J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread IV (Closed to posting)

[vesicles]

I think the J-20 project is like a swan, nothing moves above but it paddles furiously under water. Official blessing must have been bestowed long ago.

Yep! I think they already got the official blessing when it first came out during Gates' visit. No plane would dare to come out with such bang without official blessing. then there were a slew of high-profile visitors to Chengdu. So yeah, it has been blessed.

I like the swan analogy. I think that is exactly what is happening to J-20. that fact that we don't see it any more suggest that the testing has gotten to a stage that is top secret and absolutely critical to its performance. It has gotten to this stage possibly because everything is moving along smoothly, which means the plane is performing at the very least according to plan. Of course, it could also be because that they found something wrong with the plane and it went back for some kind of major repair. That is however extremely unlikely because they had the confidence to let people see it. Based on what I know about how the Chinese govn't does things, they would not let it out unless they were absolutely sure things were good. And then they made multiple copies. If they invested so much money and time building all these prototypes, they must be highly confident about the plane. I don't think the Chinese engineers could be that much off and only found out something major was wrong after all these years doing all the different tests. for an organization that could come up such high-tech plane, it is almost impossible that something so major has gone wrong and no one caught it beforehand in those years of testings.

All those casual fly-by's in the sky of Chengdu was simply low low low-profile stuff that they don't care if people see it. This further supports the view that all the early showing was deliberate. No one will be able to see anything if they don't want us to see it, which is exactly what is happening now.

 

[Jeff Head]

Recommend our mod like beings whom I am not saying I know what they are but...*holds invisible cheeseburger* Aliens.....
use there great powers to dazzle us lowly mortals and create a thread for the Shinshin ATD-X in the world armed forces forum.

Here ya go:

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/wor...lopment-news-pics-videos-6599.html#post251019

 

[Inst]

About the WS-10; you could make an analogy between the TF-30 and the WS-10, but the WS-10 project is not even mature enough to power J-10Bs. In the same way, the JF-17 depends on RD-93s instead of WS-13 engines.

As of right now, it's safe to say that there are no guarantees about the WS-15 project and expecting it to fall behind schedule is a reasonable expectation.

With regards to AESA; GaN AESA on the F-35 can jam F-22 GaAs AESA despite having a smaller total aperture. China supposedly has reasonable GaN research, especially considering its position in the telecommunications world, but until Chinese GaN is mature it'll have a generational deficit against other AESAs that employ GaN technology.

On the plus side, the Chinese J-20 AESA apparently uses only 232 or so elements; each element actually contains 8 T/R modules in a 3D configuration. Perhaps they are already using GaN and the AESA poster failed to mention it.

 

[Blitzo]

About the WS-10; you could make an analogy between the TF-30 and the WS-10, but the WS-10 project is not even mature enough to power J-10Bs. In the same way, the JF-17 depends on RD-93s instead of WS-13 engines.

Well we don't know how advanced along WS-13 is, and frankly there is probably less urgency for WS-13 considering the Russians are fairly compliant with producing RD-93s at present.

WS-10s however are powering all new flankers that SAC produces (sans J-15, but that is almost definitely due to PLAN risk reduction -- however you cut it, Al-31 is a more mature engine than WS-10), so the analogy doesn't completely work.

The lack of WS-10 equipping J-10B is definitely disconcerting, but that could be due to a heap of smaller reasons rather than simply "WS-10 doesn't meet thrust/reliability requirements".

As of right now, it's safe to say that there are no guarantees about the WS-15 project and expecting it to fall behind schedule is a reasonable expectation.

I agree that WS-15 (and probably J-20, Y-20, etc) will all face some level of delay, as is the nature of all high performing aerospace projects these days.
Question is, how much, and how greatly will it affect the air force's procurement plans?

With regards to AESA; GaN AESA on the F-35 can jam F-22 GaAs AESA despite having a smaller total aperture. China supposedly has reasonable GaN research, especially considering its position in the telecommunications world, but until Chinese GaN is mature it'll have a generational deficit against other AESAs that employ GaN technology.

On the plus side, the Chinese J-20 AESA apparently uses only 232 or so elements; each element actually contains 8 T/R modules in a 3D configuration. Perhaps they are already using GaN and the AESA poster failed to mention it.

Where did you read that F-35's radar could jam F-22s?

Whether J-20 enters service with a GaN radar or not isn't a big issue; avionics can be retrofitted without much hassle, and even if the initial batch "only" features a GaA AESA, that is still a highly competitive and large radar with the lion's share of the worlds top end fighters.

