J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII


Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
I thought WS-15 is supposed to feature thrust vectoring nozzle? Can't really tell from this image.
There's been lots of talk of that Siege, but from a practical stand point, would your roll in a new engine, and complicate that with OVT and the necessary changes to the FCS that would be an absolute requirement??

I mean the J-10C, with OVT that flew at Zhuhai, shows that may not be as large a stretch as I would have previously imagined, but the J-20 flight dynamics are much more complex with its distant coupled canards. It is no doubt a precursor to a J-20 that would be so equipped, but still, it seems like a lot of trouble for a small gain in post stall nose pointing and the acceleration of pitch rate that benefits the Flanker family, but the J-20 no doubt already has a mind numbing pitch rate.

I just don't know if I would complicate the J-20 additionally, for what might be only marginal performance improvements, at the cost of additional weight and complexity, as well as the loss of thrust from the WS-15??
 

vincent

Senior Member
There's been lots of talk of that Siege, but from a practical stand point, would your roll in a new engine, and complicate that with OVT and the necessary changes to the FCS that would be an absolute requirement??

I mean the J-10C, with OVT that flew at Zhuhai, shows that may not be as large a stretch as I would have previously imagined, but the J-20 flight dynamics are much more complex with its distant coupled canards. It is no doubt a precursor to a J-20 that would be so equipped, but still, it seems like a lot of trouble for a small gain in post stall nose pointing and the acceleration of pitch rate that benefits the Flanker family, but the J-20 no doubt already has a mind numbing pitch rate.

I just don't know if I would complicate the J-20 additionally, for what might be only marginal performance improvements, at the cost of additional weight and complexity, as well as the loss of thrust from the WS-15??
I thought someone said with thrust-vector engines, J20 doesn't have to move its canards as much during flight, minimizing radar reflections
 

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #249
There's been lots of talk of that Siege, but from a practical stand point, would your roll in a new engine, and complicate that with OVT and the necessary changes to the FCS that would be an absolute requirement??

I mean the J-10C, with OVT that flew at Zhuhai, shows that may not be as large a stretch as I would have previously imagined, but the J-20 flight dynamics are much more complex with its distant coupled canards. It is no doubt a precursor to a J-20 that would be so equipped, but still, it seems like a lot of trouble for a small gain in post stall nose pointing and the acceleration of pitch rate that benefits the Flanker family, but the J-20 no doubt already has a mind numbing pitch rate.

I just don't know if I would complicate the J-20 additionally, for what might be only marginal performance improvements, at the cost of additional weight and complexity, as well as the loss of thrust from the WS-15??
At a minimum it would have jagged nozzles for it reduction.
 

Tsin Phan

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Hi, and welcome on board, but I must correct a few things:

1. so far there is no proof that China shared "its J-20 technologies with Pakistan for joint production (China Pakistan) jet fighter JF 17 Thunder Block3" ... there are surely certain avionics, structural and design elements borrowed, but I won't rate that a "share in J-20 technology"!

2. even if - esp. at the PDF - some are already jumping the bandwagon, the Block would feature exactly the J-20's HUD, that is wrong ... it si similar but not the same.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Deino, I agree with your worthy opinions.
 

Top