J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
"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?
19 Tons is likely pretty low for the J-20, but then you're the expert who was professing 15 Tons, but I guess you're now up to 16.5 Tons now right??? you feel free to believe any number you wish?? but those high G loadings will break most of history's older lighter airframes....
 
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.
Actually Bub, anecdotal is based on someones else's personal testimony, it implies casually spoken word of mouth... here we have J-20 pilot giving us some very high G limits for the J-20, and that does indeed require an extremely robust structure.

thanks for all the attention, but I'm going to let my own statement stand, but talk all you want??
 
19 Tons is likely pretty low for the J-20, but then you're the expert who was professing 15 Tons, but I guess you're now up to 16.5 Tons now right??? you feel free to believe any number you wish?? but those high G loadings will break most of history's older lighter airframes....
Please find my quote where I said a J-20 is 15 tons. I'm sure that's in your imagination just like the 19 tons.

Your memory... is really gone... you've missed every single number that was in the story-line and made up new ones to take their place.

Not that you'll remember this next time, but for the newcomers reading:

1. A reporter claimed that an interview with Chengdu revealed the J-20's weight to be in the 16 tonne class. He called the F-22 a 20 tonne class fighter so the inference is that J-20 is under 16 tones.
2. A big shrimp revealed that the J-20's empty weight is now just under the 16.38 tonne Su-27, but with the WS-10X, it is slightly over.
3. Another big shrimp claims that anyone who wanted the J-20 to be 16 tonnes will be disappointed as with certain additions, the weight is now ~17.5 tonnes. This person claims to have worked on the WS-10.

Really, I wrote all that for other people who can remember things. And yes, maneuvers can break the older lighter frames, and the J-20 is anything but old, so... that's basically saying your fat grandpa couldn't lift something so neither can you if you weigh the same as him.
Actually Bub, anecdotal is based on someones else's personal testimony, it implies casually spoken word of mouth... here we have J-20 pilot giving us some very high G limits for the J-20, and that does indeed require an extremely robust structure.

thanks for all the attention, but I'm going to let my own statement stand, but talk all you want??
Yeah, his anecdotal evidence is the aircraft's maneuverability, not its weight. (Ironically, accounts from the persons I've listed above actually do count as anecdotal evidence on the weight of the J-20.) The 19 tonne weight is your guess. They're not connected because your engineering qualifications are so low... well, they're just non-existent, and the level of engineering knowledge needed to attempt this task is so high, I'm not really sure anyone can do it without having classified information. Basically, your guess on this is worth as much as a blind person's description of a laser show... except this blind person's super confident and says things like, "Anybody who knows anything about laser shows knows that those lasers look like swords and will cut through you if you get in the way." LOL
 
Last edited:
3. Another big shrimp claims that anyone who wanted the J-20 to be 16 tonnes will be disappointed as with certain additions, the weight is now ~17.5 tonnes. This person claims to have worked on the WS-10.


Yeah, his anecdotal comment is the aircraft's maneuverability, not its weight.
NO, his anecdotal comments are in regard to the J-20's load limits which reflect on its load bearing structure, not its maneuverability or its weight... I make my observations based on his account of the J-20's robust structure, and I see you've come up from 15 Tons to 17.5 Tons, well you're half way there,
 
NO, his anecdotal comments are in regard to the J-20's load limits which reflect on its load bearing structure, not its maneuverability or its weight... I make my observations based on his account of the J-20's robust structure, and I see you've come up from 15 Tons to 17.5 Tons, well you're half way there,
Robust structure doesn't mean heavy structure. See? New technology. You make your guesses from your imaginary knowledge of 5th generation jet engineering.

You "see" this 15-17.5T timeline every time the story is retold, and the next time we have this conversation, I have no doubt your memory will revert back again to the 15T number you created. The upside is you'll never get tired of watching reruns with a memory like that. The disadvantage, of course, is that you can't carry out a debate or follow a story.

I asked you to find where I said J-20 is 15T and of course you couldn't because you imagined it. Last time, I relayed the same information to you that J-20 is 17.5T and your answer is that now your job is done. Today, the same answer is half way (to Brat's imaginary world where you guess a number, then insist it's fact LOL). You really need to stop making yourself look so incompetent if you want anyone to take you seriously.
 

Quickie

Major
NO, his anecdotal comments are in regard to the J-20's load limits which reflect on its load bearing structure, not its maneuverability or its weight... I make my observations based on his account of the J-20's robust structure, and I see you've come up from 15 Tons to 17.5 Tons, well you're
half way there,
What you have claimed that an aircraft would necessarily be heavier in order to increase its load limit isn't always correct.

It really depends on where the increase in mass goes. An increase in mass in the aircraft body other than the load-bearing structure would actually decrease the aircraft load limits. On the other hand, a decrease in mass in non-load-bearing structures would increase the aircraft load limits if the mass of the load-bearing structure remains the same resulting in a lighter aircraft.

So here we have a situation where the change in mass/weight of the aircraft has an effect on its load limit that is opposite to what you've claimed.
 

latenlazy

Colonel
What you have claimed that an aircraft would necessarily be heavier in order to increase its load limit isn't always correct.

