J-20... The New Generation Fighter

Re: New Generation Fighter

Subedei said:

It looks like CAC chose not to intergrate the engines into the airframe as in F-22 and TU-50. I wonder if this was because they were not capable of this level of sophistication, or if they found that it was not necessary for stealth capabilities.

From the size of this airframe, I'm beggining to believe that this platform will be dedicated first to carrier killing. I assume that it is designed to be stealthy enough to evade detection by Aegis, Hawkeye, and F-35 radars, large enough to carry long-range ASMs, and superior to the F-35s in both the BVR and dog-fighting capacities of the air-superiority domain. Coupled with the, now operational, DF-21, this could signal the end of US carrier operations in the -from the US perspective- western Pacific.

Very interesting!!!

Click to expand...

Probably more because they aren't sure which engine it'll use yet, or that it'll likely use multiple engines.

Re: New Generation Fighter

Subedei said:

It looks like CAC chose not to intergrate the engines into the airframe as in F-22 and TU-50. I wonder if this was because they were not capable of this level of sophistication, or if they found that it was not necessary for stealth capabilities.

Click to expand...

Whoa wait wait -- how are the engines not "integrated in"? They're fully inside the airframe, and covered as well unlike the PAK FA, where they sort of protrude out.

From the size of this airframe, I'm beggining to believe that this platform will be dedicated first to carrier killing. I assume that it is designed to be stealthy enough to evade detection by Aegis, Hawkeye, and F-35 radars, large enough to carry long-range ASMs, and superior to the F-35s in both the BVR and dog-fighting capacities of the air-superiority domain. Coupled with the, now operational, DF-21, this could signal the end of US carrier operations in the -from the US perspective- western Pacific.

Very interesting!!!

Click to expand...

Carrier killing... with what kind of weapns? Until we see a pic of the internal weapon bays it's difficult to tell the kind of ordanance it can carry (certainly not any current AShMs) -- and it'll be easier to use long range land based cruise missiles or ASBMs to take out carriers rather than having to go through the whole layered defence with an expensive stealth fighter.

Re: New Generation Fighter

dingyibvs said:

Probably more because they aren't sure which engine it'll use yet, or that it'll likely use multiple engines.

Click to expand...

Sorry for not being clear! What I meant was that the engine seems not to have been physically intergrated into the airframe as a part of the aerodynamic design. Notice that the F-22 and TU-50 designs synthesize the engine bodies into the aerofoil -if you will- and contribute prominent bulges to the upper airframe. The engines of the J-20 seem -at this stage- to be aligned either at, or below, the horizontal centerline, resulting in a bulkier aft-plane unlike the more tapered, and streamlined, aft-plane of the F-22 and TU-50.

Re: New Generation Fighter

Bltizo said:

Whoa wait wait -- how are the engines not "integrated in"? They're fully inside the airframe, and covered as well unlike the PAK FA, where they sort of protrude out.



Carrier killing... with what kind of weapns? Until we see a pic of the internal weapon bays it's difficult to tell the kind of ordanance it can carry (certainly not any current AShMs) -- and it'll be easier to use long range land based cruise missiles or ASBMs to take out carriers rather than having to go through the whole layered defence with an expensive stealth fighter.

Click to expand...

My response to your first question is included in my previous post. As to the second, as this platform certainly won't be using any curently avialable engines, radars, avionics, etc., it is not unreasonable to exopect that its weapons pkg will also be of a "next" generation. Additionally, certainly the PLAN/PLAAF would not expect to neutralize the USN carrier strategy using a one-dimensional defense.

Do we really expect a one-dimensional stratgey from the Chinese?

Re: New Generation Fighter

Subedei said:

Sorry for not being clear! What I meant was that the engine seems not to have been physically intergrated into the airframe as a part of the aerodynamic design. Notice that the F-22 and TU-50 designs synthesize the engine bodies into the aerofoil -if you will- and contribute prominent bulges to the upper airframe. The engines of the J-20 seem -at this stage- to be aligned either at, or below, the horizontal centerline, resulting in a bulkier aft-plane unlike the more tapered, and streamlined, aft-plane of the F-22 and TU-50.

Click to expand...

First by TU-50, I assume you meant T-50...

