J-20... The New Generation Fighter II

Status
Not open for further replies.

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Love how all this was thought up just now in response to the J-20. What happened to the inferior backward 25 year old design that they didn't have to worry about? What we're going to see now is the myth of the invisible fighter being exposed and how US stealth could've been defeated that they didn't dare talk about until now. They knew all this before but they loved the hype of US stealth being able to molest the enemy at will. How come you didn't see the F-22 fly over Iraq or sold to the closest of allies? Because the fact was an adversary could learn a lot from the F-22 just flying around near by. Because of the J-20 expect to hear all the tricks of how you could've tracked an F-22 that they've known long before. But of course in disguise of how you can defeat a J-20.
 

Quickie

Colonel
yes its easy to know what kind work is military vs civilian. for defense company, their project has security level, the government require these project to be finished with people who has clearance, and you can only get clearance if you are citizen, naturilized or not. there are no race discrimination in dod related work, its the clearance and citizenship are hard to get for most chinese. you don't expect government hire you to work on F22 without doing any background check, do you? goto any defensive company website or any job site, you notice alot application relate to defensive require you to have a US citizenship + clearance or able to get one.

Are you sure? Almost every other technological applications have both military and civilian use. So, are you going to ban these otherwise highly qualified scientists from application related research or physical sciences like material science, aeronautics, rocket science, telecommunication / information technology etc and confine them to just basic science research ? Even this will not do, because some of the findings of basic sciences are bound to find uses in military applications, intended or not.

And I'm not just referring to DOD related defence industry but to the country's much larger industrial base to which the DOD defence industry depends on as a source for the basic components used for their applications.
 
Last edited:

Inst

Captain
Erm, no. As far as I understand, the trick is that the F-15 in the back functions as a spotting decoy. With its radar blaring and high RCS, the J-20 will quickly detect the F-15, then it will break stealth by opening its carriage bays to launch BVR missiles versus the F-15. Then, the F-22 spots the J-20 as it loses stealth by firing weapons, and the F-22 launches WVR or SRAAMs at the J-20. The J-20 can attempt to respond from there, but the F-22 has gotten the first shot off, and with all-aspect stealth, it can shoot and scoot and expect to evade WVR missiles, whereas the J-20 will likely won't be able to break the missile lock.

The AWACS approach won't work; the AWACS is suicide because the AWACS vessel has a very large RCS and can be knocked down by AWACS killers.

It's really a hard thing to counter; if the Chinese counter with J-11Bs with AESA in the back as their own decoys; the F-22s can just snipe them off with BVR and get away with it due to their all-aspect stealth allowing them to escape WVR screens from the J-20s.
 

challenge

Banned Idiot
新加坡联合早报:传中国研发另类第4代战机


-
传中国研发另类第4代战机

(2011-01-15 12.45pm)


  (香港讯)香港星岛日报报道,继歼20战机后,中国又研发出另一种名为“雪鹗”的第4代战机;这种战机外型较轻,类似美国与盟国合作的联合攻击战斗机(JSF)F-35。

  报道指出,日前中国中央电视台在一个有关中国发展隐形战机的节目上,背景图片除了歼20外,还有一架从没有曝光的银色战机。

  报道刊登了相关画面,并表示,这架战机的设计和歼20完全不一样,采用三翼面的鸭式布局,固定式垂直翼,菱形发动机喷口,尾翼有中国空军的军徽。

  报道说,有人在网上表示,这可能是沈阳飞机公司研发中的歼15“雪鴞”战机,这种战机类似美国F-35的轻型隐形战机。

  根据网上资料,沈阳飞机公司正在研发的一种先进战机,除了型号(为歼14)不符外,其余与上述报道差不多,譬如也称为“雪鴞”,采用三翼面鸭式布局,体型较轻。

《联合早报网》

according to singapore united news..
AVIC is developing a single engine "F-35 type" aircraft.
like J-20 is uses canard control except it single engine
 

Martian

Senior Member
China had installed gold-tinted radar-reducing cockpit canopy on J-10B

The current J-20 prototype does not have a gold-tinted cockpit canopy. However, we have seen an example of this technology on the J-10B.

xTvBI.jpg

J-10A in the foreground with clear cockpit canopy. J-10B with tinted cockpit canopy in the background.

Note: Thank you to Maozedong for the picture and Siegecrossbow for the sharp eye in noticing the gold tint.
 

challenge

Banned Idiot
Re: China had installed gold-tinted radar-reducing cockpit canopy on J-10B

gold tinted material found in J-10B canopy was RAM.
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Re: China had installed gold-tinted radar-reducing cockpit canopy on J-10B

Even if still off-topic and related to the J-10 .... I'm surprised to see one of the older J-10 pre-serials with their 101x-numbers !

