J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

could it be a really tight turn? The watermark signature is along the right edge of the pic, suggesting that the picture has been rotated maybe.

Looks like it. The canards looked weird in that picture when vertical (its canards are deflected down but its nose is pointing up), but if you flip it looks like they're trimming on a turn.

J-20 interesting view.jpg

Here's a blurry picture but I think it shows the refueling probe extended.

aaa.JPG

Originally Posted by superdog

Here's a blurry picture but I think it shows the refueling probe extended.

aaa.JPG

Is that a new bird? Isn't 2002 nose painted green?

Originally Posted by Lion

Is that a new bird? Isn't 2002 nose painted green?

That picture with 2002 with a green nose is a blatant PS.
All photos indicate that 2002 now has a green nose. Either that or CAC has built another prototype designated 2002 but with a grey nose.

That photo does seem to show something like an IFR. It's probably the lighting, but it looks like the IFR infringes on the grey radome, and that the grey radome looks a good deal larger as well. Not to mention that it looks very much forward of the cockpit.

Let's wait and see.

Originally Posted by superdog

Here's a blurry picture but I think it shows the refueling probe extended.

aaa.JPG

No spike ??

Originally Posted by Bltizo

That picture with 2002 with a green nose is a blatant PS.

Did you mean body-colored nose (same color as the airframe) up there? ...anyway, neither looks really gray, they (the old and new nose) are kind of dark green and lighter green.

Originally Posted by escobar

No spike ??

Did you mean the pitot? It's looks to be without the thing, but reallly hard to tell for suer. But this one does look more like the original 2002 (the nose color and the way inlet covers were put there).

Originally Posted by Player99

Did you mean the pitot? It's looks to be without the thing, but reallly hard to tell for suer. But this one does look more like the original 2002 (the nose color and the way inlet covers were put there).

I think he meant the vertical spiky lines from the pic when it first came out blurry.

Originally Posted by Equation

I think he meant the vertical spiky lines from the pic when it first came out blurry.

Huh? Could you say it differently, as I'm still lost here?

I think we all need to pool our resources together, chip in and get all our wall climbers a good DSLR with at least a 300mm lens.

Hard to tell if it is with the new nose. I think it is, these should be new pics.

Originally Posted by Player99

Huh? Could you say it differently, as I'm still lost here?

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/atta...ps77b4c90e.jpg

See the "spikes" on lower portion of this previous picture? I think that's what he meant.

Originally Posted by latenlazy

Points 2 and 4 make comparisons to tail planes, not tvc. Point 3 discusses the benefit of having both canards and tvc.

That's right, and for that exact reason the claimed benefits of TVC do not apply on J-20. That's because the deficiencies TVC supposedly solve do not really exist on an aircraft with canard configuration.

Originally Posted by latenlazy

We know they at least have tested tvc before. Furthermore nothing prevents parallel development or introducing the feature later on. If they're willing to do that with a new engine, they could certainly do that with tvc itself. New technology hasn't nor shouldn't be prevented from being introduced to new designs. Personally I think there is plenty of time for them to test it on the J-20 and still get to the intended date of production. We are already contemplating the PLAAF's backup options in case the ws-15 isn't ready. It would not be unnatural to consider tvc installed onto the ws-15 as part of that uncertainty.

We are contemplating PLAAF's backup option because China's aircraft engine industry is still immature at the moment. TVC is going to compound the difficulties they face, so it is actually quite unnatural to consider TVC for J-20 at this moment.