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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Another one ...
 

Attachments

  • J-20 2015 - 8.jpg
    J-20 2015 - 8.jpg
    50.1 KB · Views: 172

plawolf

Lieutenant General
I wonder where they are putting the air brakes now if the removed it from the back like they had on the first few prototypes.

Looking at the size of the new larger stingers, that would have been an ideal place for them. Maybe the incorporated the air brakes and whatever sensors the have in the tips of the stingers into the same structure? That might explain when the area with the different colour/material is so large?
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
I wonder where they are putting the air brakes now if the removed it from the back like they had on the first few prototypes.

Looking at the size of the new larger stingers, that would have been an ideal place for them. Maybe the incorporated the air brakes and whatever sensors the have in the tips of the stingers into the same structure? That might explain when the area with the different colour/material is so large?

I think its likely that the airbrake is defunct, likely upon application they noticed some aerodynamic rumble or "buffeting", or even blanking out of the elevons/ruddervators, so no dice on a speedbrake. The YF-23 offered split-flaps for drag control, which though complicated, offer far fewer aerodynamic complications with the aft surfaces. The whole airframe is likely draggy enough when alpha is increased without a thrust increase, so a slight pitch increase is used to slow it down on approach.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
i must say, the size of the different colored tip of tail booms and the angled cutout does seem peculiar. if itnis just ram why not cover a larger area and why make it angled? if putting passive sensors inside - one wouldnt need nearly as huge cutout. i guess it is possible there are both passive and acitve arrays in each of the booms, covering the rear hemisphere...

no doubt the stings are loaded with goodies, passive and otherwise, prolly why the different size and shape??
 

Mika Montero

New Member
Registered Member
PAK-FA have had some trouble in structure in test flights. As almost the entire axis is tunneled for weapon cavity, the structural strength is surely weakened. Let's see how Russians solve that with....

I am sorry there is no need to be gleeful to the any perceived misfortune of an ally (Russia).

MODERATOR COMMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS:

Mika, you were fine up to that point.

You are new to SD, please read the rules. The very type of things you speak against in your post you then turn around and do similarly.

DO NOT refer to other SD posters, even indirectly, disrespectfully and make presumptions about their intent.

DO NOT pit China and the US against each others as "real enemies."

These things lead to high emotion, arguments, and ultimately suspensions and banning from SD.

As I say, read the rules...then post accordingly.

DO NOT REPOND TO THIS MODERATION
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zool

Junior Member
I am sorry there is no need to be gleeful to the any perceived misfortune of an ally (Russia).

I don't think it was a slam on Russia, if you read the post by Phoenix and the one he was responding to. He noted an issue that did indeed come up with PAK-FA in the first prototypes and basically agreed that the J-20 was in a position to achieve IOC first, based on the pace we are witnessing in the development process.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top