J-20... The New Generation Fighter II

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by Asymptote, Jan 10, 2011.

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

    Asymptote Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Post all you info and discussion on the J-20 here...And knock off the off-topic junk. Stay on topic.!! Enjoy the discussion!!

    Here's a link back to the old thread I'll move some of the post from the last few days to this thread .

    http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/j-20-new-generation-fighter-4260.html


    bd popeye super moderator
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



    Let's just put it this way, the J-20 looks like a mock-up. It has none of the finishes of a proper flyable prototype plane. If you look at J-10, J-11B, J-10B, F-35 and PAK-FA's prototype airframes, they are usually in yellow colour (or light green in F-35's case) with lots of rivets, trims, and details on the airframes. The J-20 on the other hand looks to me like a one piece fiberglass mock up that's not really flyable.




    Yep, the ventral fins, the engines, seems weak and unresolved, and we have NO IDEA what's the current software package/sensor package on-board the J-20 (or latest J-11B/J-10) or how capable they are compare to the western counterparts.



    Talk about ventral fins, that's another detail that reminds me of Mig 1.42/1.44. Infact, the whole plane practically resembles Mig 1.42/1.44 if not for the fact it has a pair of side engine air intacts. Another detail I notice is the canted "all moving tailplane" which is also another signature of Mig 1.42/1.44.






    Same reason as I stated above, it looks like a fiberglass mock up, maybe its flyable, it just felt more or less like the Sukoi Su-47 technical demonstrator to me, with a lot less resolved details.




    More or less, the Russian were exploring the stealth concept so they sort of "squashed" the plane a little and canted the vertical stabilizers a bit to give it a better radar shaping, but I think back then the Russians were trying to make their ambitious "plasma stealth" system to work, so airframe radar cross section shaping wasn't high on the Priority.





    That's the question I am also asking - what cuase the Russians to throw away the Mig 1.42/1.44 in the first place? From the photos, all I can gather is that it could be the canard configuration and their plasma stealth tech. The canard for whatever the reason is probably not very stealthy airframe design, and their plasma steath tech probably failed so they eventually opted to throw the whole airframe design away and opted to copy the more conventional F-22/F-23 design.

    On a side note, I thought canards are great for frontal stealth.



    Perhaps. I don't know, I am still curious if canard was the problem.


    I am not hoping anything, I am just curious at the development, seeing all other 4th and 5th generation fighter programs taken place in the past, its interesting to see and compare the concept and results, and the timeline of development.
     
    #1 Asymptote, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 11, 2011
  2. Asymptote
    Offline

    Asymptote Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter

    I guess that's expected. It looks similar to the Flanker, but at the same time it's a mix of F-22/F-23.
    The F-22 itself looks like it was based on the F-15 airframe as if they just took a F-15 and canted the shape all around, extended the LEX and chines a bit.
     
    #2 Asymptote, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  3. Asymptote
    Offline

    Asymptote Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter


    You guys don't find it odd that J-20's body is as smooth as silk? Its so unlike any production prototype fighters I have seen in the past.
     
  4. rhino123
    Offline

    rhino123 Pencil Pusher
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    179
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter

    So far there are no photos that are showing us close enough shots and angles that would show rivets...

    And even if there is less number of plates and rivets used, there might be plenty of explanation that the J-20's body was 'smooth'... one of them being design. They might have designed the aircraft with large and wide composite material, so there are essentially lesser joints and so lesser gaps and rivets.

    As for the black colours vs normal production colour... black colour might be a good idea for stealth aircraft (look at Y-23, B-2, F-117). And there is also chances that the RAM coating that the Chinese have apply to their aircraft are black in colour... afterall it is just a colour.

    Finally, a simple explanation of the different in the prototype of J-20 as compared to previous production prototype, might be because the chinese are doing a better job? They are getting better, or there will be lesser changes expected in this prototype to manufacturing lot.
     
  5. nameless
    Offline

    nameless Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter

    So its a just one piece fiberglass mock up?

    J10, Su27 and many other aircraft all have ventral fins, its dishonest to somehow claim that Mig 1.42 was the first or the only one.
    And the mig 1.42 does not have an "all moving tailplane" just a conventional tail that is slightly canted. J20's tail is much more similar to FAK-FA and F117. Again Mig 1.42 was not the first to have canted tail.

    IMO They ran out of money so they has to rely on the stealthified Su27 design.
     
