J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

Originally Posted by Air Force Brat

Roger that hmmwv, there so much stuff below to break he's gotta be carefull, he's doin some crankin and bankin, prolly in burner pretty good, if he is maintaing altitude, it takes a lot of power, thats why the leading edge flaps are deployed and the canard is angled downward to prevent overpitching the aircraft, the last thing you want to do is depart the aircraft. When you bring a fighter aircraft in to land, you customarily do a 360 overhead, where you fly down the runway heading and do the overhead break, and honk her right on around at a very low power setting in a steep bank with fairly heavy g, that bleeds off speed so you can lower the flaps and pop the gear. Then you bring the power back up to maintain a safe descent rate, as you have greatly reduced your available energy and increased your drag, the ideal approach speed is calculated at a given fuel/payload, and from there you gradually bleed off airspeed and energy as you fly down final. If you're fast you risk an overshoot, if you're slow you risk a high sink arrival, or worse landing short, if you're on the mark the nose is higher than the mains, the main gear rolls on and you hold the nose off for aerodynamic braking, and Bob's your uncle! Yes you know your old bud pretty well player.

I see, on a side note what do you think it's the reason that J20 rarely deploys the air brake during landing, instead it uses the drag chute every time? With the all moving canard and tail, as well as the dedicated air brake you'd think it'll have no problem stopping on a 2,500m runway, no? The only logical reason is to create chute folding jobs

Also I'm curious why do you call the test pilot "tall man?" Colonel Li Gang isn't a particularly tall guy (5th from the left).1294930224821.jpg

Regarding that strange "thing" behind the canopy: IMO it is not a realy bump but simply a panel which covers the hinging-mechanism, which was sled back for work on it. More interesting is that "yellow" stripe in front .... but actually I don#T know.

Deino

Originally Posted by Deino

Regarding that strange "thing" behind the canopy: IMO it is not a realy bump but simply a panel which covers the hinging-mechanism, which was sled back for work on it. More interesting is that "yellow" stripe in front .... but actually I don#T know.

Deino

I suppose we will tell whether that actually is a bump once we get more pictures. If all of them show the bump present, then it won't be a panel. If the bump is absent, then your theory will be proven correct.

Have any of the wall climbers caught a glimpse of the engines and whether that is different to 2001, yet?

Originally Posted by Bltizo

I suppose we will tell whether that actually is a bump once we get more pictures. If all of them show the bump present, then it won't be a panel. If the bump is absent, then your theory will be proven correct.

Have any of the wall climbers caught a glimpse of the engines and whether that is different to 2001, yet?

I think it is safe to say that 2000 was the static test-bed, 2001 is powered by painted AL-31F engines. I assume that 2002 will be powered by a standard WS-10; I do not believe that the WS-10G is ready...but what do I know?

Maybe 2003 or 2004 will have WS-10G.

Best solution, 2002 with one WS-10 and one WS-15 with 2D nozzle.

Originally Posted by Lion

Best solution, 2002 with one WS-10 and one WS-15 with 2D nozzle.

Best maybe ... but I think we should be realistc !

Originally Posted by Centrist

I assume that 2002 will be powered by a standard WS-10;

I think it will keep the painted AL-31F engines.

I do not believe that the WS-10G is ready...but what do I know?

I do not believe that the WS-10G even exists.

Maybe 2003 or 2004 will have WS-10G.

#2005 prototype with WS-15.

Originally Posted by hmmwv

I see, on a side note what do you think it's the reason that J20 rarely deploys the air brake during landing, instead it uses the drag chute every time? With the all moving canard and tail, as well as the dedicated air brake you'd think it'll have no problem stopping on a 2,500m runway, no? The only logical reason is to create chute folding jobs

Also I'm curious why do you call the test pilot "tall man?" Colonel Li Gang isn't a particularly tall guy (5th from the left).1294930224821.jpg

