J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

[Gloire_bb]

That actually leads to false confidence to one's input, one think one knows but actually doesn't. We are talking about accuracy down to millimeter (resolution to accurately represent object of centimeter which is related to the band), photogrammetric modeling isn't accurate enough. Only laser based 3D modeling can do the job, and we know that is not going to happen.

Stealth aircraft geometry is complex, but not that complex for the most part (or it'll literally be affected by dust, temperature, and so on).
In the end, we're mostly talking about relatively large parts of the aircraft following known radio wave reflection mechanics.

So while I agree about the risk of false confidence - I still think it's worth looking into. Especially when the alternative is just hints of all sorts.

 

[phrozenflame]

Just to point out that the 0.41sqm average RCS of J-20 is significantly larger than what J-20 was required to be which is less than 0.3sqm.

There are assumptions taken with regards to RAM, primarily no-ram. You're comparing that with required 0.3 sqm.

 

[latenlazy]

Have you read that post?

Yes. And no matter how many factors he includes in his model if the resolution of the model is too low it won’t be representative.

 

[phrozenflame]

Yes. And no matter how many factors he includes in his model if the resolution of the model is too low it won’t be representative.

and as it is said that's the case with f-35, it provides something. Do you have any links to more comprehensive public rcs analysis?

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

and as it is said that's the case with f-35, it provides something. Do you have any links to more comprehensive public rcs analysis?

That there's nothing better available in the public domain doesn't imply that what your friend did has any value.

Furthermore, criticisms of resolution or level of detail or RAM modeling (accurate no-RAM models do have a lot of value) miss the forest for the trees. The model gets macroscopic, highly visible details like where the ventral strakes attach to the body wrong, so why should anyone expect that the modeler got the fine details correct when he gets something as blatantly obvious as this wrong?

Simply put, your friend's model doesn't depict a J-20, therefore it has no value to us.

 

[phrozenflame]

That there's nothing better available in the public domain doesn't imply that what your friend did has any value.

Furthermore, criticisms of resolution or level of detail or RAM modeling (accurate no-RAM models do have a lot of value) miss the forest for the trees. The model gets macroscopic, highly visible details like where the ventral strakes attach to the body wrong, so why should anyone expect that the modeler got the fine details correct when he gets something as blatantly obvious as this wrong?

Simply put, your friend's model doesn't depict a J-20, therefore it has no value to us.

It very much implies that it has value when nothing better is available. The level of resolution and RAM modeling applies to all the models. So the comparison remains apple to apple/orange to orange. Until something better comes along, this will have inherent value.

RAM detailing will never be available in the public domain. You could actually point out the differences 1 by 1 in an organized formatted manner in the model and we could request them to make an update, that would be constructive.

Also, he isn't really a friend, I found his blog to be very informative and we exchanged messages.

 

[latenlazy]

It very much implies that it has value when nothing better is available. The level of resolution and RAM modeling applies to all the models. So the comparison remains apple to apple/orange to orange. Until something better comes along, this will have inherent value.

RAM detailing will never be available in the public domain. You could actually point out the differences 1 by 1 in an organized formatted manner in the model and we could request them to make an update, that would be constructive.

Also, he isn't really a friend, I found his blog to be very informative and we exchanged messages.

Sometimes no facts are better than inaccurate facts.

 

[phrozenflame]

Sometimes no facts are better than inaccurate facts.

Accuracy is a continuum. Also, now it seems that a few here have the pursuit to not find the facts but to hide and blur them.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

Accuracy is a continuum. Also, now it seems that a few here have the pursuit to not find the facts but to hide and blur them.

You are not in a position to find any facts about the J-20, neither is he. It seems I need to put this impolitely - the modeler is too incompetent to model the J-20 correctly at even the coarsest macroscopic level and you are too thick to understand that.

 

[Maikeru]

You are not in a position to find any facts about the J-20, neither is he. It seems I need to put this impolitely - the modeler is too incompetent to model the J-20 correctly at even the coarsest macroscopic level and you are too thick to understand that.

Really, there's no need to hide behind euphemism and artifice to save someone's feelings. Tell us what you really think!