J-20... The New Generation Fighter

Status
Not open for further replies.

70092

Junior Member
It would have been much more convincing if some of these Russian military fans could open their somewhat loud mouths about how Chinese have copied their 5th generation technologies AFTER Russia has successfully developed a real 5th generation fighter in the first place:




Sure it looks like China have copied alot of Russian techs to develop a 5th generation fighter.
 

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
Guys the broad cast is on today, again. Will the J-20 fly or will it just do a taxi run? Stay tuned to find out.
 

A.Man

Major
From what we have seen: the design, the material, aerodynamic and workmanship of the Chinese J-20 are way ahead of any Russian airplanes. I personally believe, the Chinese aerospace production technologies is at least 15 years more advanced than Russian's. MIG 1.44 has no connections to J-20 at all. All Toyota's, Honda's, Fords, BMW's, VW's and Hyundai's, as well as Tata's are all look alike. Were they all copies of the Ford Model-T?
 

Bltizo

Moderator
Staff member
I personally believe, the Chinese aerospace production technologies is at least 15 years more advanced than Russian's. MIG 1.44 has no connections to J-20 at all.
I definitely wouldn't say 15 years more advanced... but asymptote's assumption is compltely off the mark too.
 

Bltizo

Moderator
Staff member
Let's just put it this way, the J-20 looks like a mock-up. It has none of the finishes of a proper flyable prototype plane. If you look at J-10, J-11B, J-10B, F-35 and PAK-FA's prototype airframes, they are usually in yellow colour (or light green in F-35's case) with lots of rivets, trims, and details on the airframes. The J-20 on the other hand looks to me like a one piece fiberglass mock up that's not really flyable.

... right. And when it does fly?
The fact that we can't see the rivets and details is due to the paint scheme. I wonder if that's why CAC used that shade.
YF-22 and YF-23 both had fancy paint jobs, which made the details hard to see too. So I suppose they must've looked to everyone like one piece mock ups too.


Yep, the ventral fins, the engines, seems weak and unresolved, and we have NO IDEA what's the current software package/sensor package on-board the J-20 (or latest J-11B/J-10) or how capable they are compare to the western counterparts.
Sure, we have no idea -- but we all know avionics are one of the stronger points in the Chinese aerospace industry...
And how can you tell the ventral fins and engines seem "weak"? They're obviously there for the prototype, and that's to be expected.

Talk about ventral fins, that's another detail that reminds me of Mig 1.42/1.44. Infact, the whole plane practically resembles Mig 1.42/1.44 if not for the fact it has a pair of side engine air intacts. Another detail I notice is the canted "all moving tailplane" which is also another signature of Mig 1.42/1.44.
Actually the whole plane reminds me of the wright brothers wright flyer 2 -- canards and all moving tail...




Same reason as I stated above, it looks like a fiberglass mock up, maybe its flyable, it just felt more or less like the Sukoi Su-47 technical demonstrator to me, with a lot less resolved details.
When the PAK FA prototype first came out -- did you think that "felt" like a tech demonstrator with a lot of unresolved details? Their canopy wasn't one piece, it had an unstealthy IRST, not extensive serration, unstealthy engine nozzle, unstealthy backside etc etc which could all be called unresolved details.
Of course those details were unresolved because it was a prototype.

More or less, the Russian were exploring the stealth concept so they sort of "squashed" the plane a little and canted the vertical stabilizers a bit to give it a better radar shaping, but I think back then the Russians were trying to make their ambitious "plasma stealth" system to work, so airframe radar cross section shaping wasn't high on the Priority.

Was there any evidence they were working on plasma stealth for Mig 1.44? Probably, definitely no. They were working on a bad design without the necessary stealth shaping. Period.