Second, I wouldn't call the T-50's engines "integrated" -- they kind of look tacky the way they're put into the airframe. Certainly not intgrated like the F-22's engines.


And the bulkiness of the J-20's engine/rear could be because of more internal space for fuel and electronics? It certainly looks more integrated than the PAK FA's are.

Re: New Generation Fighter

Subedei said:

Sorry for not being clear! What I meant was that the engine seems not to have been physically intergrated into the airframe as a part of the aerodynamic design. Notice that the F-22 and TU-50 designs synthesize the engine bodies into the aerofoil -if you will- and contribute prominent bulges to the upper airframe. The engines of the J-20 seem -at this stage- to be aligned either at, or below, the horizontal centerline, resulting in a bulkier aft-plane unlike the more tapered, and streamlined, aft-plane of the F-22 and TU-50.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't those bumps actually create drag?

Re: New Generation Fighter

Bltizo said:

First by TU-50, I assume you meant T-50...

Second, I wouldn't call the T-50's engines "integrated" -- they kind of look tacky the way they're put into the airframe. Certainly not intgrated like the F-22's engines.

And the bulkiness of the J-20's engine/rear could be because of more internal space for fuel and electronics? It certainly looks more integrated than the PAK FA's are.

Click to expand...

Correction taken, T-50. And I certainly agree that the T-50's engines could and should be better intergrated. But, just look at that baby from the side view. She almost disappears into thin air. Still, even though the T-50's engines look kind of "stuck-on" from the bottom view, the plane's side view suggests a more streamlined aerofoil.

Re: New Generation Fighter

Subedei said:

My response to your first question is included in my previous post. As to the second, as this platform certainly won't be using any curently avialable engines, radars, avionics, etc., it is not unreasonable to exopect that its weapons pkg will also be of a "next" generation. Additionally, certainly the PLAN/PLAAF would not expect to neutralize the USN carrier strategy using a one-dimensional defense.

Do we really expect a one-dimensional stratgey from the Chinese?

Click to expand...

Ah right -- err I posted a response just now to your response to my first question (lol)

Let's hypothesize China does make a small AShM able to fit into the J-20's weapon bays (let's give a range of 150 km). Would it be worth it to fly four J-20s into the massive picket line of Aegis, E-2D, Growlers, F-35s and Superhornets while acting in conjunction with ASBM, land based AShM, sub based AShM -- or just scrap the J-20s and use other non stealthy platforms (like H-6 variants or JH-7A), but which can carry larger, longer ranged AShMs?
Regardless of how capable next generation, weapon-bay "fittable" AShMs are, they will have a very small range that the platform will have to enter the killzone to fire.

Losing J-20s to a CBG's SAM or CAP is not a good trade, espicially when they are needed so badly to counter F-22s.

Subedei said:

Correction taken, T-50. And I certainly agree that the T-50's engines could and should be better intergrated. But, just look at that baby from the side view. She almost disappears into thin air. Still, even though the T-50's engines look kind of "stuck-on" from the bottom view, the plane's side view suggests a more streamlined aerofoil.

Click to expand...

Right I see what you mean. But in any case I wouldn't call the J-20's engines "non integrated". It probably looks kind of bulkly due to internal storage of fuel or electronics there.
Or maybe they're keeping it bulky and will modify it further when more like the F-22 or YF-23 when WS-15 comes into play.

Re: New Generation Fighter

latenlazy said:

Wouldn't those bumps actually create drag?

Click to expand...

I can only assume that, if those bumps created significant drag, neither the American, nor the Russian engineers would have chosen them as fundamental to their designs.

I'm not here to "put-down" this very exciting Chinese advance. But, let us remember that they are the least experienced in this domain, to date.

Re: New Generation Fighter

Subedei said:

I can only assume that, if those bumps created significant drag, neither the American, nor the Russian engineers would have chosen them as fundamental to their designs.

I'm not here to "put-down" this very exciting Chinese advance. But, let us remember that they are the least experienced in this domain, to date.

Click to expand...

On the other hand the J-XX is a different airframe and will therefore have a different aerodynamic performance. What may be used in one airframe may not be beneficial in another. That, and I wonder if implementing that type of design was more for weight and size reduction than for aerodynamic benefits.