(Raise hand)
I did that in #1775, check above man.
For me, same as above, not only if the engines are already chinese that would be the first 100% chinese plane, and would be strange considered how advanced it is (J10 still uses AL31, and J11B, with chinese engines, is directly derived from russian airframe) but is also "suspicious" the appearance of two article in these days, in Jane's and in WPost, that state basically that China is incapable to build reliable turbofans: they would lose face if this situation is gonna change so soon and the issue timing of these article could be related exactly to J20.It's a lot harder to follow this forum in China....Anyway, great pics are coming out. But I am not convinced that this thing is powered by WS-10A. I mean...I don't see what the other option could be, it just doesn't look like WS-10a to me.
Additionally, I feel as though China will need to buy 117S engines soon (if they havent already). The WS10a doesn't have the thrust or the thrust vectoring (and wont have it for many years) and therefore the J-20 airframe cannot be adequately tested to see if it can handle the stressed of TVC.
TVC engines are a trade-off:The engine looks very similiar to WS-10A , it doesn't looks like it can TVC..
It's not a Russian engine or else they would be bragging about it already. Maya already said the J-20 would be powered by FWS10A before WS-15 is ready. So there's your answer everybody.So, any guesses as to what is powering this giant?
I think you are referring to the rear-shot photo. I think that photo angle just makes the engine nacelles look conventional, almost like JH-7A. But if you look at the side views (not clear because everything is black and ventral fins are in the way) the fuselage tapers off toward the rear just like the F-22.I guess I just expected that the airframe would taper toward the rear as the F-22 and T-50 do.
It doesn't! So, I'll stop riding a dead horse.
Please see my reply to Subedei above. I think that's an artifact of the photo. The fuselage actually does taper to the rear just like F-22.I wonder if the lack of conformal shaping around the engines has more to do with the uncertainty of the final engine or a deficiency in their ability to calculate a more refined stealth shape, or if it is a deliberate attempt to reduce the RCS further.
What are those things? Even on regular 4G aircraft you don't have bulbs that large. I think they are some kind of sensor, or flight testing instrument for the prototype.The aileron actuator fairing/bulb things concern me in that they do not look like they are being blended into the undersides of the wings. This could affect RCS. They are also huge compared to the ones on the F-22. Does this indicate issues with miniaturizing?
Yes, that makes sense! There is a distinct upward cant on the canard that's not seen on any other canard delta. Eurofighter has a downward cant.I wonder if the upward cant of the canard is a way to control the release of a creeping wave from the trailing edge.
Please see my reply to kursed.It's a lot harder to follow this forum in China....Anyway, great pics are coming out. But I am not convinced that this thing is powered by WS-10A. I mean...I don't see what the other option could be, it just doesn't look like WS-10a to me.
Additionally, I feel as though China will need to buy 117S engines soon (if they havent already). The WS10a doesn't have the thrust or the thrust vectoring (and wont have it for many years) and therefore the J-20 airframe cannot be adequately tested to see if it can handle the stressed of TVC.
It would be interesting to back several years to see which forum member was the most accurate in predicting the development speed of J-20.sory, but this thread is so busy,the page go too fast, no body want to check back, so many same photos appeared in here, but I think it's ok, because many people didn't see all photos, they are hard to go back to find it.
the thread is explosive!!!
That makes sense, plenty of room for radar and IRST (not bulging out).If not already mentioned, i would add that a so big nose could allow the displacement of a lot of AESA T/R modules, thus resulting in a very powerful radar . For example USA source stated that F35 will use advanced avionics compared to F22, but due to airframe limitations the radar of F35 will have shorter detection range than the one onboard on F22
I doubt J-20 is at any disadvantage compared to the F-22maybe china opted for this design to compensate the J20 disavantage with USA avionics/stealth (or maybe is only a matter of aereodinamic of the plane)
Carlos Copp basically says J-20 should be at least equal to F-22 and even exceed in internal weapons carry and range. Carlos Copp actually underestimated the J-20 when he said that China's AESA is not demonstrated. In fact, AESA was already tested on J-10B last year. Moreover, China fielded AESA back in 2003 on the Type 052C destroyer.Australia Air Power on J-20 , posting in full
Dr Carlo Kopp
Over the last few days imagery of what is claimed to be China's new stealth fighter has appeared on a range of Chinese Internet sites. There have been no official disclosures as yet, so many of the claims appearing in the media may only be speculation presented as fact.
The aircraft may be a technology demonstrator or a prototype for a mass production fighter aircraft. The latter is however much more likely, given that the PLA Chief of Air Staff claimed an IOC later in the decade.
What the imagery shows is a large fighter, approaching the size of an F-111, with a canard delta configuration and pair of outward canted all moving vertical tails. This configuration will provide good sustained supersonic cruise performance with a suitable engine type, and good manoeuvre performance in transonic and supersonic regimes.
Of most interest is the stealth shaping, which is considerably better than that seen in the Russian T-50 PAK-FA prototypes and in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The Chinese design appears to be largely built around the stealth shaping design rules employed in the F-22A Raptor. The chined nose section and canopy are close in appearance to the F-22. The trapezoidal inlets are closest to the F-22, but employ an F-35 style boundary layer control design. The wing fuselage join angle, critical for side aspect stealth, is very similar to the F-22 and superior to the Russian T-50 PAK-FA prototypes and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The flat lower fuselage is optimal for all aspect wideband stealth. Planform alignment is impossible to assess until in flight imagery becomes available.
The aft fuselage, tailboom, strakes and nozzles are not compatible with high stealth performance, but may only be stop gap measures to expedite flight testing of a prototype. The airframe configuration and aft fuselage would be compatible with an F-22 style 2D TVC nozzle design, or a non-TVC rectangular nozzle designed for controlled infrared emission and radio-frequency stealth.
The PLA have not disclosed the engine type. There are claims that the Russians supplied supercruise capable 117S series engines - these would not be sufficient to extract the full performance potential of this advanced airframe.
The airframe configuration is compatible with ventral and side opening internal weapon bays, and large enough to match or exceed the internal weapons payload of the F-22A Raptor. Internal fuel fraction may also be high, given the fuselage configuration and large internal volume of the big delta wing.
Other unknowns are the intended sensor suite. China has yet to demonstrate an AESA radar, or an advanced indigenous emitter locating system. However, these could become available by the time this airframe enters production.
The size of the airframe, and its evident focus on supersonic persistence, suggests at a minimum an intention to provide a long range interceptor for air control in the Second Island Chain geography. This capability by default would provide the ability to penetrate an opposing IADS to destroy assets like AWACS, other ISR systems, and tankers. Suffice to say, with suitable internal weapons, the design could be employed as a penetrating strike aircraft, in the combat radius class of the F-111 or Su-34 Fullback.
The notion that an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or F/A-18E/F Super Hornet will be capable of competing against this Chengdu design in air combat, let along penetrate airspace defended by this fighter, is simply absurd.
APA will produce a detailed analysis at a future date, once more technical material becomes available.
Some excellent analysis of this system by Bill Sweetman, Editor of DTI, can be located at:
J-20 - Denial Is Not An Option
China's Stealth Striker