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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
View attachment 9066

A quick comparison.

The intakes are clearly different now.
Here's the best comparitive images I could find, from about the same angle.

The first is the new aircraft, the second is of the older. Yes, the intakes are shaped differently. Also, there looks to be some kind of new sensor under the nose there.


j20-01.jpg

j20-02.jpg


I cannot get a real good feel for it, but from this angle the front canards and the vertical stabilizors do not look that much different. The cockpit canopy does seem to have some minor differences too. But as you can also see, the lighting and angle make a difference on the color as perceived by the camera. I am not sure just yet, from these pictures alone, that the new aircraft is that much lighter.
 
Last edited:

SinoSoldier

Colonel
They need the innerframe because they also added detonation cord on top of the canopy. So when need to eject the top blows off and the rest of the canopy will not be strong enough. Previously they probably went with the F-22's way of throwing the whole canopy away before the pilot ejects.

My guess is maybe this is for low altitude flight test where this ejection method may be quicker and safer to pilot.

Perhaps then this is a temporary method to ensure safe testing of aircraft. The production variant should retain the original canopy.
 

no_name

Colonel
Is that a potential gun placement under one of the wings near the root?

edit: never mind just my eyes. I do wonder where the gun will be placed?
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Perhaps then this is a temporary method to ensure safe testing of aircraft. The production variant should retain the original canopy.

Why? It's not like having the additional brace does anything major to RCS.

People admonish the T-50 for having a two piece canopy, and even F-35 for having a braced one piece canopy. But just because a featureless one piece canopy looks cooler doesn't mean its a better choice or more stealthy.
 

paintgun

Senior Member
I cannot get a real good feel for it, but from this angle the front canards and the vertical stabilizors do not look that much different. The cockpit canopy does seem to have some minor differences too. But as you can also see, the lighting and angle make a difference on the color as perceived by the camera. I am not sure just yet, from these pictures alone, that the new aircraft is that much lighter.

The inside of the canopy looks really different, at least to my eyes
Lighter? Maybe not, I'd imagine it would pack some extra few hundred kilos for the new bells and whistles, it's the fuzzy picture obscuring the outline of the plane making it look somewhat thin in the air

Perhaps then this is a temporary method to ensure safe testing of aircraft. The production variant should retain the original canopy.

This is the production variant.
If anything I prefer this kind of canopy as much as I prefer my chocolate ice cream over vanillas
 

no_name

Colonel
If anything I prefer this kind of canopy as much as I prefer my chocolate ice cream over vanillas

I like mint with chocolate chips. Tip top don't make them anymore in NZ and the only other brand I found was expensive. Can still find it in Aus.

I don't really mind what final configuration it would be. Rooting for single canopy is just a personal preference.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
What's that orangish looking thing under its chin?

Mock up of an IRST protrusion, similar to the F-35s EOTS.

The confirmation of J-20 having an IRST is one of the biggest developments of this new prototype. We've known J-20 would have an EODAS like system, but a steerable IRST is necessary for focusing at particular regions of airspace to passively search, identify and engage opposing aircraft, and is especially necessary against stealth aircraft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top