J-14, Fan art

Sometimes I wonder about Rick Kamer myself and why we rarely hear from him anymore. I suspect age has something to do with it. From what I know he was a former USAF intel officer, and following his retirment, kept PLA observing as a hobby. Doesn't seem to be an avid fan of newer J types, but has a thing with the older J fighters. He was instrumental in teaching us internet geeks how to read the PLAAF serials and presented us the general PLAAF orbat. I believe he still lurks around somewhat.

Hey Mao...Down load that pic to your hard drive and then upload it as an thumbnail. That site does not appear to allow direct links to it's pics.

@maozedong: Thank you! As I suspected the guy is producing new artwork. A high resolution version of the pic would perhaps reveal which type of software he currently uses (indicative data). Indeed at first glance you would think you see a real mockup of a new stealthy fighter (reduced size tech demonstrator perhaps) but the background hanger is too perfect and the 3D model is somewhat fuzzy. Playing ´spot the difference´is becoming more difficult every time and eventually we will not be able to discern between reality and her ´virtual´sister!
P.S. I know only some stuff about computer graphics and nothing special about J-XX!

@crobato: Interesting; did not know that he was a retired air force intelligence guy. I only hope that he is well and would appreciate that he shares some of his knowledge with us.:coffee:

maozedong said:

Violet Oboe: you know so much about Jxx, any comment on this pic?

Click to expand...

That's not a Chinese JXX ... its a RCS testframe for a Japanese stealthy fighter concept called ATD-X. Some sources say that a moldel will fly by remote control this year.

ATD-X's first test flight will be in 2011.

Here's more:


Deino

Obviously the pic of a RCS testframe/mockup posted by maozedong from tiexue.net is real but it belongs to a japanese fighter plane project currently in the early stages of development. (thanks @Deino!)

At first I thought the pic would be a very advanced 3D simulation but in playing ´spot the difference´I have miserably failed. Probably China has actually similar projects in the pipeline but the guy who would dare to post real pictures about that on the net would find himself instantly in deep trouble and his postal address would not relocate from certain areas in Xinjiang for the next 20 years!

Some years ago Sony/Columbia produced a megaflop movie unimaginatively called ´Stealth´in close collaboration with the Pentagon public relations unit. Hollywood insiders maintain that DoD covered as much as 20-25% of the 130 million $ budget (26-32.5 mio. $) and the mockup of the fictional ´Talon´UCAV was produced by their own USN engineers. Outdoorshots were made in June 2004 on board of CVN-72 Abraham Lincoln cruising in the eastern pacific and I have to admit that these scenes were quite impressive. Overall the movie was awesomely bad and I have given my original Hong Kong copy away to my little brother long ago but what bothers me is that it is very unusual that DoD finances movie projects about fictional warplanes. Apart from the unrealistic scenario in the film that Talon shoots down several Su-37 what has motivated DoD propaganda guys to do that??

May be the movie (released in 8/05) should prepare the public for some ´things´ to be revealed or was it only about luring more kids into US military recruiting offices?

Violet Oboe said:

... but what bothers me is that it is very unusual that DoD finances movie projects about fictional warplanes. Apart from the unrealistic scenario in the film that Talon shoots down several Su-37 what has motivated DoD propaganda guys to do that??

May be the movie (released in 8/05) should prepare the public for some ´things´ to be revealed or was it only about luring more kids into US military recruiting offices?

Click to expand...

I think the DoD has a generall habit to support movies wich "show the US military in a positive light". Perhaps it has become a little more desperatel lately becuse of recruiting problems. But being (very) realistic is not really a point in such cases, IMO. First, "normal" watchers wouldn't see the difference, and being totally realistic is sometimes even more boring than a little fictional action.
Remember the new french "top gun" movie? It's called skyfighters I think, came somewhere in '06. The footage is just very beautyfull, but plot awesome unrealistic.
Hm, I'm already ff

Some years ago Sony/Columbia produced a megaflop movie unimaginatively called ´Stealth´in close collaboration with the Pentagon public relations unit. Hollywood insiders maintain that DoD covered as much as 20-25% of the 130 million $ budget (26-32.5 mio. $) and the mockup of the fictional ´Talon´UCAV was produced by their own USN engineers. Outdoorshots were made in June 2004 on board of CVN-72 Abraham Lincoln cruising in the eastern pacific and I have to admit that these scenes were quite impressive.

Click to expand...

I have pointed this out before. My son has worked as an technician in the motion picture Tv industry now for 7 years. He worked on this film aboard the Nimitz at sea and in san Diego for about two weeks.. He was not involved with the CVN-72 scenes.

The movie was filmed on two CVN's, Nimitz & Linclon. No actual cash/cheques exchanged hands. The USN let the movie maker have feel use of two CVN's for some period of time. According to my son the Talon was pure movie fiction. The USN may have had a hand in making it appear more realistic as a carrier aircraft.

My oldest son...We call 'em "Hollywood!"

this is real chinese J-14 PSed pic.

It looks like a CGI rather than a PS. There seems to be a design commonality with all the pics.

crobato said:

It looks like a CGI rather than a PS. There seems to be a design commonality with all the pics.

Click to expand...

'PS' should be included in 'CGI' I think. Coz PS is also computer generated. In industrial design industry we call 3D/2D modelling/painting in computer 'CAD' or 'CAE' (depend on the project. if it's based on design, then we call them 'CAD'. If it's based on engineering, then we call them CAE). And the fact is that most of the really nice so called 'PS' pictures are made in 'Painter' rather than 'Photoshop'. So that's why I really don't like people use 'PS' or 'CGI', one is just wrong, the other is just too 'Hollywood'. Please use the word 'CAD' or 'CAE' in the future. At the end of day these are the two words used by professional industrial designers.

PS. I've been a professional automotive/industrial designer for the past 4 years. so you guys can really trust me on this one.