J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by Deino, Apr 17, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. newguy02
    Offline

    newguy02 Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    332
    I think 2101 will probably fly just after New Years Day as it seems unlikely to be directly on Jan.1 and since this is probably the first production aircraft, CAC is probably a bit more cautious than for other prototypes.
     
    GreenestGDP and Equation like this.
  2. Brainsuker
    Offline

    Brainsuker New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2013
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    44
    the 2101 means... is it a new J-21? or still J-20?
     
  3. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,543
    Likes Received:
    16,407
    2101 is only the serial number... the X in 2X0Y could refer to the first batch of production J-20s (in this case being the first LRIP batch), and the Y refers to the aircraft place within the batch.

    The plane is still called J-20.
     
    Equation likes this.
  4. Deino
    Offline

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,920
    Likes Received:
    25,803
    Any news today ?? ... maybe a maiden flight ??
     
  5. Ultra
    Offline

    Ultra Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    853
    Likes Received:
    1,286
    If I am not mistaken, the very best human pilot can withstand is 12g for only a few seconds, and 9g for a very short period or they will simply black-out. That's after years of very intensive training. Missiles on the other hand can go 20g+ regularly and more than 100g+ recorded for some older missiles.

    Its really down to physiology and physics - as we found newer and stronger materials, couple with better and superior construction / manufacturing methods, and smarter and better A.I. for the CPU, better sensors - the missiles will in the near future out-maneuver human pilot every single time.

    Super maneuverability will become a useless feature in the future combat aircraft.


    Trends in Air-to-Air Combat: Implications for Future Air Superiority

    In this study, Dr. John Stillion conducts a historical analysis of air-to-air combat, drawing on a database of over 1,450 air-to-air victories from multiple conflicts from 1965 to the present. Using this data, Stillion assesses how advances in sensor, weapons, and communication technologies have changed air combat and the implications of these trends for future combat aircraft designs and operational concepts. Stillion concludes that these advances may have fundamentally transformed the nature of air combat. This transformation may be steadily reducing the utility of some attributes traditionally associated with fighter aircraft (e.g., extreme speed and maneuverability) while increasing the value of attributes not usually associated with fighter aircraft (e.g., sensor and weapon payload as well as range). As a result, an effective sixth-generation “fighter” may look similar to a future “bomber” and may even be a modified version of a bomber airframe or the same aircraft with its payload optimized for the air-to-air mission, Stillion argues. If this is correct, then the United States may be in a position to save tens of billions of dollars in nonrecurring development costs by combining Air Force and Navy future fighter development programs with each service’s long range ISR/strike programs.

    http://issuu.com/csbaonline/docs/csba6110_air_to_air_report?e=15123547/11484803



    Breaking Defense quotes a defense industry insider who thinks that Stillion’s analysis is spot on:

    Why invest in the sixth generation fighter to create a ‘super F-22′? Such an aircraft will only offer marginal improvements over the F-22 at great cost. But it will still be fairly short-ranged (at least considering the operational distances in the Pacific and other theaters). Wouldn’t it be better instead to focus on a bigger aircraft?

    The insider could envision a future fleet of around 400 bomber-like multi-role aircraft constituting the core of America’s airpower in the 21st century: “What I find most compelling is the idea that we could develop a single, large, long-range, big payload, stealthy aircraft that would comprise the future United States Air Force’s combat arm.”


    Granted, human pilots will still have the insights and abstract problem solving skills over a cold lump of metals, but with AESA radars, more effective BVR missiles, an increasingly networked battlespace, HOBS missiles and high-end sensor fusion now a reality, dogfight may finally become a relic of the past, along with super maneuverability.
     
    Equation and siegecrossbow like this.
  6. latenlazy
    Offline

    latenlazy Colonel

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,289
    Likes Received:
    3,483
    The problem with relying on superior sensors is that they are contingent variables in a battlefield, and not definitive ones. Your adversary can interfere and constrain with your ability to detect and see, but no technology yet exists that can interfere and constrain your ability to maneuver.
     
  7. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,543
    Likes Received:
    16,407
    What is written there is a vision of future air to air combat, and certain elements may or may not come .
     
    Equation likes this.
  8. thunderchief
    Offline

    thunderchief Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Another (actually same but better resolution) pic of 2101, stolen from another forum . Do my old eyes deceive me, or those wheelZ look green ? :D

    [​IMG]
     
  9. mzyw
    Offline

    mzyw Junior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Messages:
    137
    Likes Received:
    23
    From the new pics I gathered there is no sensory devices in the air intake bump, given the simple fact it is yellow in colour. What do u guys think?
     
  10. plawolf
    Offline

    plawolf Brigadier

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,127
    Likes Received:
    12,546
    I have to agree. The yellow primer coloured plane, while not giving much insight into what parts are composite (unless the entire surface area are all composites), does give useful insight into where the antennas are.

    The radome obviously, and also along the top of the vertical tails, tail stings and wing roots.

    What is harder to see definitively, but which I think I can just make out, are grey patches along the leading edge of the main wing, and fixed lower fins.

    The lower fines might just be lighting, but I'm fairly confident I can see grey on the leading edge of the wings, indicating the presence of possible L-band radar.

    Hardly surprising given that the J10C, which in my view is based on J10 test beds used to help with the J20 avionics development work, also sports such leading edge grey patches.

    Really wish we had better resolution pictures of the primer aircraft. Although given how much I was able to gleam from just that grainy image, it's understandable why the higher quality shots of it are being held back.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page