J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread IV (Closed to posting)

[thunderchief]

2. Assuming that WS-10A produces 132kN, and is reliable enough to be in service with the J-11B, I don't see an AL-31 variant that is both in service and provides significantly more thrust to merit using that instead of WS-10A. AL-31FM2 with 145kN would be a good candidate but it's still in testing in Russia so I really don't believe that that's what's in the Chinese machine.

At some point in time J-20 will certainly fly with Chinese engine, WS-10A being most likely candidate . But at this moment there are more pressing matters like establishing control laws for FBW , testing avionics and latter weapons integration , measuring RCS and IR signature from various angles etc ... Basically , when we see first weapons test-fired from J-20 then we will know that IOC is near . That will be a good time to pay attention to engines .

 

[richardparker07]

Re: New JF-17/FC-1 Fighter Aircraft thread!!!

J-20 prototype serial 2011 coming in for landing after its maiden flight, Chengdu, March 1, 2014

 

[Jeff Head]

We are getting more and more really good pics of the J-20. I am looking forward to the day when we get some really good, high-res pics of the J-20 in the air from wingmen or chase aircraft like these of the F-22.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Check out that flickr site for a lot more.

I have one for the J-20 too...but no really good in flight pics yet.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[kyanges]

Whenever images that were posted pages ago, often in higher quality, start being reposted over and over again, sometimes in lower quality, it's like the thread is in withdrawal and needs its picture fix.

 

[by78]

Whenever images that were posted pages ago, often in higher quality, start being reposted over and over again, sometimes in lower quality, it's like the thread is in withdrawal and needs its picture fix.

Here's your daily fix (all new):

1280x960

1600x1329

 

[Verum]

Two things I never really came around....

The first is reinforcement in the canopy. There wasn't one in the first prototype, but now there is. The only plane in service without one is the F-22. Is it really that hard to make one without an actual piece of metal reinforcement?

The second one is the thrust vectoring plates. For a such high caliber plane like J20, adding two thrust vectoring plates shouldn't be that hard. After all, it's just two titanium/tungsten based metal plates with another million lines of software codes. It doesn't just add maneuverability but also increase stealth. Even if it's not thrust vectored. at least adding the plates would improve stealth and concentrate the exhaust to increase thrust.
Any metallurgy expert in here? Would the vectoring plates be hard to produce?

 

[manqiangrexue]

Two things I never really came around....

The first is reinforcement in the canopy. There wasn't one in the first prototype, but now there is. The only plane in service without one is the F-22. Is it really that hard to make one without an actual piece of metal reinforcement?

The second one is the thrust vectoring plates. For a such high caliber plane like J20, adding two thrust vectoring plates shouldn't be that hard. After all, it's just two titanium/tungsten based metal plates with another million lines of software codes. It doesn't just add maneuverability but also increase stealth. Even if it's not thrust vectored. at least adding the plates would improve stealth and concentrate the exhaust to increase thrust.
Any metallurgy expert in here? Would the vectoring plates be hard to produce?

I think adding those plates, with thrust vectoring force the plane to be heavier. Would it increase maneuverability? Not certain that it has too many advantages to a delta-canard. Most importantly, I think those plates decrease thrust, by about 15% as they are constricting a round engine outlet to a small, rectangular exit. Not sure that's totally right but that's as far as I know. In any case, those plates must have some serious draw-backs as they are not too difficult to make but every stealth fighter designed after the F-22 has decided to forgo them in favor of round nozzles.

 

[Quickie]

If you look at the above pictures of the 2011 and 2001, the ventral tail fins of the 2011 is now entirely blocking the engine nozzles, unlike nozzles of the 2001 which are partially seen. I remember commenting about the fins serving the purpose of blocking the nozzles and improving stealth. Now it seems the blocking is even more complete.

 

[chuck731]

Two things I never really came around....

The first is reinforcement in the canopy. There wasn't one in the first prototype, but now there is. The only plane in service without one is the F-22. Is it really that hard to make one without an actual piece of metal reinforcement?

The second one is the thrust vectoring plates. For a such high caliber plane like J20, adding two thrust vectoring plates shouldn't be that hard. After all, it's just two titanium/tungsten based metal plates with another million lines of software codes. It doesn't just add maneuverability but also increase stealth. Even if it's not thrust vectored. at least adding the plates would improve stealth and concentrate the exhaust to increase thrust.
Any metallurgy expert in here? Would the vectoring plates be hard to produce?

The reinforcement arch in J-20 canopy is probably composite similar to the one in F-35, not metal. 2. F-22 is not the only plane in service without one. F-16 also has none. 3. The issue is not how hard it is to make a canopy without a support arch. It is how much thinner and thus lighter you can make the canopy if you gave it a support arch.

If J-20 is intended to use a distributed aperature electro-optical system similar to those on the F-35, then pilot visibility out of cockpit canopy becomes less important as the pilot would rely mainly on images taken by cameras around the plane and projected into the pilot's visor. So in this case it is well worthwhile to sacrafice a little canopy visibility to make the canopy much stronger and yet lighter by adding a reinforcement arch like those in the 2011 and F-35.

Despite the howl of protest that would certainly come from some poeple on this forum, the weight, cost, and developmental problems of the thrust vectoring nozzle on the F-22 is now regarded as not really worthwhile because it contributes little to how the USAF now envision a supercruising stealth fighter would be used. So I am not sure there is really enough ground to add thrust deflectors to the J-20 even if it is easy to do.

 

[davidwangqi]

It's definitely the major reason they keep fins.

If you look at the above pictures of the 2011 and 2001, the ventral tail fins of the 2011 is now entirely blocking the engine nozzles, unlike nozzles of the 2001 which are partially seen. I remember commenting about the fins serving the purpose of blocking the nozzles and improving stealth. Now it seems the blocking is even more complete.