    #5 nameless, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 10, 2011
  6. Asymptote
    Offline

    Asymptote Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter


    Its not just the Russians, the Americans, the Europeans, practically everyone goes through the same process of aircraft design (or any type of design - its standard design process / evolution). The americans call it "lineage", where a new product is the result of hundreds of prototypes, mock ups and aggregation of previous generation's design. The F-22 itself was the result of F-119/B-2 stealth tech, with decades of experiences designing various previous generation fighters that finally came to fruition in F-22. The F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, are all part of that lineage. (And the extent to which american explore the airframe design + their XF series of experimental airframes). And even when they finally nail down the specification, they still put up a competitive tendering process, with Lockheed Martin/Boeing pitted against Northrop/McDonnell Douglas - with 2 VERY different designs, with both designs very mature and production capable.

    The J-20 on the other hand, seems to be evoluted out of J-10 and J-11B, with both platform still very new and "shaky" (with lots of kinks and problems still needs to be work through / find out after decade of use).

    If you look at the development of F-22, it was build upon decades of previous generation design (F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18) it took almost 25 years from beginning of 1980's ATX program until it enter service in 2005, with several concurrent developments such as F-117/B-2 that aided to its design in the final product.

    The Russian pretty much were the same, they developed from decades of previous generation experience, from Mig-29/Su-27/Su-30/Su-35/Mig-35/ Su-37 until they begin the Mig 1.42/1.44, and the horizontal development of Su-47 (composite body, radical airframe) until they finally settle on the PAK-FA.

    Design just doesn't come about suddenly, it has to be built on SOLID GROUND.
     
    #6 Asymptote, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  7. Quickie
    Offline

    Quickie Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    1,733
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter

    My opinion is the T-50 is not as stealthy as the F-22 and J-20. What measure they're going to take to hide the engine blades without hindering the engine performance? Btw, the nose shaping of the T-50 is similar to F-35 which is said to be less steathier than the F-22. See, I can easily use the words "is a copy of" just to flame, but I didn't.

    As for the future changes to the J-20, I don't see much changes except for maybe the nozzles and the ventral fins.
     
    #7 Quickie, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  8. rhino123
    Offline

    rhino123 Pencil Pusher
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    179
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter

    From your explanation, then no other nations in the world, other than those with aircraft design and building should be allowed to design 5th generation aircraft.

    By the way, the Chinese do have a long history in building aircraft (although in the past, many are copies and modified Russian fighters) such as J-6, J-7, J-8, J-10 and J-11). US and Russian might had a harder start as compared to the Chinese. They designed their aircraft from scrap and with nothing to fall back on or check. The Chinese started their design at a later stage, saw what others had done, reverse engineered some of their older products, learn from what others had failed and so the entire process might be faster.

    Look at the Japanese's automobile industry. During the 60s, they are no where as good as the Europeans who have decades of experience in automobile design and creation. And the Japanese copied many of the design with modification... and now? We are seeing Japanese cars booming in almost any markets.

    So a latecomers might not necessary means to fall flat on his face.
     
  9. latenlazy
    Online

    latenlazy Colonel

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,081
    Likes Received:
    3,145
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter

    Last I checked the B-2 and F-117 were production designs, as were the teen series fighters. They weren't demonstration aircraft meant to fill a gap in the production process, so I don't see how that supports your argument that the J-20 is a demonstration aircraft.

    The competition aspect between airframes for the US has always been a marketing gimmick to aid the exportability of new designs, just like with the Russians. Who's to say China has to follow the same model? The only exception to this has been the x-projects and independently funded projects by different defence firms.

    Which problems do the J-10 and J-11B need worked out? Why the J-11B when it's just an improved variant (or copy) of the Su-27?
    I agree with you that designs don't come suddenly and have to be built upon, but who's to say that one country has to follow the same design timeline and process of another country? Who's to say that countries catching up need to go through the same process as countries that are already ahead?

    You're basic argument is "This thing can't fly because China hasn't done what the US and Russia have". That's not a very good argument I'm afraid.
     
    #9 latenlazy, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  10. kyanges
    Offline

    kyanges Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    710
    Likes Received:
    106
    Re: J-20... The New Generation Fighter

    Asymptote, I'm sure it's not some kind of empty fiber-glass shell that can't fly, but I won't argue the point. I'll only suggest that we all wait for higher quality, close-up images to appear, because honestly, with the quality of images that have been released so far, no rivets or panels would be visible anyway...

    As for being a technology demonstrator, I honestly wouldn't mind if it simply meant that the the real production J-20 would be more compact and refined or something.
     
    #10 kyanges, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page