 

[shen]

with 360 degree radar and guidance and ultra manouverable missile... maybe. but wouldnt it be more effective if the missile already facing backward ? surely there would be some aerodinamic changes to the missile shape and structure to make the missile stable during initial backward flying or maybe shoot them out of a container.

here is a Israeli sales video for Python 5.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Ok, I know it is a sales pitch, thus Python 5 is given the best scenario, but it demonstrates one possible scenario where a backward facing radar is not necessary to take a backward shot.
Presumably, the missile is fired on lock on after launch mode. First it relies on the fighter's forward facing radar to get a firing solution, the radar tracks the enemy fighter to the limit of its POV, the last know radar track is downloaded to the missile's INS, missile launches makes 180 degree turn and still guided by INS based on the last know radar track, with a wide POV and sensitive seeker, it may just be able to intercept a closing target. Now Python 5 is a large missile with a very powerful rocket motor. A less powerful missile such as the AIM-9X with its old 5" diameter motor may not have the kinetic energy to pull this off despite its advanced seeker.
This maneuver would allow a fighter to avoid a dangerous merge with the enemy and still get off a WVR missile.

 

[Engineer]

About the WS-10; you could make an analogy between the TF-30 and the WS-10, but the WS-10 project is not even mature enough to power J-10Bs. In the same way, the JF-17 depends on RD-93s instead of WS-13 engines.

On the contrary, the WS-10 is matured enough to be used in more than hundred serial produced J-11B as well as on various prototypes including J-10B, J-15 and J-16. Whether WS-13 is matured enough has no impact on the maturity of WS-10 or progress of WS-15.

As of right now, it's safe to say that there are no guarantees about the WS-15 project and expecting it to fall behind schedule is a reasonable expectation.

That's a self contradicting statement. You can't have reasonable expectation while simultaneously saying there is no guarantee.

With regards to AESA; GaN AESA on the F-35 can jam F-22 GaAs AESA despite having a smaller total aperture. China supposedly has reasonable GaN research, especially considering its position in the telecommunications world, but until Chinese GaN is mature it'll have a generational deficit against other AESAs that employ GaN technology.

On the plus side, the Chinese J-20 AESA apparently uses only 232 or so elements; each element actually contains 8 T/R modules in a 3D configuration. Perhaps they are already using GaN and the AESA poster failed to mention it.

The quoted advantage of GaN is more efficiency, not jamming. The development of new software that take advantage of the physics of a phase array is what enabled a radar for jamming purposes. Existing AESA radar made from GaAs can perform such role with appropriate software. In any case, these are distractions to the main point. The simple fact remains: China already has AESA radar for the J-20. Pointing out new technologies isn't going to erase the existence of that radar.

 

[tphuang]

That's a self contradicting statement. You can't have reasonable expectation while simultaneously saying there is no guarantee.

That wasn't a self contradicting argument. You can certainly say that we don't about the readiness of a project, but based on past records of such project, it will probably be delayed. Just look at all the civilian airliner projects. You can pretty much say they are all going to be delayed because that's what track record shows.

Now for my personal view of this.

WS-15 is a very complicate project. Measuring whether or not it's on time is a hard thing to do. I don't think we can really say it's ahead of behind since we don't know what the actual schedule is. We don't know that PLAAF has expectations it will be ready by which year. We do know that it has been making good progress and that it has been proceeding well compared to WS-10A project had been (this is based on what the big shrimps are saying).

 

[Engineer]

That wasn't a self contradicting argument.

The reason I called the statement self contradictory is that by having no guarantee of anything, there is no guarantee that there will be delay. Hence, an expectation of a delay isn't reasonable when there is no evidence to base that expectation on.

You can certainly say that we don't about the readiness of a project, but based on past records of such project, it will probably be delayed. Just look at all the civilian airliner projects. You can pretty much say they are all going to be delayed because that's what track record shows.

If we go by the record of Chinese civilian aviation projects, J-10 should be a flop too. Heck, even when going by the record of Chinese military aviation projects, J-10 should also be a flop. The fact that J-10 is a success illustrates there is little to no correlation between projects.

People keep mentioning about past record, but the WS-10 is the first and only production turbofan engine developed by China. It is only one sample, which is not statistically significant enough to build a track record on. If China had five turbofan engine projects over the past ten years and all of them met delays one way or another, then I would concede on the importance of track record.

Now for my personal view of this.

WS-15 is a very complicate project. Measuring whether or not it's on time is a hard thing to do. I don't think we can really say it's ahead of behind since we don't know what the actual schedule is. We don't know that PLAAF has expectations it will be ready by which year. We do know that it has been making good progress and that it has been proceeding well compared to WS-10A project had been (this is based on what the big shrimps are saying).

Agreed. Furthermore, if WS-15 is significant behind schedule, we would certainly be hearing about the rumors. The lack of such rumors means that there is nothing to enable one to claim a delay is a reasonable expectation.

 

[foxmulder]

Frankly, I think there is a delay for ws-15 otherwise it would have equipped J-20 prototypes.

 

[latenlazy]

Frankly, I think there is a delay for ws-15 otherwise it would have equipped J-20 prototypes.

Except we knew from the get go that the prototype might be ready before the engine. We used to put the J-20's first prototype at 2014~2015 under the assumption that the engine wouldn't be ready until then at earliest, so I think that's the date most of us who've been at this for a while are waiting for.