Deino
 

Maggern

Junior Member
Thanks, I did see that. I just want to know if it's 19 or 20. :p . It took like a year or something before China released the basic specs on the J-10 right? And that was after the official unveiling... :( .

Well if you want me to be specific, I measured it to ~19.3m, however there are some problems with pixelation (plus the image might be off by a few milimeters, so the length might be off by .2/.3m (most likely it'll be longer, so 19.3-19.6m then). As I don't trust myself by a long shot, I'd say what you should bring out of this is that the 23m guess is way off, and that 21-22m might be a bit long too. As with J-10 we'll have to wait until someone walks up to a full-scale and measures it by hand until we know the exact dimensions.

So, I guessed it right. You locked this thread 2 hours ago because I said something anti-american??
Isn't that kinda pathetic when you were espousing how forum posters should get off their high horses when all the post and media bashing Chinese but when something even remotely anti-american (american stole the russian tech) and you would immediately give out warning and lock the thread??

1. Don't keep this tone with the mods. At least not in public.
2. 99% of the threads in this forum are related to the CHINESE military. Hence, in this case any celebration/bashing of the J-20 is to some degree acceptable. Bashing the US in any form is not, as it is not as relevant. Find some threads about US technology and go there.
 
Last edited:

Asymptote

Banned Idiot
Erm, no. As far as I understand, the trick is that the F-15 in the back functions as a spotting decoy. With its radar blaring and high RCS, the J-20 will quickly detect the F-15, then it will break stealth by opening its carriage bays to launch BVR missiles versus the F-15. Then, the F-22 spots the J-20 as it loses stealth by firing weapons, and the F-22 launches WVR or SRAAMs at the J-20. The J-20 can attempt to respond from there, but the F-22 has gotten the first shot off, and with all-aspect stealth, it can shoot and scoot and expect to evade WVR missiles, whereas the J-20 will likely won't be able to break the missile lock.

The AWACS approach won't work; the AWACS is suicide because the AWACS vessel has a very large RCS and can be knocked down by AWACS killers.

It's really a hard thing to counter; if the Chinese counter with J-11Bs with AESA in the back as their own decoys; the F-22s can just snipe them off with BVR and get away with it due to their all-aspect stealth allowing them to escape WVR screens from the J-20s.


This is a classic evolving baiting game.
So, basically, the Chinese are at disadvantage due to having shorter range BVR missile to counter the american all aspect stealth F-22 which can get closer to the J-20 without being detected while the J-20 is targeting the F-15 at BVR range.

So what if the Chinese move the J-11B further behind, drawing the F-22 closer to the kill zone of J-20?? Basically this is reverse baiting, but at the same time F-22 could choose NOT to be baited and just not fire, then it will be just a beautiful smash up of F-15 vs J-11B with F-22 and J-20 as bystander (since both would be too afraid to give the other side advantage until its too late).
 

KYli

Brigadier
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Stealthy Chinese J-20 Vulnerable

Jan 14, 2011




By David A. Fulghum, Bill Sweetman, Bradley Perrett, Robert Wall
Washington, Washington, Beijing, London

China’s newest combat aircraft prototype, the J-20, will require an intense development program if it is going to catch up with fast-moving anti-stealth advances.

In fact, anti-stealth will bring into question all stealth designs: How much invulnerability will current low-observability techniques offer as air defense systems adopt larger and more powerful active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radars? From the early days of AESA development, a key goal was to build a radar that could detect very small objects—such as a cruise missile at a distance great enough to target and shoot it down—or a larger object like a fighter with a very low-observable treatment.

Airborne detection of stealth aircraft may already be an operational capability. In a series of tests at Edwards AFB, Calif., in 2009, Lockheed Martin’s CATbird avionics testbed—a Boeing 737 that carries the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s entire avionics system—engaged a mixed force of F-22s and Boeing F-15s and was able to locate and jam F-22 radars, according to researchers. Raytheon’s family of X-band airborne AESA radar—in particular, those on upgraded F-15Cs stationed in Okinawa—can detect small, low-signature cruise missiles.

Moreover, Northrop Grumman’s lower-frequency, L-band AESA radar on Australia’s Wedgetail airborne early warning and control aircraft is larger and potentially more capable of detecting stealth aircraft at longer ranges.

Lockheed Martin also hinted at a JSF anti-stealth capability in 2009 in a reference to combat with sophisticated, foreign aircraft. “The F-35’s avionics include onboard sensors that will enable pilots to strike fixed or moving ground targets in high-threat environments, day or night, in any weather, while simultaneously targeting and eliminating advanced airborne threats,” said Dan Crowley, then-executive vice president and F-35 program general manager.

