J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI


Status
Not open for further replies.

Figaro

Junior Member
Registered Member
There's no way PLAAF is moronic enough to fly J-20 anywhere near any borders (reminds me of that stupid claim months back about J-20 flying through Korea :rolleyes:)
They won't give the Indians a chance to take a free look and evaluation of J-20 during peacetime. If J-20 is near Indian borders, it'll there to drop and fire ordinance. Any less than that, it's far within Chinese borders. PLAAF has Su-35 for the tit-for-tat border mock fighting if it ever escalates to that level with the Indians.
The Indians just feel that they are the center of attention for all PLA operations ... which basically amounts to exaggerated self-importance. They think that their air force is of such high priority that the Chinese would send J-20s to the border. Classic self delusion.
 

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
Serendipitously, I just found a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from pb19980515 on J-20's weight.
You shouldn't google translate the post directly. What pb tried to convey was that he's afraid that the 18 metric ton data wasn't "patriotic" enough for CAC fans and that hard core fanboys might smear him.
 

Totoro

Captain
VIP Professional
If one takes empty weight of various planes and divides it with end of the nosecone to end of muzzle lengths of those planes, one gets this:

F-111: 1.04
Su-27: 0.816
F-15c: 0.7
F-15e: 0.786
F-22: 1.165
F-35a: 0.946

Since F-22 and F-22 feature quite a bit of overhang of their tail surface behind the engine nozzles, here are half way values (half way between end of nozzle and end of tails) for them as well, perhaps better representtive of weight distribution:
F-22: 1.1
F-35a: 0.9

Also, sizing J-20 to its missiles, a known value, I get 19.75 meters from tip of nosecone to end of nozzles.

Which planes are most likely for comparison?
F-111: Not terribly relevant role and tech wise, but it does have a weapons bay
Su-27: No air to ground, No long airframe life, no stealth. Does carry all its fuel internally.
F-15c: Not really relevant.
F-15e: A bit more relevant in the sense that we see what sort of weight increase does strengthened airframe and longer airframe life infer.
F-22: Quite a bit relevant. Very long airframe life, full-on stealth, same role, perhaps even a bit less multirole than J20. Materials wise, weight savings may not be quite on par with J20
F-35: Quite a bit relevant. Very long airframe life, possibly similar stealth requirements to J20. Materials should be similar. A bit more oriented towards multirole.

J20 empty weight using other planes' ratios:
20.5 tons if F111
16.1 tons if Su27
15.5 tons if F15E
21.7 tons if F22
17.8 tons if F35

So what characteristics is J20 likely to have?
Long airframe life, as F35 and F22?
Airframe stressed for hauling lots of underwing ordenance, like F35?
Airframe optimized for forward sphere stealth and narrower bandwidth stealth, like F35?
Airframe optimized for broader bandwidth stealth, like F22?

If J20 is engineered to last ~5 thousand hours, not haul a lot of weight under its wings (though we did see it with four huge tanks! Something F22 never did. But maybe it was an extreme stress test? Remains to be seen how often we'll get photos of J20 with four tank configuration), if it's designed for X band stealth, primarely from frontal hemisphere...

Then it's plausible serial grade J-20 weigh 17-18 tons empty.

If J20 is engeered to last 10 or more thousand flight hours, regularly haul a few tons under its wings, if it's designed for broader band stealth (though still only frontal hemisphere)...

Then it's plausible serial J-20 weigh 20-22 tons empty.
 