I'm fairly certain that there is likely more than I pilot, on one of the vids the pilot looked like a tall tom cruise type, so I'm just teasing, and kind of hopefull that somebody will say, those guys on sino d need straightened out, I think we'll let the tall man tell em whats what. The first Raptor demo driver, Max Moqua, prolly misspelling his last name hosted a program called "air combat", in which he narrated and interviewed pilots of both aircraft, one program was F-86 vs Mig 15, anyway he was a faithfull poster on a site called "Air Show Buzz", when one of the other forum members took him to task for not doing a real "cobra" and questioned the raptors ability, he stated that the Russian pilots departed their aircraft from controlled flight, that he would not be departing the Raptor at low altitude for an airshow due to the risk involved, and further that the "cobra while awsome to watch, had 0 tactical application and the demo he performed in the Raptor was primarily a tactical display. Having said that, I would love to hear what any of the J-20 drivers thought of the J-bird? Maybe the tall guy the second from the left in your pic, the second from the right looks like Jackie Chan?
Speed Brake, Hhhuuuummhhhh, thinking out loud, I "love the twin drogue chutes", prolly don't need them both, I am at a lose otherwise, they are cool and nostalgic, nuthins cooler than popin that chute on landing, then droppin it as you taxi back in, the airplane is likely very light, that may change in 2002 when we have radar etc, and I expect them to open up the flight envelope a bit, as I stated previously, we have not seen 2001 at extremely high alpha, nor have we heard any anecdotal reports of 2001 departing Chengdu an sonic booms associated with her test flights. Are there any vids with speed brakes? As I stated 2001 comes across the fence with plenty of airspeed, that will likely change if they deploy speed brakes on final? Great question though, maybe the engineer has an idea?

Should the Russian example be an indicator. For example they had built two more T-50 prototypes in the second year. Or did they rush into it?

Originally Posted by Centrist

I think it is safe to say that 2000 was the static test-bed, 2001 is powered by painted AL-31F engines. I assume that 2002 will be powered by a standard WS-10; I do not believe that the WS-10G is ready...but what do I know?

Maybe 2003 or 2004 will have WS-10G.

I'm still quite uncertain as to whether the silver nozzle engines are Al-31 -- yes we have Maya's backing but it must be different to standard al-31 somehow. I mean one doesn't just paint over nozzles, and if we accept that, you have to wonder why they would change the nozzles.
I am only willing to say this 2002 is probably the second flying prototype.
There may be a 2000 somewhere as static test frame (which would be new for CAC), and I also believe there is the second 2001 (the one we saw equipped with standard al-31s) which was used for taxi/ground testing like t-50KNS.
The situation with the j20 prototypes for me is similar to WS-10 variants. You know there is definitely more than one type around, but you have no idea how many

Originally Posted by Bltizo

I'm still quite uncertain as to whether the silver nozzle engines are Al-31 -- yes we have Maya's backing but it must be different to standard al-31 somehow. I mean one doesn't just paint over nozzles, and if we accept that, you have to wonder why they would change the nozzles.
I am only willing to say this 2002 is probably the second flying prototype.
There may be a 2000 somewhere as static test frame (which would be new for CAC), and I also believe there is the second 2001 (the one we saw equipped with standard al-31s) which was used for taxi/ground testing like t-50KNS.
The situation with the j20 prototypes for me is similar to WS-10 variants. You know there is definitely more than one type around, but you have no idea how many

I don't think it's paint.

Originally Posted by latenlazy

I don't think it's paint.

Of course it isn't paint. It is coated somehow. Personally, I used to believe that the 2001 was powered by a modified WS-10. But if you count the nozzle pedals and look at their dimensions, they look exactly like the AL-31F, albeit silver in color.

Also, all of China's prototypes in recent years have flown on Russian engines first, the J-15, J-10B most notably, despite the WS-10 being in mass production. It seems unlikely that the J-20 would break this tradition. I think the engines are "painted" simply for show. After all, the J-20 is clearly meant to be seen in the open by other world powers as a symbol of China's rising military and technological preeminence, but this would be marred by the ugly/easily recognizable Russian engine nozzles.

If you just accept that the engines are AL-31F with modified or coated nozzles, you eliminate the need for a mysterious and out-of-character "second 2001" prototype, which admittedly, did a week of taxi flights before disappearing into a dark abyss. Occam's razor, the simplest answer is probably correct.

Even if we take in occam's razor, is changing the engine (or engine nozzles) from a week of taxi flights to now test flights the simple answer?
Or that there are just two 2001 prototypes?

Really, the pursuit to determine how many J-20 prototypes exist is a futile mission imo.

And the silver nozzle does seem to have physical differences between Al-31 (note the extra "strip" between each petal on the silver nozzles), it isn't just a coating (although I'm sure we can point to things for and against the nozzles being structurally identical.)
If we believe there to be only one 2001 prototype, the question will be why would they want to modify or change the nozzle in the first place?

the strip is an illusion caused by the 'paint', it is also there on the black nozzle because geometrically they are very similar, or as one should put it, the same

it is probably a coat, or perhaps nozzle petal/elements made from different material

also, very devilish of CAC to hide 2002's butt so we have to track back and talk about 2001's