J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by siegecrossbow, Sep 4, 2017.

  1. latenlazy
    Offline

    latenlazy Major

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    3,331
    Likes Received:
    1,752
    Did you not read what I said? I wasn’t insulting anyone’s motives (certainly not yours, at least not until you decided to make our discussion about me). You asked me for reasons which might substantiate why we should believe some claims. I don’t think it’s outside the scope of a normal response to also talk generally on some observations for why people might reject those claims on weak basis despite available evidence.

    Tbh it came off as a bit standoffish and was kind of out of the blue, as if you were implying that nationality had something to do with our disagreements, when I really wasn’t trying to bring nationality into the discussion. I generally get the feeling that you’re reading a lot more into mine (and sometimes other) people’s comments than what’s there.

    The YF-22 demonstrator was 15 tonnes. As I said when I first brought this point up, you can only take that example so far, as we are talking about a demonstrator, but there are ways to get weight down with certain conditions and trade offs. As I keep saying, you don’t have to believe it. You asked for my thoughts and i shared them, I’m not trying to persuade you of anything. Take it or leave it,


    It takes quite a bit of pretension and self importance to assume this about others, especially when you asked *them* for their thoughts first.

    No. A few friends in think tank world here and there. Maybe you shouldn’t be so presumptuous about people you don’t know, hmm?

    Estimates which demonstrate my point (though I myself wouldn’t endorse them for serious analysis because of potential measurement errors, which is why I didn’t post them, and why I have generally maintained not making hard and sweeping conclusions)? Do you even care at all about the substantive discussion or is this purely about extending personal quarrels with me? I’ve consistently provided evidence when asked for it. On the other hand, you still haven’t contributed anything of substance. You’ve spent most of your time here trying to do the stuff you seem to feel fit to lecture others for (like “nitpick” and “blowholes”, except with little more than personal attacks) and being much less earnest about it to boot. So much for your own standards of “fairness”. Good job.
     
    #1381 latenlazy, Dec 7, 2017
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  2. manqiangrexue
    Online

    manqiangrexue Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    1,043
    Likes Received:
    3,201
    All this speculation is from that one statement that J-20 had gone where they had never flown before?? LOL

    Now from what I think I understand, J-20 might very well get there without being seen but coming back is a lil' trickier since those engines were not made for rear-aspect stealth... In any case, if their only source of speculation is that incredibly vague statement, then I'm not convinced at all. After all, doing something like this is very risky with minimal benefit. Then, if successful, dropping hints that it happened to alert others is just... not the personality of the CCP in my opinion.
     
  3. vincent
    Offline

    vincent Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    664
    Likes Received:
    911
    The reporter is a moron. It was the TU-154 reconnaissance
     
    N00813 and kwaigonegin like this.
  4. kwaigonegin
    Offline

    kwaigonegin Colonel

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    4,444
    J20 is not an all aspect stealth because it was not designed to be. It just has enough stealth to make it effective at A2A engagement mostly at stand off distances.

    If it had overflown SK on some sort of recon run, I'm 100% sure SK's air defence umbrella would've seen it.

    so yes you're right, reporter is a moron but unfortunately this is quite common when you have non-technically adept people report on military or more technical matters.
     
    N00813, Air Force Brat and by78 like this.
  5. ZeEa5KPul
    Offline

    ZeEa5KPul Just Hatched
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2017
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    5
    Is that a fact? If so, there ought to be mass firings at Chengdu if they thought it was acceptable to sink billions into a project they knew would result in a crippled fighter. Happily for the employees at Chengdu, they thought no such thing.

    The current iteration of the J-20 might have some problems with radar returns from the rear because the engines haven't been shaped and treated for RCS reduction. This is a problem that is being partially addressed by the WS-10 variant being tested, and will be fully addressed by the WS-15.

    The J-20 was designed to be, and shall be, an all-aspect air-superiority fighter.
    Let's not be so harsh, we all make mistakes.
     
