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

[latenlazy]

if you quote me from a year ago i always say J-20 was around 21 meters, later i said it is between a range of 20.5-21.5 meters, and the reasoning is based upon the famous picture where the J-20 is compared to F-22 and the author said 21.11 meters, the canopies of both jets are about the same size.
Since they are aproximations, there is always a margin of error.

Now since the chinese TV says it is 20 meters, i guess very likely is near 20.8 and close to 21 meters.

that is my guessing

Soo...you worry about pixels, biases, and errors when we have a comparison between the J-20 and J-15, but you have no qualms about potential errors using the F-22 canopy, which we don't even know is the same size as the J-20's? This is beyond silly.

 

[MiG-29]

Soo...you worry about pixels, biases, and errors when we have a comparison between the J-20 and J-15, but you have no qualms about potential errors using the F-22 canopy, which we don't even know is the same size as the J-20's? This is beyond silly.

we have to learn to be tolerant, your guess is alright, but is not official, same is mine.

when we can read the dimension in this page for J-20 we can say who was wrong now is just a subjective point of view where pixels and subjectivity play a big role

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

now it seems J-20 is a bit larger than T-50

 

[latenlazy]

we have to learn to be tolerant, your guess is alright, but is not official, same is mine.

when we can read the dimension in this page for J-20 we can say who was wrong now is just a subjective point of view where pixels and subjectivity play a big role

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

now it seems J-20 is a bit larger than T-50

Why would you bring in the T-50 on a discussion about the J-20's length?

 

[leibowitz]

Why would you bring in the T-50 in hear on a discussion about the J-20's length?

Yeah, not really sure how that picture advances his original point. Actually, I'm not even sure what MiG-29 is trying to argue here...

 

[MiG-29]

Yeah, not really sure how that picture advances his original point. Actually, I'm not even sure what MiG-29 is trying to argue here...

more important is the Su-35 measured at 21.9, but i just found interesting both pictures use flankers to tell the size, none is official niether exact but if we photoshop a J-20 there, we would probably add and see J-20 from the Su-35 sting up to the T-50 nose or slightly more according to a 20.3 meters or a 20.9 meters

 

[Maggern]

more important is the Su-35 measured at 21.9, but i just found interesting both pictures use flankers to tell the size, none is official niether exact but if we photoshop a J-20 there, we would probably add and see J-20 from the Su-35 sting up to the T-50 nose or slightly more according to a 20.3 meters or a 20.9 meters

If I were to compare sizes between two aircraft, I'd much rather rely on a satellite picture that contains both. Then both aircraft would unequivocally be pictured from the same distance, angle and resolution. The pictures you have used comparing cockpits etc are highly inexact, as there is ample room for differences in angles, distances etc. One should always use the tools that gives the best equal representation of the measuring stick and the aircraft in question. As of now, that is Deino's pic. Remember how we landed on a more considerable length using more dubious and erroneous pics earlier? Well, now we finally have the best tool we can have short of official measurements or actually standing next to the aircraft.

 

[airsuperiority]

Soo...you worry about pixels, biases, and errors when we have a comparison between the J-20 and J-15, but you have no qualms about potential errors using the F-22 canopy, which we don't even know is the same size as the J-20's? This is beyond silly.

Hence I say his abilities to detect even the smallest things that probably even a single-celled bacteria won't notice is truly a superhuman capability. If Marvels is ever looking to add a new superhero to their list of lineups, I'd definitely nominate him

 

[Air Force Brat]

If I were to compare sizes between two aircraft, I'd much rather rely on a satellite picture that contains both. Then both aircraft would unequivocally be pictured from the same distance, angle and resolution. The pictures you have used comparing cockpits etc are highly inexact, as there is ample room for differences in angles, distances etc. One should always use the tools that gives the best equal representation of the measuring stick and the aircraft in question. As of now, that is Deino's pic. Remember how we landed on a more considerable length using more dubious and erroneous pics earlier? Well, now we finally have the best tool we can have short of official measurements or actually standing next to the aircraft.

Well let me jump in here and agree with Maggern[ by the way is that your last name, we may be related, pm me if ?], the satelite photo does not lie. This whole argument about length is really about whether or not the J-20 is agile, [It is quite agile], we need to go back to Dr. Songs position paper, he set about to make the J-20 a very agile aircraft while knowing that TVC would likely not be available. Engineer has stated that TVC is likely NOT in the equation even for the future. So lets get back on topic. We know Mig from that photo that J-11 and J-20 are in the same ballpark, and J-20 appears to be slightly shorter? than the J-11. So now that 2001 and 2002 are undergoing more advance flight testing at ? JIANG? how far is that in miles from Chengdu. Have any of the photos of the sisters, [01 and 02] come from JIANG? I am kind of postulating that 2003 will roll out at Chengdu after the Chinese New Year? Cheers AFB

 

[Gorthaur]

Well Jr. that depends on who you want to believe, the F-22 will supercruise at that speed and the J-20, J-31, and the T-50 will almost certainly be in the same ballpark as the F-22 on top end, I would hazard a guess of Mach 2.2+. How the others will stack up at supercruise will ultimately depend on the powerplants, weight, and how slick they are, I would imagine that the Russians will push the top end on the T-50 up as far as is possible, The J-31 will most certainly get better powerplants if it survives the cut, and the J-20, T-50, F-22 will likely all end up at 2.2 or a little better. Now the F-35 is what it is, and Mach 1.8 is pretty fast for a Strike Aircraft, so where does that leave us?----the old Fighter Pilot addage was that speed is life, I'll stick to that until someone shows that it is no longer relevant, and L/O technology is constantly changing so we shall see? Welcome to Sino Defense? AFB

I was thinking in the lines that planes have full load when mentioning maximum speeds which means of course also external armament. I thought it would cause so much drag that it is not practical to go for more powerful engines. I admit that I should have mentioned that point in earlier post.

F-22 would surely go some 2.x Mach if needed and with only internal armament. F-35 is coming out more and more lumpy with every iteration and I doubt it could do more than 1.8 mach even with clean sheet plane. Even thought, that F135 engine IS a monster for an engine. And there is the problem with Chinese planes, engine technology is not yet even near what USA can manufacture. (Or UK, referring to canceled F136 engine).

Edit: Fixed the F-35 engines to correct numbers. I shouldn't trust my menory.

 

[Engineer]

By Su-27 being larger 21.9 without pitot tube only makes larger J-20...

The length of a standard Flanker is longer than both J-15 and J-20 as the satellite photo showed.

In another satellite photo, we can also reach the exact same conclusion when comparing J-20 to a J-11B.

Tags: Chengdu; China; J-10; J-11; J-20; Imgur; Xi'an; length comparison; satellite images; satellite photos;

So comparing the J-20 against a bigger plane doesn't make the J-20 larger at all. The J-20 is certainly not going to be longer than Su-33's length of 21.19 meter, and most likely shorter than 21 meter.