airsuperiority
Captain
Intuition tells me if 2003 is indeed the one with all the changes that incorporates the new engine, it might be the actual prototype and not tech demonstrator. Another thing is, what if there's no 2003?
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread IV (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
I doubt we will see major physical changes that requires improvement or deed sign of the structure. I think what we see is what we are going to get, sans engines.
In terms of flight, it is only the higher thrust flight regimes they will need to test, assuming they've placed in things like weight placeholders in the plane to simulate the realistic weight of a WS-15 J-20.
I can expect CAC would have done lots of work to reduce their future workload and mitigate "useless" data and testing from the non WS-15/or equivalent prototypes.
Oh, I think we will see 2003, Xi made a comment about the economy and how it had affected all our nations, so I'm sticking to the premise that the delay has been to establish financial priorities, with the ADIZ going into effect, I have no doubt that means they will be bringing up the "blackbird", not that I expect to see them next week, but they will be moved front and center. If the J-20 was faltering, I doubt greatly that the PLA would have implemented the ADIZ in the rather terse, brash manner it was implemented, they are sending a message, and the J-20 will only reinforce that message!
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I agree with Bltizo, we won't likely see any significant changes on the 2001/2002 airframe design, other than engines, unless some serious fault was discovered during testing.
The J20 is a Chinese bird, not American or European. The Americans and Europeans would happily double the budget and development time to get the last 10% of additional performance out of the design before it goes into production.
The Chinese would rather take the 90% performance already achieved, put the design into production years earlier and make 1.5 times as many planes with the same budget, while they save the other 25% of the budget and staff and invest it into R&D for the next gen of fighters.
The J10 and J20 arc is a perfect example of this strategy at work. If the J10 had been an American or Western European bird, the J10A would not have been put into production, instead they would have waited until the J10B was ready and only produce that. Consequently the J20 would almost certainly have been delayed, and the J10 would probably not even by in frontline service today.
It would be very out of character for China, and CAC in particular, to change this winning strategy now all of a sudden when it has worked so well for them so far.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Actually a lot of Western aircrafts did the same too. A few that came to mind are the F-4s, F-14s and the F-104. The Phantom lacked a gun and not till the F-4E did they finally put one on that bird. The Tomcat suffered from a terrible engine until the Delta and the F-104 let's say it's nickname of a flying coffin was for a reason.
I don't think the Chinese go in for the financial shenanigans that are so prevalent within the Beltway. Aircraft development is to important and expensive for such wasteful games.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
The original F4 didn't have an internal gun because back then the designers thought missiles made guns obsolete. It was a choice, not because the Americans couldn't figure out how to work a gun into the design.
The F14, F15 and even F16 all suffered from engine teething problems early in their lives as America made the shift from Turbojet to turbofan. The airframes themselves were hardly changed at all during that time.
The 104 I don't know that much about, but sounded like a right old lemon that the USA never fielded itself.
But I guess I should also stress that the terrible budget inflation and deadline slippages seems to be a relatively modern development for American and European defence companies that only came about largely after the end of the Cold War. During the Cold War and before, western defence companies seemed to generally be far better at being able to deliver cutting edge equipment on time and on budget.
Makes you kinda wonder if the USSR imploding led to western companies and generals to loose focus and go for too many bells and whistles at the expense of the budget and timetable. That without the existantial threat the USSR embodied looming in the backs of the minds of everyone, defence projects came to be viewed less as the best defence against the end of life as people knew it and more as a means to get the ultimate man toys and as pork barrels.
But I think we are going off topic somewhat. Hope the good people at CAC are reading and give us something new to look at and analyse soon.
