J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

[Blitzo]

This position is fine (in bold) but that wasn't what you said initially that caused my disagreement. I interpreted your statement below that one outcome is more probable than the other.

Yes, what I said before was that it was probably a generic term -- i.e.: a generic term doesn't explicitly exclude the possibility that it might be MIL-STD-1773.

Of course, that part which you quoted from me is essentially what my position 1 in my last post referred to:

"we do not know what J-20 is using apart from the possibility that is is an "advanced optic HSDB", because I believe that the acronym HSDB in this case is not referring to any specific MIL-STD or product, but rather used as a general term"

 

[Brumby]

Yes, what I said before was that it was probably a generic term -- i.e.: a generic term doesn't explicitly exclude the possibility that it might be MIL-STD-1773.

Of course, that part which you quoted from me is essentially what my position 1 in my last post referred to:

"we do not know what J-20 is using apart from the possibility that is is an "advanced optic HSDB", because I believe that the acronym HSDB in this case is not referring to any specific MIL-STD or product, but rather used as a general term"

Is it we don't know sufficiently or one outcome is more probable than the other? Please decide.

 

[Blitzo]

Is it we don't know sufficiently or one outcome is more probable than the other? Please decide.

? I don't understand what is confusing to you, but I'll rewrite it in a different way:

It's possible that the HSDB acronym used might refer to MIL-STD-1773 or it might refer to any other alternatives, because we don't know sufficiently, yes.

However such a position inherently assumes that the "HSDB" acronym used by huitong's post in the first place is a generic term in the first place, and not a specific reference to MIL-STD-1773. Therefore, by accepting it is a generic term, it leaves open the possibility that the actual databus itself might be MIL-STD-1773 or it might be anything else altogether.

 

[Brumby]

[QUOTE="Bltizo, post: 405392, member: 4915]

It's possible that the HSDB acronym used might refer to MIL-STD-1773 or it might refer to any other alternatives, because we don't know sufficiently, yes.

However such a position inherently assumes that the "HSDB" acronym used by huitong's post in the first place is a generic term in the first place, and not a specific reference to MIL-STD-1773. Therefore, by accepting it is a generic term, it leaves open the possibility that the actual databus itself might be MIL-STD-1773 or it might be anything else altogether.[/QUOTE]
If this is your final position it is fine. As I said before, it wasn't your position initially.

 

[Blitzo]

If this is your final position it is fine. As I said before, it wasn't your position initially.

It was my position initially, because my position this whole time is that the HSDB term was used generically and not specifically. Being generic means it doesn't exclude the possibility that it might be a specific MIL-STD, but also doesn't favour it over being any other alternative standard or databus...

But whatever, if you want to see my initial posts in that way then you're free to do so.

 

[Brumby]

It was my position initially, because my position this whole time is that the HSDB term was used generically and not specifically. Being generic means it doesn't exclude the possibility that it might be a specific MIL-STD, but also doesn't favour it over being any other alternative standard or databus...

But whatever, if you want to see my initial posts in that way then you're free to do so.

OK. We are past injury time.

 

[Deino]

That seems unlikely.

Indeed 14 LRIP J-20As are much too many ... however Huitong meant altogether there are now 14 J-20s flying:

These would be then be the two demonstrators 2001 & 2002, the 6 true prototypes 2011-2017 and - if correct - 6 LRIP J-20A.

Deino

 

[siegecrossbow]

Indeed 14 LRIP J-20As are much too many ... however Huitong meant altogether there are now 14 J-20s flying:

These would be then be the two demonstrators 2001 & 2002, the 6 true prototypes 2011-2017 and - if correct - 6 LRIP J-20A.

Deino

Shouldn't 2001 and 2002 be mothballed by now? After all, there are a number of differences between them and the production version.

 

[Deino]

Shouldn't 2001 and 2002 be mothballed by now? After all, there are a number of differences between them and the production version.

Most likely yes ... and I'm sure they will become some sort of gate-guard or museum's exhibit !

But at least no. 2002 (aka now 2004) was still active in early 2016.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Indeed 14 LRIP J-20As are much too many ... however Huitong meant altogether there are now 14 J-20s flying:

These would be then be the two demonstrators 2001 & 2002, the 6 true prototypes 2011-2017 and - if correct - 6 LRIP J-20A.

Deino

I think he meant to say by the end of 2016??? We really only know of 9-10 flying prototypes???? 2102 is still a question mark, that would allow another 4 from the next batch by the end of the year?