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

[latenlazy]

Looks like another cropped corner there.

Can't decide if those black hexagons on the back are more vents for the inlet tunnel or maybe vents for the APU, or just different colored panels. Clearly though the previous vents on the back behind the cockpit are gone, which suggests the hexagonal vents on the side of the inlets probably replaced them.

I think what looks like the rectangular geometry of the panels on the back suggests that the exterior arrangements of panels on the plane is probably not final. There will likely be more changes. They may not have bothered to make those changes and finalize the design of the exterior until they finalized the design of the interior of the plane.

EDIT: On further inspection those black hexagons on the back look reflective, so they're unlikely to be holes.

 

[ladioussupp]

btw, I wrote an entry on USNI for J-20

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"The back corners of vertical tail fins have also been clipped. According to a Chinese research paper, that seems to reduce the radar signature from side angles."

Would you please provide the paper? Thank you~~

 

[Munir]

"The back corners of vertical tail fins have also been clipped. According to a Chinese research paper, that seems to reduce the radar signature from side angles."

Would you please provide the paper? Thank you~~

Sure you have less surface but every change in angle adds RCS in other directions. I think it is more a matter of strength issues cause just imagine if you turn a canard. The outward surfaces face tremendous forces. If you clip some parts you reduce that and it needs less maintenance... If it reduces RCS would they just skip "clipping" the main wing? Besides that The F16 (not first version) or even F2 have this... I doubt they were so busy with reducing their RCS back then. Maybe it services the purpose of lowering drag or making the wing more effective?

So some papers as news source and publication somewhere else does not mean it is the truth... Journalist are often not informed or technical educated.

 

[Blitzo]

Sure you have less surface but every change in angle adds RCS in other directions. I think it is more a matter of strength issues cause just imagine if you turn a canard. The outward surfaces face tremendous forces. If you clip some parts you reduce that and it needs less maintenance... If it reduces RCS would they just skip "clipping" the main wing? Besides that The F16 (not first version) or even F2 have this... I doubt they were so busy with reducing their RCS back then. Maybe it services the purpose of lowering drag or making the wing more effective?

So some papers as news source and publication somewhere else does not mean it is the truth... Journalist are often not informed or technical educated.

The publication itself looked to be from a scientific journal, so if it was, chances are it was definitely informed and technically proficient in their field, if not directly sourced from a J-20 related study.

And what has F-16 or F-2 got to do with anything? No one is saying that every aircraft with outwardly clipped wings wants to reduce RCS, and no one is saying clipping the outward edge of a control surface will always reduce its RCS on every kind of surface. the argument is that in this case it seems to have that effect. Why it does that is another matter entirely and I don't thinking any of us have the knowledge to confidently make one claim or another.


There is definitely a train of thought that clipping the edges may be to strain forces, but the paper showing the canard and dbsm readings seem to indicate there is an RCS reduction function as well.

 

[latenlazy]

Sure you have less surface but every change in angle adds RCS in other directions. I think it is more a matter of strength issues cause just imagine if you turn a canard. The outward surfaces face tremendous forces. If you clip some parts you reduce that and it needs less maintenance... If it reduces RCS would they just skip "clipping" the main wing? Besides that The F16 (not first version) or even F2 have this... I doubt they were so busy with reducing their RCS back then. Maybe it services the purpose of lowering drag or making the wing more effective?

So some papers as news source and publication somewhere else does not mean it is the truth... Journalist are often not informed or technical educated.

Reflections are the point. More reflections aren't necessarily bad so long as it's away from the source. In the case of the wing's trailing edge that little knick probably reflects the waves back and forth between the radar absorbent edge to reduce signals.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Here's another shot with the crowd. That's a lot of people.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blitzo]

"The back corners of vertical tail fins have also been clipped. According to a Chinese research paper, that seems to reduce the radar signature from side angles."

Would you please provide the paper? Thank you~~

Post 3012, this thread

 

[Jeff Head]

... by the way with all the modifications to '2011' Trumpeter needs to redo their 1/72 scale model to represent the latest standard.

Deino

Yes. I have that model...as yet unbuilt.

I intend to try and scratch build the differences into the aircraft when I do build it. Most of them should be fairly straight forward.

 

[Jeff Head]

Guys, may I please request everyone, Chinese or Pakistani or anyone else, to stop arguing about whether J-20 would approved for Pakistan Air Force or not.

Be a bit more mature about this, who so ever tries to flame the argument that China would never let Pakistan have the J-20, is not worth responding to.

Just let it be, and if this subject comes up again, then politely tell whoever raises the subject, to refrain from doing so.

Just for the record, China is not like America when it comes to it's allies, nor is Pakistan like Japan. Equating or drawing similarities with these countries and their alliances is amateurish.

For one thing, Pakistan didn't become China's friend, after being nuked by China. That's something to think about, when comparing alliances.

Dizasta1 read, understand, and adhere to the following moderation:

First, you are not a moderator on this forum, it is not your position to instruct other members in how to respond to topics. Suggestions are fine. But couch them as clear suggestions and not as instructions. When you start couching those suggestions in terms like "whosever (blah blah blah) ...is not worth responding too,", or call one side of the argument (which just so happens to be the one you do not agree with) a "flame," or trying to basically silence the argument you do not agree with by telling people to reframe from bringing it up or responding to it, your intent to try and silence those discussions is clear, and you are coming very close to crossing the line.

Second, you call people amateurish (in this case me, because I am the one who indicated that the US would not sell its F-22s to Japan), when you have no idea regarding their background or involvement in such matters. And you do it simply because you do not agree with it. Also your use of past events, which this forum indicates in its rules need not be brought up, to justify your own arguments about alliances and relations with other countries, and once again to silence others, is also coming very close to crossing the line.

Voice your opinion. Give suggestions which are clearly worded as such. Be reasoned in your discussions. But do not try and silence others. If there is an issue you see that needs moderation...inform a moderator. Do not take it upon yourself.

For these actions, you are receiving another WARNING

Disazta1, you have been warned before...this will be your last warning before receiving a suspension and time out. If you persist in such behavior after that, the suspension will be permanent.

Other senior users have been trying to give you suggestions and guidance...please listen to them. That does not mean you have to agree with them...but it is pretty good advise in general from people who have been around here a long time.

 

[Equation]

Here's another shot with the crowd. That's a lot of people.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I know and strangely they all wore dark color clothes.