It really depends on where the increase in mass goes. An increase in mass in the aircraft body other than the load-bearing structure would actually decrease the aircraft load limits. On the other hand, a decrease in mass in non-load-bearing structures would increase the aircraft load limits if the mass of the load-bearing structure remains the same resulting in a lighter aircraft.

So here we have a situation where the change in mass/weight of the aircraft has an effect on its load limit that is opposite to what you've claimed.
Yep. Load limits are first and foremost a question of load bearing geometries and how they distribute force. They are secondly a question of material strength along different load and force vectors. Only in the most tertiary sense are they a function of mass. Anyone with even basic engineering knowledge would know this.
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
From another forum, "J20 related papers published in the journal of aviation in 2019".
1.鸭翼的RCS影响研究
郭展智 陈颖闻麻连凤
成都飞机设计研究所

2.新一代战斗机座舱盖关键技术设计方案研究
杨波 赵培林蔡三军 周生 林陈川
北京航空航天大学航空科学与工程学院 成都飞机设计研究所机电系统设计研究部

3.战斗机大迎角/过失速机动下进气道气动特性
王海峰 向欢杨应凯 谢锦睿
航空工业成都飞机设计研究所

4.先进战斗机生命保障系统研究
包晓宁 赵培林张保中 胡志文 兰于 清薛飞
中国航空工业集团公司成都飞机设计研究所

5.战斗机嵌入式训练系统中的智能虚拟陪练
陈斌 王江王阳
中国航空工业集团公司成都飞机设计研究所

6.新一代战斗机全机地面强度试验技术
王育鹏 裴连杰李秋龙 郑建军 冯建民 王凡
中国飞机强度研究所全尺寸飞机结构静力/疲劳航空科技重点试验室 西北工业大学航空学院 中国航空工业集团公司成都飞机设计研究所

7.先进战斗机气动弹性设计技术
李秋彦 李刚魏洋天 冉玉国 吴波 谭光辉 李焱 陈识 雷博淇 徐钦炜
航空工业成都飞机设计研究所

8.先进战斗机全动V尾抖振动强度设计与验证
金伟 杨智春孟德虹 陈炎 黄虎 王勇军 何石 陈园方
成都飞机设计研究所 西北工业大学中国空气动力研究与发展中心 中国飞机强度研究所

9.战斗机强度设计技术发展与实践
张立新 钟顺录刘小冬 付焕兵 兑红娜 刘栋 梁敬 禄云 牟彬杰 石上路
成都飞机设计研究所强度部

10.先进战斗机过失速机动大气数据融合估计方法
杨朝旭 郭毅雷廷万 李荣冰
航空工业成都飞机设计研究所 南京航空航天大学

1. Research on the effects of duck wings on RCS
Guo Zhanzhi, Chen Yingwen, Ma Lianfeng
Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute

2. Research on the key technology design scheme of the new generation fighter canopy
Yang Bo Zhao Peilin Cai Sanjun Zhou Sheng Lin Chenchuan
School of Aeronautics Science and Engineering, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics

3. Aerodynamic characteristics of the inlet of a fighter under high angle of attack / overstall maneuvers
Wang Haifeng, Xiang Huan, Yang Yingkai, Xie Jinrui
Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute of Aviation Industry

4. Research on Advanced Fighter Life Support System
Bao Xiaoning, Zhao Peilin, Zhang Baozhong, Hu Zhiwen, Lan Yu, Qing Xuefei
Chengdu Aviation Design Institute of China Aviation Industry Corporation

5. Intelligent virtual sparring in fighter embedded training system
Chen Bin Wang Jiang Wang Yang
Chengdu Aviation Design Institute of China Aviation Industry Corporation

6. The ground strength test technology of the new generation fighter
Wang Yupeng Pei Lianjie Li Qiulong Zheng Jianjun Feng Jianmin Wang Fan
Key Laboratory of Static / Fatigue Aviation Science and Technology for Full-scale Aircraft Structures, China Aircraft Strength Institute Northwestern Polytechnical University School of Aeronautics

7. Advanced fighter aeroelastic design technology
Li Qiuyan, Li Gang, Wei Yangtian, Ran Yuguo, Wu Bo, Tan Guanghui, Li Yan, Chen Shi, Lei Boqi, Xu Qinwei
Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute of Aviation Industry

8. Design and verification of full-motion V tail shake vibration strength of advanced fighter aircraft
Jin Wei Yang Zhichun Meng Dehong Chen Yan Huang Hu Wang Yongjun He Shi Chen Yuanfang
Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute Northwestern Polytechnical University China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center China Aircraft Strength Institute

9. Development and Practice of Fighter Strength Design Technology
Zhang Lixin Zhong Shunlu Liu Xiaodong Fu Huanbing Dui Hongna Liu Dong Liang Jing Luyun Mu Binjie Shi Shanglu
Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute Strength Department

10. Fusion Estimation Method of Advanced Stall Aircraft's Overstall Mobile Air Data
Yang Chaoxu Guo Yi Lei Tingwan Li Rongbing
Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute of Aviation Industry Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top