J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
The bumps (position trackers) basically confirm that helmet is indeed a helmet mounted disolad.
A pretty substantial development, that will increase the effectiveness of PL-10 as well as the ability of the pilot to interpret symbology when looking away from the HUD. Not to mention the possibility of J-20s EOPDS being used in a similar fashion to F-35s EODAS to "see through the cockpit".
At this point, every major visually identifiable subsystem that we expected from J-20 has basically been confirmed, sans the presence of a gun. Of course it would also be nice to see a live firing of a missile from the internal weapons bay and maybe a shot of the cockpit display to confirm it is using the large panoramic display, but that's quibvling.
A pretty substantial development, that will increase the effectiveness of PL-10 as well as the ability of the pilot to interpret symbology when looking away from the HUD. Not to mention the possibility of J-20s EOPDS being used in a similar fashion to F-35s EODAS to "see through the cockpit".
At this point, every major visually identifiable subsystem that we expected from J-20 has basically been confirmed, sans the presence of a gun. Of course it would also be nice to see a live firing of a missile from the internal weapons bay and maybe a shot of the cockpit display to confirm it is using the large panoramic display, but that's quibvling.
Next step will be combat patrol.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
That is a sweet looking HMD! I wish they would lift the sunshades to let us have a good look at the display optics.
From first impression, it looks like they split the display and electronics between the traditional forehead position, and the ear/cheek pieces, which are much more prominent than other helement designs.
So the display unit might be mounted in front of the forehead, with hue lenses attached to the cheek piece, or vice versa.
Now they just need to general issue this to J10 and J11/16s.
From first impression, it looks like they split the display and electronics between the traditional forehead position, and the ear/cheek pieces, which are much more prominent than other helement designs.
So the display unit might be mounted in front of the forehead, with hue lenses attached to the cheek piece, or vice versa.
Now they just need to general issue this to J10 and J11/16s.
vesicles
Colonel
Man! This helmet reminds me of the helmets worn by the technicians on the Death Star.
I found these two photos. Seems to be the helmet in display.
The positions of bumps match.
On the side, one information card says "AR Eye Glasses", the other says "VR display".
There seems to be two layers of glasses. The outer layer could be just protection like sun glass. The inner layer should be the projection screen of any digital images.
The projection system (the glasses) seem to match another model from Zhuhai airshow
It is interesting that I can not figure out how the image is projected onto the screen.
[Edit], just find out the projector lenses just in front of the forehead.
The positions of bumps match.
On the side, one information card says "AR Eye Glasses", the other says "VR display".
There seems to be two layers of glasses. The outer layer could be just protection like sun glass. The inner layer should be the projection screen of any digital images.
The projection system (the glasses) seem to match another model from Zhuhai airshow
It is interesting that I can not figure out how the image is projected onto the screen.
[Edit], just find out the projector lenses just in front of the forehead.
Last edited:
Technically there is nothing different between ordinary "projection of data to the helmet" and "see through the cockpit". The difference is "computer generated symbols" vs. "camera fed live image". So the infrastructure is already there on J-20. However there may be difference between the technical solutions.
I heard that F-35's approach is to have multiple camera feeds that will be stitched together by computer, then project to the screen. That demand a huge computing capacity to minimize the delay (something like HD video at 100Hz frame rate). It was said (some time ago) to be unsatisfactory, I don't know the latest development.
However, there may be another simpler approach IMO, that is to use only one camera mounted on a servo platform, the camera will be steered to the desired direction by the head movement. The camera's FOV should match human eyes, so the projected image on the screen will match perfectly to reality. This approach will remove the demand of live image stitching, an unnecessary request for CPU power. The only possible delay is the servo motors response time which is neglectable (better than SW stitching, similar to digital shutter delay and mechanical shutter in a DLSR). Chinese designers may go this simple way just like they choose their rotation rack for the side weapon bay.
Well, the only reason we had even considered the possibility of J-20 having a similar "look through the floor" capability to the F-35 is because the J-20 has six EO PDS apertures in similar locations to the F-35.
At the minimum, they were thought to be a 360 degree MAWS system. At the other side of the spectrum, it was thought it could be similar to F-35's EODAS, with the ability to track many targets at 360 degrees and relay that information to the J-20's pilot if they had an HMD, all while providing the ability to provide an optical "hologram" to the HMD to allow the pilot to see through the floor all 360 degrees around the aircraft.
What you describe using a camera mounted on a rotating platform would be one way to do that role if one really wanted it, but obviously J-20 doesn't have any such platform apart from its under nose EO IRST and that platform almost certainly lacks the ability to track the full ventral hemisphere it is located on.
If J-20 didn't have those six EO PDS apertures around its airframe, then we wouldn't even be considering it to have a "see through the floor" capability in the first place.
I agree with the assessment of the EO PDS apertures.
However, just for theoretic discussion. When you said full ventral hemisphere, did you mean the rear end being blocked by the housing? Any ways, the "see through" even on F-35 can not be realistically 360 degrees full sphere, isn't it? The apertures or rotating cameras may be abled to do so, but the pilot (controlling input by head) can not turn his head 180 degrees backward or more than 90 degrees downward. That means the body limit of the pilot set in before the limit of the devices.
The reason that I proposed this idea is after I watched DJI's Mavic camera mount.
When I said full ventral hemisphere, obviously the pilot would be unable to practically look directly behind him, however I do not think the arrangement of F-35 or J-20 EOIRSTs would allow their sensors to full rotate down perpendicular to the ground (90 degrees downward) either. In fact I'm not even sure if the F-35's EOTS has any ability to rotate/swivel in the vertical plane, though I believe it should be able to do a 360 degree rotation in the horizontal plane.
Anyway this is all tangential.
- Status