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

[AssassinsMace]

When the J-20 came out I remember a lot of Western journalists mocking this plane and China for designing a 'stealth' plane using 'unstealthy' canards. The condescension and ridicule was massive. But now that Boeing has come out with a SIXTH generation stealth design using canards, I wonder if these same 'journalists' will start mocking the F/A-XX as well. My guess is no, so what's the difference? Western canards are made of adamantium? /stupid

It's a case where people are just going to point to anything different as THE difference... Just look at how people say the J-20 is a rip-off of the F-22. Then it's really not a rip-off of the F-22 if they can see differences.

 

[latenlazy]

The section from the saw-tooth to the arrow is the "band" I was referring to.

I did my own measurements using the points indicated with the lines I drew and found no difference. The lines I drew are at different angles because I followed the dimensions of the individual petals, and the two petals I thought were most visible were not corresponding. Those lengths should be the same no matter how much the nozzle is contracted. It's pretty hard to get an accurate measurement with a picture this small, since very small differences in angle and pixels can create discrepancies, which are then magnified at zoom, but given two uploaded pictures now everyone can make up their own minds.

 

[Solaris]

It's a case where people are just going to point to anything different as THE difference... Just look at how people say the J-20 is a rip-off of the F-22. Then it's really not a rip-off of the F-22 if they can see differences.

The point is that I think they were wrong about exactly how unstealthy a canard actually is. Unless we are supposed to believe that Boeing designers are somehow dumber than the Western journalists who are mocking canards.

 

[siegecrossbow]

When the J-20 came out I remember a lot of Western journalists mocking this plane and China for designing a 'stealth' plane using 'unstealthy' canards. The condescension and ridicule was massive. But now that Boeing has come out with a SIXTH generation stealth design using canards, I wonder if these same 'journalists' will start mocking the F/A-XX as well. My guess is no, so what's the difference? Western canards are made of adamantium? /stupid

Unless you can shoot those canards out like some sort of super sharp boommerangs you don't want to make them out of adamantium lol.

 

[Air Force Brat]

You are trying to imply that Boeing is wrong in its decision to consider canards, so that it is possible Western journalists are not going to become utterly hypocritical when this thing rolls out? I think that's what you're saying...

Actually like you I don't "know" that Boeing is wrong, nor do I "know" that Chengdu is right, this is one of my passions, but not my vocation. What I am saying is that the Western Press is not anti-China, in fact the liberal media is very pro-China, the defense journalists are doing their best to be accurate, they are not political, and many of them are fans of the J-20, but all other things being equal, the addition of an all flying canard on either side of the forward fuselage, with that canard being the aircrafts "primary" pitch control, is like waving a red flag at a bull, it DOES draw undue attention. The F-22s primary pitch control in the early, fine range of pitch, especially supersonic are the OVT, the horizontal stabilons are aft of and blocked by the main wing from the front quadrant.

So the J-20 is NOT a clone of the F-22 although the forward fuse of both, with the exception of the canard, are "very close" in actual shaping, and yes if China was smart they did attempt to duplicate that shaping and planform of the F-22, because it is very good. I don't like canards, I much prefer stabilators/stabilons, and I loath the idea of a tailess planform for a fighter aircraft, super maneuverability requires large control surfaces, for instance the F-22 or J-20, with large deflections to "force" the aircraft to change direction, but I do like the J-20 in spite of its canards, and I do like the Boeing design in spite of it being tailess, see what I'm saying, I don't care for those design elements, but I do admire the aircraft, and find them attractive, and likely very effective at achieving their design goals.

Now to my main point of your assertion of the "western medias anti China bias",,,,,,,

1. It just ain't so, the liberal media loves the idea of a "socialist super-state", caring for???? and dictating "whats best"?????

2. If you Chinese fellows want to be "respected", you've got to quit "whining" that ain't fair in one breath, and proclaiming to be the worlds only future "super-power" in the next breath. Not to say I don't respect you, I do or I wouldn't take my time to "meet" you here on these forums, just saying lets all try to tell the truth, when the US is wrong, I usually confess that honestly I believe, and offer my apology in the next breath. I can do that because I am a US citizen, and my free speech is protected by the first amendment, and I love my country and only desire to make it a better place, and a more honest player on every level.... I know some of you do not enjoy that freedom, and I wish you did, earnestly so.