Better images emerging from China point clearly to the J-20’s use of stealth technology, but major uncertainties and questions remain unresolved.

The overall shape resembles that of the F-35 and F-22, which have a single “chine line” uniting the forebody, upper inlet lips, and wing and canard edges with a curved surface above that line and flat, canted body surfaces below it. The wing and canard edges are aligned: The wing and canard leading edges are parallel and the trailing edge of each canard is aligned with the opposite wing’s trailing edge. The same basic philosophy also has been adopted in British, Swedish and Japanese studies for stealth fighters.

The aim in all cases is to endow a practical, agile fighter configuration with a “bow-tie” radar signature, with the smallest signature around the nose and the greatest (still much lower than that of a conventional aircraft with curved or vertical-slab sides) to the side. The fighter’s mission planning system, using a database of known radar locations, then derives a “blue line” track that weaves between radars and avoids exposing the side-on signature to those radars more than transiently.

The “diverterless” supersonic inlet avoids a signature problem caused by a conventional boundary layer diverter plate. For example, the F-22 has a conventional inlet, which is likely to require extensive radar absorbent material (RAM) treatment.

The biggest uncertainty about the Chinese design concerns the engine exhausts, which as seen on the prototype are likely to cause a radar cross-section (RCS) peak from the rear aspect. One possibility is that a stealthier two-dimensional nozzle will be integrated later in the program; however, the nozzles on the current aircraft show some signs of RCS-reducing sawtooth treatment, suggesting that the People’s Liberation Army has accepted a rear-aspect RCS penalty rather than the much greater weight and complexity of 2D nozzles.

Other features are less clear. Stealth development has been dogged by detail-design challenges. All the antennas on the aircraft have to be flush with the skin and covered with surfaces that retain stealth properties while being transparent in a specific frequency. Maintainability becomes a complex tradeoff: Some systems requiring frequent attention will be accessed via landing gear and weapon bays, and others by latched and actuated doors that can open and close without affecting RCS—but the latter involves a weight penalty.

Perhaps the toughest hurdle is managing radio-frequency surface currents over the skin. Early stealth designs used heavy, maintenance-intensive RAM. The F-22 introduced a much lighter surface treatment, but it has proven unexpectedly difficult to maintain, causing corrosion issues. Lockheed Martin now asserts that the F-35 will be robust and affordable to maintain in service, with a combination of a high-toughness, sprayed-on topcoat and a conductive layer cured into composite skin panels.

The Chengdu J-20 design has struck many analysts and observers as familiar and somewhat different from the F-22, F-35 or Sukhoi T-50.

“The J-20 is reminiscent of the Russian MiG-1.42 both in terms of planform and also with regard to the rear fuselage configuration,” says Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies. “The most obvious difference is the greater forward fuselage shaping as the basis for low-observable characteristics, along with the different engine intake configuration. The MiG program was canceled by the Russian government around 1997,” he notes. However, the similarity to the MiG concept may suggest some collusion with the Russian aviation industry.

The J-20 made its first flight shortly before 1 p.m. Beijing time on Jan. 11. The flight ended three weeks of anticipation that began in late December when the new design started taxi tests.

The discussion about the program will now shift to the aircraft’s mission (fighter or, more likely, long-range strike), sensors (strike missions would require a high-resolution, long-range radar) and communications (which would demand high-speed data links and sophisticated integration).

Conventional radars have only one-half to one-third of the range of an AESA radar. Moreover, the movement of a conventional, mechanically scanned radar antenna provides a tell-tale glint of radio-frequency reflections to enemy aircraft with advanced radars. Such reflections undercut the effectiveness of a stealth airframe. China is known to be pursuing newer radar technology.

“It’s too early to tell the true status of the Chinese AESA program,” says a Washington-based intelligence official. “We’ve seen lots of press and air show information on the program, but that doesn’t automatically translate into a robust development or give us an accurate look at where [China] is as far as fielding one anytime soon.

“Like the [high-performance] engine, it’ll be a challenge to take the step from older radars to one designed for a fifth-generation fighter,” he says. “Again, though, the J-20 is just the first or second—depending on whom you believe—prototype in a very long development program.”

If the Chinese conduct a few months of flight tests and there are no more aircraft involved in the program, this might indicate that the J-20 is a proof-of-concept or technical demonstrator. If there are several aircraft eventually, a prototype program would be a more likely conclusion.

The flight occurred during a visit to China by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who says Chinese President Hu Jintao confirmed the event to him in talks. However, Gates still believes the U.S. will retain a preponderance of stealth fighters through 2025.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top