Actually, much more than adding the Vulcan cannon occurred through the upgrades to the F-4. The first true, in service, production Phantoms had the J-79-GE-8,-8A and -8B engines of 10,900 lbf dry, and 16,950 afterburner thrust. They also had the Westinghouse APQ-72 radar (pulse only), an Texas Instruments AAA-4 IRST pod under the nose, an AJB-3 nuclear weapons delivery system. Later, the aircraft was redesigned and equipped with J-79-GE-10 engines of 17,844 lbf (79.374 kN) afterburner thrust, the Westinghouse AWG-10 Fire Control System (which included the world's first operational Look Down Shoot Down Pulse Doppler radar), and a new integrated missile control system and expanded ground attack capability. Later, after another significant upgrade, the smokeless J-79-GE-17 smokeless engines were added with of 17,900 lbf (79.379 kN) afterburner thrust, the new AWG-10B radar with digitized circuitry, a Honeywell VTAS (Visual Target Acquisition Set) with helmet sight, still classified avionics improvements, some airframe reinforcement and leading edge slats for enhanced maneuvering. All of these were in addition to the cannon.
To imply that the F-4 Phantom II did not improve substantially in terms of engines, fire control, avionics, structure, and manuevering over its life is just incorrect. It was a significantly different and improved aircraft when all was said and done...which is similar to the types of changes being seen in Chinese upgrades to their aircraft. BTW, Wolf, Kwaig served on US aircraft carriers with these aircraft and knows whereof he speaks.
Specific structural changes are not all that should be considered when talking about serious upgrades to an aircraft, though the later F-16E/F Mod 60 aircraft are complete new builds.plawolf said:
For example, the F-14, in addition to the original TF-30 engines being replaced with GE F110-400 engines, the later upgrades also included newer digital avionics systems, a complete new glass cockpit, they replaced the AWG-9 with the newer AN/APG-71 radar. Other new systems included the Airborne Self Protection Jammer (ASPJ), Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS), SJU-17(V) Naval Aircrew Common Ejection Seats (NACES) and Infra-red search and track (IRST). All of these required significant change in the wiring and computing included within the arcraft, and was why complete new letter designations (like J-10 to J-10B) wre used to designate them.
The same is true of the other aircraft. The F-15C is a hugely upgraded and better aircraft than the original F-15s.
As I stated, the F-16E/F Block 60 is a completely new build aircraft, and the US did not wait to introduce the F-16 for those types of innovations. In fact, generally, in almost all cases, the US does not wait for these types upgrades, they produce the initial aircraft by the hundreds, and then upgrade them, or build completely new version of the aircraft to account fo the needed changes.
Well, the US built the F-104 as an interim solution until the F-106 was ready.plawolf said:
Still, hundreds were built and they served with the US Air Force from 1958-1969, and then on in the National Guard until 1975. 17 years of service for about 300 aircraft.
Other nations bought them (new builds) and they served with Germany, Japan, Turkey, Canada, and Italy...Italy retiring their last aircraft in 2004. So, while it was an interim solution, and did not fulfill all the requirements the US was looking for (they had to wait for the F-106 for that), it really was not what you might call a "lemon," and it did undergo significant changes in its history. I could recount them all here, but they were similar to the upgrades the US performed on its other major aircraft as shown in the above examples.
Yes, it is OT, and I will stop here. But I wanted to let other readers know that the changes to these US aircraft were significant...and in may ways at least as significant as the J-10 to J-10B, and J-11B upgrades the PRC is doing to its aircraft, and what I have no doubt they will do to the J-20 as well over it's life.plawolf said:But I think we are going off topic somewhat. Hope the good people at CAC are reading and give us something new to look at and analyse soon.
Engineer
Major
is an interesting video which explains why China seemed so open when J-20 had its first flight.
In it, a general tells us that there were calls to disperse the crowd outside of CAC due to concern about national secrets. However, the general himself rejected that idea after a tour of the outside, and rightly so. The rationale is that the crowd are patriotic Chinese citizens, and that their interest and attention are beneficial to China's aerospace industry. Dispersing them would be counterproductive and would foster resentments.
Upon saying this, the general received two rounds of applause.
In it, a general tells us that there were calls to disperse the crowd outside of CAC due to concern about national secrets. However, the general himself rejected that idea after a tour of the outside, and rightly so. The rationale is that the crowd are patriotic Chinese citizens, and that their interest and attention are beneficial to China's aerospace industry. Dispersing them would be counterproductive and would foster resentments.
Upon saying this, the general received two rounds of applause.
- Status