by78

Brigadier
Serendipitously, I just found a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from pb19980515 on J-20's weight.
For future reference, instead of providing a machine translation, could you copy-and-paste the original text here? Even better, also make a screen capture of the text and post it here. There are quite a few of us here who can translate Chinese and are well versed in the slangs and esoteric jargons prevalent in Chinese forums; we'd be happy to do the translating. The reason a screen capture is preferable is because very often access to Chinese forums are interrupted – as of now, cjdby.net is not accessible – and moreover, the post in question might disappear for a variety of reasons.
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
You shouldn't google translate the post directly. What pb tried to convey was that he's afraid that the 18 metric ton data wasn't "patriotic" enough for CAC fans and that hard core fanboys might smear him.
For future reference, instead of providing a machine translation, could you copy-and-paste the original text here? Even better, also make a screen capture of the text and post it here. There are quite a few of us here who can translate Chinese and are well versed in the slangs and esoteric jargons prevalent in Chinese forums; we'd be happy to do the translating. The reason a screen capture is preferable is because very often access to Chinese forums are interrupted – as of now, cjdby.net is not accessible – and moreover, the post in question might disappear for a variety of reasons.
I still think posting the machine translation with the source is the best option. If the output is below par, I of course welcome a better human translation, and often someone provides it. The advantages of using machine translation are that it's always available and removes the need to wait and hope for a human version. Furthermore, most of the time it is just fine, basically as good as a human could do (even in this case the relevant part was clear enough: empty weight over 18 tonnes). Everything I've posted in this forum from Chinese sources was done with machine translation and most of the time there are no complaints (examples: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). This doesn't prevent anyone from providing a better translation. The other concern, about sources disappearing, is in my opinion overblown. I don't think one of my links has died so far (most definitely still work). But if people think the information might be in danger of being lost, they can, of course, post the original quote in Chinese along with a screenshot in the same comment in which they do the translation.

In summary, posting a machine translation with a source provides an immediate English version of the text even if no-one is inclined to translate and is most of the time no worse than a human translation. It doesn't preclude the posting of a better translation or the archiving of the source material.
 

by78

Brigadier
I still think posting the machine translation with the source is the best option. If the output is below par, I of course welcome a better human translation, and often someone provides it. The advantages of using machine translation are that it's always available and removes the need to wait and hope for a human version. Furthermore, most of the time it is just fine, basically as good as a human could do (even in this case the relevant part was clear enough: empty weight over 18 tonnes). Everything I've posted in this forum from Chinese sources was done with machine translation and most of the time there are no complaints (examples: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). This doesn't prevent anyone from providing a better translation. The other concern, about sources disappearing, is in my opinion overblown. I don't think one of my links has died so far (most definitely still work). But if people think the information might be in danger of being lost, they can, of course, post the original quote in Chinese along with a screenshot in the same comment in which they do the translation.

In summary, posting a machine translation with a source provides an immediate English version of the text even if no-one is inclined to translate and is most of the time no worse than a human translation. It doesn't preclude the posting of a better translation or the archiving of the source material.
The problem with machine translation is many fold:
1) It's terrible at translating the underlying context.
2) It's clueless about the various slangs and jargons that are liberally employed on the Chinese internet.

By posting a machine translation without also posting the original text is problematic in that bad translations cause confusion and can result in unintentional misinformation. I'm personally fine with posting an immediate machine translation, so long there is a buyer-beware type of disclaimer, along with a copy or screen capture of the original text and a request for additional human translation.

And just because the links you've provided thus far are in working order doesn't mean they will stay that way forever. Case in point, Top81 forum has changed its URL in the past year, and in the process, broke all the old links. FYJS forum too has migrated servers at least twice in the past seven years or so, again breaking all original links. Complicating the matter further, some forums are now requiring a membership to access their previously open content, with the membership requirements being restrictive enough to exclude many SDF members. Both Top81 and Haohan forums have switched to the membership model, with Top81 rejecting membership applications from certain geographical regions. These changes not only broke all previous URLs, but they also prevent non-members from accessing referring links.

All of the above is why I think it's advisable to at least copy-and-paste original texts here for posterity, and why a screen capture is even better.
 

latenlazy

Colonel
A case in point about doing more than linking can be made with how many of the really old records of leaks, sources, and other materials going back a decade or more are now broken and inaccessible. We should probably normalize more rigorous procedures for saving information we’re collecting if we want to use these forums as an archive.
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
Ultimately, anyone can employ any posting standard they like, within the rules. I don't see a reason for a change on my end. For the record I'll say once more that machine translation works well most of the time and is an overwhelming positive on balance.
Of course, anyone is free to copy the original text, take a screenshot, provide a translation, archive the page or do anything else they like.
 

taxiya

Major
Registered Member
Serendipitously, I just found a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from pb19980515 on J-20's weight.

J-20 uses more than 18 tons of empty weight. . . . . . . . I guess I'm going to be sprayed. . . Anyway, it will be sprayed, rather than the way "blow" Eagle, plus a counterweight, the use of empty weight of 12.5 tons. Another "black" was born. . .
I know I am late to the party as 4 pages have turned. But I can't resist protesting that "machine translation (between unrelated language families) is a torture to the ears".:mad:

Please ignore my protest to save the thread. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top