That's the question I am also asking - what cuase the Russians to throw away the Mig 1.42/1.44 in the first place? From the photos, all I can gather is that it could be the canard configuration and their plasma stealth tech. The canard for whatever the reason is probably not very stealthy airframe design, and their plasma steath tech probably failed so they eventually opted to throw the whole airframe design away and opted to copy the more conventional F-22/F-23 design.
Again, is there any evidence they were working on plasma stealth for Mig MFI?
The likeliest answer they ditched the Mig MFI was due to economic reasons and also that it just wasn't stealthy enough to go against the ATF.


Perhaps. I don't know, I am still curious if canard was the problem.
If the canards were the "problem" they could've easily discarded them for only delta. The problem was in the general design of the aircraft itself, and the economic problems they faced.
 
Last edited:

terrorhunter

Banned Idiot
Let's just put it this way, the J-20 looks like a mock-up. It has none of the finishes of a proper flyable prototype plane. If you look at J-10, J-11B, J-10B, F-35 and PAK-FA's prototype airframes, they are usually in yellow colour (or light green in F-35's case) with lots of rivets, trims, and details on the airframes. The J-20 on the other hand looks to me like a one piece fiberglass mock up that's not really flyable.






Yep, the ventral fins, the engines, seems weak and unresolved, and we have NO IDEA what's the current software package/sensor package on-board the J-20 (or latest J-11B/J-10) or how capable they are compare to the western counterparts.



Talk about ventral fins, that's another detail that reminds me of Mig 1.42/1.44. Infact, the whole plane practically resembles Mig 1.42/1.44 if not for the fact it has a pair of side engine air intacts. Another detail I notice is the canted "all moving tailplane" which is also another signature of Mig 1.42/1.44.








Same reason as I stated above, it looks like a fiberglass mock up, maybe its flyable, it just felt more or less like the Sukoi Su-47 technical demonstrator to me, with a lot less resolved details.






More or less, the Russian were exploring the stealth concept so they sort of "squashed" the plane a little and canted the vertical stabilizers a bit to give it a better radar shaping, but I think back then the Russians were trying to make their ambitious "plasma stealth" system to work, so airframe radar cross section shaping wasn't high on the Priority.







That's the question I am also asking - what cuase the Russians to throw away the Mig 1.42/1.44 in the first place? From the photos, all I can gather is that it could be the canard configuration and their plasma stealth tech. The canard for whatever the reason is probably not very stealthy airframe design, and their plasma steath tech probably failed so they eventually opted to throw the whole airframe design away and opted to copy the more conventional F-22/F-23 design.

On a side note, I thought canards are great for frontal stealth.





Perhaps. I don't know, I am still curious if canard was the problem.




I am not hoping anything, I am just curious at the development, seeing all other 4th and 5th generation fighter programs taken place in the past, its interesting to see and compare the concept and results, and the timeline of development.
have you actually looked at close up shots of this plane? seen the ones with the landing gear hatches open? they look like fibreglass to you? you think that fibreglass can withstand the take-off rotations this plane has done?

my car is smooth as hell with no rivets on the outside and i can see my face reflecting from the paint. but guess what... its made of aluminium and carbon fibre... no fibreglass

bare in mind that there are 2 prototypes one of which has some yellow, unpainted panels exposed and no company would build 2 planes with different engines purely as tech demonstrators let alone 4, as we have reports that CAC are assembling another 2 J-20 planes

the chinese obviously made the effort to make the plane look presentable before displaying it in public and by looking at the way you come to conclusions firstly it shows the level of in-depth evaluation - or lack thereof - that you possess and also the level of maturity at which you interpret evidence and data available on hand
 
Last edited:

70092

Junior Member
Lets stop this meaningless PAK-FA vs J-20 topic, it goes nowhere and I bet in the end we all, including even the russians, know which one is better, thats the point.

Which also explain why its always the russians to trying to downplay the J-20 instead of the other way around (the Chinese poster could careless about PAK-FA, unless there are some soap graspe military fanboys brought out this funny issues again and again, like how China copied Russian's 5th generation tech blah blah, talks almost as if they really believe Russia has 5th generation techs to steal in the first place), not seems like they are still remain quite calm when J-20 shows up, hehehe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top