3. I really do love and respect you fine gentlemen, even when we are polar opposite on a particular subject, many of the exceptions to that "good faith" gentlemanly discourse, find themselves cast into the nether world of "banned idiots" or internet hell, cast into the "outer-darkness" so to speak. Our mods are gentlemen themselves, and have extended me many kindnesses as they have you, for that they have my tremendous respect and friendship... But rest assured if a friend of brat were to be moderated, I would go to the mat for you, just as I defended mig29, very sad that he is no longer with us, but understand very well that he refused to follow the kind and concerned attempts of the mod team to "keep him in the fold?????

 

[Solaris]

Actually like you I don't "know" that Boeing is wrong, nor do I "know" that Chengdu is right, this is one of my passions, but not my vocation. What I am saying is that the Western Press is not anti-China, in fact the liberal media is very pro-China, the defense journalists are doing their best to be accurate, they are not political, and many of them are fans of the J-20, but all other things being equal, the addition of an all flying canard on either side of the forward fuselage, with that canard being the aircrafts "primary" pitch control, is like waving a red flag at a bull, it DOES draw undue attention. The F-22s primary pitch control in the early, fine range of pitch, especially supersonic are the OVT, the horizontal stabilons are aft of and blocked by the main wing from the front quadrant.

So the J-20 is NOT a clone of the F-22 although the forward fuse of both, with the exception of the canard, are "very close" in actual shaping, and yes if China was smart they did attempt to duplicate that shaping and planform of the F-22, because it is very good. I don't like canards, I much prefer stabilators/stabilons, and I loath the idea of a tailess planform for a fighter aircraft, super maneuverability requires large control surfaces, for instance the F-22 or J-20, with large deflections to "force" the aircraft to change direction, but I do like the J-20 in spite of its canards, and I do like the Boeing design in spite of it being tailess, see what I'm saying, I don't care for those design elements, but I do admire the aircraft, and find them attractive, and likely very effective at achieving their design goals.

Now to my main point of your assertion of the "western medias anti China bias",,,,,,,

1. It just ain't so, the liberal media loves the idea of a "socialist super-state", caring for???? and dictating "whats best"?????

2. If you Chinese fellows want to be "respected", you've got to quit "whining" that ain't fair in one breath, and proclaiming to be the worlds only future "super-power" in the next breath. Not to say I don't respect you, I do or I wouldn't take my time to "meet" you here on these forums, just saying lets all try to tell the truth, when the US is wrong, I usually confess that honestly I believe, and offer my apology in the next breath. I can do that because I am a US citizen, and my free speech is protected by the first amendment, and I love my country and only desire to make it a better place, and a more honest player on every level.... I know some of you do not enjoy that freedom, and I wish you did, earnestly so.

3. I really do love and respect you fine gentlemen, even when we are polar opposite on a particular subject, many of the exceptions to that "good faith" gentlemanly discourse, find themselves cast into the nether world of "banned idiots" or internet hell, cast into the "outer-darkness" so to speak. Our mods are gentlemen themselves, and have extended me many kindnesses as they have you, for that they have my tremendous respect and friendship... But rest assured if a friend of brat were to be moderated, I would go to the mat for you, just as I defended mig29, very sad that he is no longer with us, but understand very well that he refused to follow the kind and concerned attempts of the mod team to "keep him in the fold?????

I understand that you personally don't like canards. But apparently Saab, Dassault, BAE, Airbus, Alenia, CAC, and now Boeing just absolutely LOVE canards. Oh and Western journalists don't like them either (at least, when they are attached to a Chinese plane). I'm in a quandary about who to go with here.