    MastanKhan likes this.
  6. Tirdent
    Offline

    Tirdent New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2017
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    20
    That's a somewhat unflattering F-22 picture though - because its fuselage sides slope at a shallower angle and are more blended toward the rear than on the J-20, there is less contrast at the ventral edge which can give the impression that little waisting occurs in the rear fuselage.

    http://nationalinterest.org/files/s...ges/3862058955_6201aa7755_b.jpg?itok=ej5LzwlF

    While that's perhaps still a bit less pronounced than on the J-20, the F-22 rear fuselage seems to taper slightly more in the vertical plane:

    https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7004/6455302065_bc2fa492ac_b.jpg

    http://media.gjczz.com/images/97c39d9853adf84351ce82f1254c8d41.jpeg

    Doesn't seem like a huge source of error, all in all.

    The trough between the engines could work both ways - by reducing the depth of the structure in that area they may actually weaken it and require reinforcements (a case of "holes being heavy", similar to the weapons bays).
     
  7. Klon
    Offline

    Klon New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2017
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    19
    Here's a reminder of some things that have been said in this discussion.
    You: "That said, for the J-20’s weight to be exorbitantly greater relative to its peers though (such as 25 tonnes) would require believing either the PLAAF wasn’t aiming for a competitive fighter, or that they’re incapable of producing something that would fit the specs of a competitive fighter, or that they’re incompetent. We know from everything officials have said publicly and from documents like the program tender that the J-20 is supposed to be a competitive fighter to the F-22 though, and any three of those assumptions smacks of the sort of condescending biases and baseless prejudices that have led to underestimation before."
    This was the beginning of the motives thing. Even if you weren't explicitly talking about me, who was this about? Some unrelated bigots? Why bring it up if you weren't implying these are my motivations? Oh, I see it now. You set up a straw man bigot who shares my position. Good job.
    Me in response: "Alternatively, fighter development is an extremely complex undertaking and weight creep is commonly seen in programs around the globe. The 611 Institute doesn't have to be incompetent or incapable to be forced into trade-offs that could result in a weight greater than the 'baseline' 21 tonnes. I'm not saying that this actually happened, just that it is not something that can be obviously ruled out.
    I don't find imputation of negative motives, even without direct attribution, to be conducive to good faith discussion."
    Your response: "Some part of that is assuming Chinese aerospace isn't up to meet that challenge though, and if you delve into the "why" behind that question sometimes the reasons are grounded in some rather flippant or unpleasant beliefs. The PLAAF tendered for a fighter that could match the F-22, and the PLAAF is purported to be very happy with the J-20."
    What kind of standard of debate are you using when your go-to response is to try and cast doubt on the other person's integrity instead of addressing the argument? Okay, again you did it without directly referring to me, but who else could it be about? Bigots at the gates? Plus, you were totally wrong on the issue. Nobody would have objected to a statement like "maybe Lockheed was forced into some trade-offs on the F-22/F-35/whatever program, as it's a complex undertaking." That reads basically like a truism.
    This is all on page 130.
    After this, I told you in two additional posts that your standards of behavior are low before I responded in kind in the fourth. I stand by all my points. There isn't anything left to discuss.
     
  8. manqiangrexue
    Online

    manqiangrexue Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2014
    Messages:
    1,043
    Likes Received:
    3,201
    Although holes can be heavy, I would think that if this were that situation, the designers would have flushed out the trough for a fully flat bottom to get the weight savings all the while increasing internal volume available for upgrades. Might have some stealth or aerodynamic implications, though, for good or for bad.
     
    Equation likes this.
  9. kwaigonegin
    Offline

    kwaigonegin Colonel

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    4,444
    Your own statement agrees with my observation... the J20 is certainly NOT an all aspect stealth at this point in time which is what the subject is about in regards to the article. As you said RCS from rear will most likely be picked up. I believe SK's air defence net will see the blip.
    Perhaps if over flown over Myanmar or Sudan it might get lucky ... I'm merely saying it can and will be seen on radar if overflight over SK... .
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  10. ZeEa5KPul
    Offline

    ZeEa5KPul Just Hatched
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2017
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    5
    The bolded quote above I agree with. This I don't:
    Besides, "detecting" and "engaging" a stealth fighter are two very different propositions, as I'm sure you know. China's long-wave radars regularly pick up F-22's and F-35's -- so let's leave aside the snark about "getting lucky" over Myanmar or Sudan.
     
Loading...

Share This Page