearing it apart again, examine every parts and redesign every part to have next generation design. Along the way, you have hundreds of modification/variation of original design. And this usually starts from the outside - the shell of the design - the body/structure frame of the design. So the car usually get a different look first, while the engines and the innards get change much much later.

People in the West are always China bashing. When China is being secretive, they label them a threat to their national security and interest. When they are open about it, they still label them a threat to their national security and national interest then tell the world that they are inferior and that they are 20 to 30 years behind them.

The process that the pioneers (US and the EU) went through will always be the lengthiest because they have to come up with the designs, research and use appropriate materials, research and apply technologies and modern manufacturing techiques. Once the products are constructed numerous tests needs to be done via trial and error to determine the effectiveness and practicality of their product. So yes it takes time!

However, as times pass by more and more technologies, materials and manufacturing processes mature and becomes available, this will help developing countries catch such as China catch up. As we all know, they have plenty of money and they now have the luxury of new materials, technologies, manufacturing techniques and perhaps data to help them with the science and technological leap forward. You cannot predict how many years ahead or behind using the traditional method of thinking anymore. Things can only get quicker and easier as times pass.
Not to mention with China giving away so much financial aids and securing business deals around the world these days, you just never know what actually gets traded underneath the tables.

Here are some other things that may have contributed to China's recent achievements:

Clinton Gave China Chips for Nuclear War Clinton Gave China satellite and solid fuel technology to generate cash for his campaigns and personal gains.

Noshir Gowadia Convicted of Selling Secrets to China | Epoch Times B-2 Bomber, low signiture and stealth cruise missile technology sold to the Chinese.

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2...prints-to.html Obama's proposed sale of B-2 spirit bomber blue print, stealth paint and metals to help US ease off Chinese debt.

It is also rumoured that the Lockheed EP-3 spy plane that was forced down near Hainan was actually an deliberate act to give the spy and radar technology to China as an payment to ease off debt. So it wouldn't surprise me one bit that China is so far ahead in the technological developments despite the embargo that was placed upon them by America and the EU since 1989.