 

[kwaigonegin]

Actually like you I don't "know" that Boeing is wrong, nor do I "know" that Chengdu is right, this is one of my passions, but not my vocation. What I am saying is that the Western Press is not anti-China, in fact the liberal media is very pro-China, the defense journalists are doing their best to be accurate, they are not political, and many of them are fans of the J-20, but all other things being equal, the addition of an all flying canard on either side of the forward fuselage, with that canard being the aircrafts "primary" pitch control, is like waving a red flag at a bull, it DOES draw undue attention. The F-22s primary pitch control in the early, fine range of pitch, especially supersonic are the OVT, the horizontal stabilons are aft of and blocked by the main wing from the front quadrant.

So the J-20 is NOT a clone of the F-22 although the forward fuse of both, with the exception of the canard, are "very close" in actual shaping, and yes if China was smart they did attempt to duplicate that shaping and planform of the F-22, because it is very good. I don't like canards, I much prefer stabilators/stabilons, and I loath the idea of a tailess planform for a fighter aircraft, super maneuverability requires large control surfaces, for instance the F-22 or J-20, with large deflections to "force" the aircraft to change direction, but I do like the J-20 in spite of its canards, and I do like the Boeing design in spite of it being tailess, see what I'm saying, I don't care for those design elements, but I do admire the aircraft, and find them attractive, and likely very effective at achieving their design goals.
?

I got bad news for you my friend ... I know a few folks in the aviation industry and it is extremely likely the trend in the next generation of combat aircraft will have reduced or total elimination of the vertical stabilizers. I think one day it will go the way of the dodo bird. Probably only heavies and specialized aircraft will have them.

 

[AssassinsMace]

What is considered a rip-off? A 5th gen fighter is a sophisticated piece of technology. Does the shell make all the difference? Just because it looks similar, does it make it a rip-off? What about all the technology in it? Are we to believe anyone who thinks the J-20 is a rip-off of the F-22 has exact copies of technology in the avionics and other components on the inside? When people who say rip-off they're saying it was stolen technology not by copying but the technology taken illegally. Who believes the J-20 has same things inside as the F-22? No one outside of those who know knows what's inside. And since many claim it's Russian technology, how is it a rip-off of the F-22? Again the shell... They said China stole the technology of the W-88 nuclear warhead. How do they know that? Because someone walked into the American embassy in Beijing and slapped down a pencil drawing of the W-88 warhead and left. From a drawing they concluded the blueprints to the W-88 nuclear warhead was stolen because the drawing matched the same specs in scale as the W-88. So if I found a picture of the W-88 warhead in the public domain and traced it on a piece of paper, does that mean I'm in possession of the W-88 warhead? Can a picture explode like a nuclear bomb because apparently just having a drawing with the exact scaled dimensions of the real thing but in possession of nothing on the inside means I'm a nuclear power. A picture of the outside tells you nothing of what's inside.

 

[Quickie]

I did my own measurements using the points indicated with the lines I drew and found no difference. The lines I drew are at different angles because I followed the dimensions of the individual petals, and the two petals I thought were most visible were not corresponding. Those lengths should be the same no matter how much the nozzle is contracted. It's pretty hard to get an accurate measurement with a picture this small, since very small differences in angle and pixels can create discrepancies, which are then magnified at zoom, but given two uploaded pictures now everyone can make up their own minds.

View attachment 9535

The line you drawn for the right engine petal should be starting at point of the arrow I had used to indicate one end of the band. If the 2 green lines are of the same length, then the difference in the 2 petals' length can be easily seen.

 

[latenlazy]

The line you drawn for the right engine petal should be starting at point of the arrow I had used to indicate one end of the band. If the 2 green lines are of the same length, then the difference in the 2 petals' length can be easily seen.

I'm pretty certain that the "line" behind the line that I drew on the right nozzle isn't a line, but an effect of lighting. A similar thing can be seen on the left nozzle, though it's much darker and more blended into the rest off the nozzle.

EDIT: I take it back. There is a good chance that what you pointed out is in fact a line, because if you look at the bottom of the left nozzle, there appears to be a zigzagged radius that sits outside the radius of the line that I drew in. That would make sense given other pictures of the engine, since we know from other pictures that the fixed part of the nozzle mates with the contracting part in a sawtooth pattern. If that were indeed the case, then it seems more likely that the nozzles are the same size but the sawtoothing is even less visible on the left nozzle than the right one due to lighting.