J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI


Status
Not open for further replies.

11226p

New Member
Registered Member
Ok if I got something wrong please tell me but if I understand correctly the diagram showcases the RCS per angle for the orientation of the aircraft given in spherical coordinates in dBsm as seen in the diagram legend below for transversal magnetic polarized fields to the incident surface. So here is what I am interested in the RCS for the J20 is given for a radar with 16GHz wavelength but 28GHz for the Su-57, why the difference? Second the J-20 is modeled with CFCJ/CFCI? surface coating, does anyone have more knowledge about what this coating is?
 

OrientalGamer

New Member
Registered Member
The so-called 0.5 m^2 is just a meme. The stealth of the aircraft depends on where what angle, and so on. You can't say that one aircraft has 0.5 or 0.01 rcs. That's bullshit.
When do comparison, select one variable and keep others the same, I learnt it in primary school.
Yes, it is an estimation, if you know the exact number, share with us.
Calling others claim bullshit or meme is not good, btw I am a good player in trolling.
 

OrientalGamer

New Member
Registered Member
Ok if I got something wrong please tell me but if I understand correctly the diagram showcases the RCS per angle for the orientation of the aircraft given in spherical coordinates in dBsm as seen in the diagram legend below for transversal magnetic polarized fields to the incident surface. So here is what I am interested in the RCS for the J20 is given for a radar with 16GHz wavelength but 28GHz for the Su-57, why the difference? Second the J-20 is modeled with CFCJ/CFCI? surface coating, does anyone have more knowledge about what this coating is?
Lower frequency has a better detection result for stealth fighter, su57 under 16ghz might be disaster, I have no idea about the coating on j20.
 

ILikeChina

Junior Member
Registered Member
When do comparison, select one variable and keep others the same, I learnt it in primary school.
Yes, it is an estimation, if you know the exact number, share with us.
Calling others claim bullshit or meme is not good, btw I am a good player in trolling.
Ceteris paribus. Yep indeed. But its too simplified. The aircraft won't stay in the same place while flying, that's why we need complex simulation instead of data like 0.5 rcs m^2. Like Dr Song paper, or canard paper which was uploaded there not a long time ago.
 

11226p

New Member
Registered Member
The source is in the pic, seems like a western doc, this pic is the only thing I have from him.
Also, many sources claim the rcs of su57 is 0.5 m^2, which is not impressive at all.
View attachment 56705
I think the source for the image is this Aus Airpower page here
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
altough I could not find the direct source for the images but it is a monograph by the publisher of the charts, interesting read regardless.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Disclosure by J20 pilot during CCTV interview : Positive overload 9G, negative overload -2 to -3G, side overload 4G.

What is "side overload"?

View attachment 56637
The side load is expressed as G limit, and while you're not alone in never having heard a G limit around the yaw axis, we have now, and the J-20 is called a 4 G air frame in the yaw axis. The J-20 is expected to be able to be highly divergent in the yaw axis by virtue of pedaling right or left, this would have been especially important in "nose pointing" as expected in "post stall maneuvering"!

These high G limits are more affirmation that the J-20 was built as a "heavy fighter", designed to be "kicked around" at the limit of human tolerance, it is an overbuilt and robust structure, designed to perform very near F-22 limits, and as such we should all be very pleasantly surprised...

We have a couple of reports of the 300 series of Airbus loosing their vertical stabs and rudders due to over exuberant rudder deflections, and we have the picture of a B-52 flying with but a stub of the vertical stab remaining after an encounter with extreme turbulence, so yes side loads are also an important part of flying, but we have seldom if ever heard those figures, the J-20 is a hell-a-va strong airframe, and its obvious Chinese Airmen are indeed very proud of her...
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
"No doubt" LOL Math non-existent, eyeballing logic fail. But let's just add the "if you know anything about..." in there so the feeble-minded will be inclined to agree with you to look like they "know stuff"... by your definition. Just one question: in your imagination, is it that the higher the weight one calls the J-20 the more s/he knows about "structures" or does one just agree with precisely your 19 for maximum "knowingness" and any other number detracts from it? LOLOL Called you out on this "tactic" many times; learn a new trick, will ya?
Yes my friend, even though this is just more anecdotal evidence, that your "experts 15 tons" J-20 is just a fairy tale... the J-20 is a big boys toy, 9 Gs Positive, 3 G's Negative, and 4 G's in the yaw axis, she's no doubt built like a "brick shit house"! that was archaic description of being very well built indeed!
 
Yes my friend, even though this is just more anecdotal evidence, that your "experts 15 tons" J-20 is just a fairy tale... the J-20 is a big boys toy, 9 Gs Positive, 3 G's Negative, and 4 G's in the yaw axis, she's no doubt built like a "brick shit house"! that was archaic description of being very well built indeed!
Well, if your memory is stuck at 15 tons, you're going to have a lot of trouble keeping up with developments. Do I really have to tell the whole story from the top? I think everyone else remembers by now...

Anecdotal evidence means you weighed the J-20 and can tell us what the scale said but don't have a picture to prove it. Saying it's gotta weigh a certain number because of how a complex machine looks/moves is called imagination. Please understand the difference between anecdotal evidence and imagination. English is your native language, no?

Built like a brick house doesn't mean heavy like a brick house; that's called advancing technology.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top