by78
General
Do you have the original version available on your account?
The SDF 2048 pixel limit on picture size needs to die, it's not like anyone is still using dial-up.
Yes I do. Please for the original version.
J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Yes I do. Please for the original version.
The build quality of J-10s and J-20s are super impressive. Some inverted images to make the edges and surfaces more obvious.
The J-20 much smoother. Just compare it with a J-11 and you can see.
J-16 build quality/workmanship is also pretty impressive
How different is the workmanship compared to Russian Flankers?
Why does the J-11 not have the same build quality as the J-10? Have there been any improvements on them in later versions?
J-16 build quality/workmanship is also pretty impressive
I think the J-16's surfaces are slightly better than the older J-11s and Su-30s because SAC have replaced a lot of the tooling and machinery and from upgrades to the materials of some parts of the airframe itself, new machinery and tooling have replaced older ones entirely. But this is also quite true for Russia's modern flankers since upgrading most of the airframe to new materials. They also have a similar surface smoothness to the Su-57.
I'd say the worksmanship on modern CAC products (J-10C and J-20) are clearly superior to the most modern Russian fighter Su-57. J-10A and J-16 surfaces are about the same level as modern Russian flankers and Su-57. I think CAC has benefited from J-20 manufacturing and the demand on surface tolerances. The Russians have traditionally not focused effort on this area or paid that much emphasis on material stealth despite Su-57 finally clearly being an effort in producing a design with geometric and material stealth in mind (surface quality, paint, materials etc). At least they make this claim.
J-16 is SAC's best effort so far and it's "tier 2" level if you will. The F-35 surface finish are the best of the bunch with J-20 about the same level as the F-22s if you look at close ups. I think you reach a point of diminishing returns when you hit the F-22/J-20 level and the F-35's extra attention is just US MIC going that extra step and developing those tools and skills. A worthwhile thing for future considerations. With SAC's FC-31 prototypes, you can see the surface finishing being poorer. Not just the V1 with black paint. It's unfair to count the first prototype but even some photos and videos of V2 show a surface finish around the J-16 level. I'm sure they'll upgrade this to J-20 levels for production because they're both AVIC products for the same customer - PLA.
Personally I think the Russian approach is kind of the right approach but I also think the Su-57 doesn't measure up in these traditional stealth requirements, so already there's less incentive to perform cost prohibitive tasks if it's already got partially exposed fan blades etc. You definitely want to develop these technologies but when it comes to a more trivial area like surface finishing, the J-16/Su-57 level is probably enough if everything else is equal. The aim is to reduce your RCS beyond that inflection point if you look at detection ranges with RCS curves. Pretty confident the Su-57 reduces RCS more than enough especially with internal bays. So it does the job. US and China have just gone all the way. Spending a lot more resources to get the jump from Su-57 level to J-20/F-22 level may not be worth it. There are other things to consider - actual materials, overall geometry, engine blades, bulges, electronic signatures etc etc.
Last edited:
J-16 and recent Flanker models such as Su-35 and Su-30SM do seem about the same in terms of fit and finish, but the Su-57 is way better thanks to its large-scale use of composites. How it compares to the J-20 is impossible to confidently assess, as there are no high-quality photos of both in comparable state of surface coating. Even J-20s in yellow primer have displayed quite a lot of RAM to date, at the same time we have not yet seen a Su-57 with more than partial RAM application.
The early J-20 demonstrators would offer a good point of comparison in this regard, but being painted matt black makes it difficult in the extreme to judge their surface finish.
The early J-20 demonstrators would offer a good point of comparison in this regard, but being painted matt black makes it difficult in the extreme to judge their surface finish.
So is this the IFR probe or a gun port?Re-posting a lost image with beautiful details.
Definitely IFR port. There was a blurred video released in 2019 showing IFR probe in the same area.
by78
General
I don't think it's a good idea to put a bulky gun assembly right next to the cockpit and then has all that obstruction in its line-of-sight. It's long been known that it's an IFR probe.
- Status