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

[Air Force Brat]

In comparison, F-35 recently demonstrated flight at 50° AoA, while F-22 is capable of maintaining controlled flight in excess of 60°. In the case of F-22, the control at AoA limit is most likely achieved through thrust vectoring, not via aerodynamics as is the case with J-20. This should reflect better aerodynamics on the J-20.

Fifty degrees was the design target, and in high AoA testing with the spin chute, things went so well that they expanded the envelope to 73 degrees, which is out standing and quite likely very close to the J-20s max AoA, which brings us back to the likelyhood that the Raptor is also in the same neighborhood without TVC. I am rather certain that they will limit the AoA to around 50 in normal operations as there is really no point in going post stall. While the distant coupled canard does have some obvious advantages in this regime, it likely has some disadvantages in others, or else every-one would be building aft mounted delta's with canards. I doubt there is a great deal of difference in every day ops, but I am convinced that TVC has definate advantages, not limited to the post stall regime. Some of this is just fashion, porsche has a very soft spot in its heart for the rear engined horizontally opposed six banger, figure that, although I will confess that my sole drive in a 911 left me greatly dissapointed? Brat

 

[no_name]

, although I will confess that my sole drive in a 911 left me greatly dissapointed? Brat

Being able to drive a Porsche is still nice, it'll handle corners like on rails, no?

Or you mean compared to other high end sports cars?

 

[Hyperwarp]

I assume this is some Sustained AoA and not a quick nose pull up. 60'-65' sustained is pretty impressive without TVC. I believe J-20 will eventually get 3D-TVC. Regarding the F-22, I vaguely remember "Dozer" doing rather crazy slow-speed high AoA passes. And there was some F-22 testing footage sometime back of elevated nose but at sustained supersonic speeds.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Being able to drive a Porsche is still nice, it'll handle corners like on rails, no?

Or you mean compared to other high end sports cars?

Oh it had lots of "personality" it was a nice early nineties with air-cooling, I was just expecting something more buff, but it rattled and prattled, it was cool, but kinda a let down. New vettes handle well, one of our Hospice nurses let me drive hers at the company picnic, and I was impressed, it was definately hooked up, then I had to get on my old GSXR-1000 and ride home, kinda hot, but still interesting, I have an 01 and its not quited as hooked up as the 04 I used to own, even with new Pilot Power 2C2s, they are a dual compound, and hard in the middle with softer compound on the edges, but they are a dissapointment compared to my old Pilot Powers that were nice and gooey all over, but these nasty roads here in Central Obamastan eat those up.
So yes I love all that stuff, but I'm afeared I'm gettin old???? But yes driving a Porsche is still nice.

 

[Air Force Brat]

I assume this is some Sustained AoA and not a quick nose pull up. 60'-65' sustained is pretty impressive without TVC. I believe J-20 will eventually get 3D-TVC. Regarding the F-22, I vaguely remember "Dozer" doing rather crazy slow-speed high AoA passes. And there was some F-22 testing footage sometime back of elevated nose but at sustained supersonic speeds.

Yes it was 73 degrees sustained, and yes the Raptor is quite impressive, no one who has seen it would be so casual about relating it as equal to the Typhoon, there is really nothing quite like the Raptor, I believe that Zeke was the Demo driver when I saw it, but it was something to behold, Max always made the point that he "never departed the Raptor", so he didn't do the crazy stuff the Russian guys do, with the airplane flopping all over the place, but then he was the first Raptor Demo pilot, sadly BHOs sequester is grounding the Raptor Demo team, as well as the Blues and T-Birds. AFB

 

[MiG-29]

Yes it was 73 degrees sustained, and yes the Raptor is quite impressive, no one who has seen it would be so casual about relating it as equal to the Typhoon, there is really nothing quite like the Raptor, I believe that Zeke was the Demo driver when I saw it, but it was something to behold, Max always made the point that he "never departed the Raptor", so he didn't do the crazy stuff the Russian guys do, with the airplane flopping all over the place, but then he was the first Raptor Demo pilot, sadly BHOs sequester is grounding the Raptor Demo team, as well as the Blues and T-Birds. AFB

to be honest i do not think all these stealth fighters are so impressive in agility, stealth imposes some aerodynamic restrictions in terms of flight envelope, that is the reason they use TVC nozzles or HMS with high off bored missiles.

Up to what i have seen YF-22 was in the range of F-15 or F-16 without TVC nozzles.
But everything is a mixture of conditions, F-35 is less agile than the Eurofighter and this is known by western pilots, for F-35 to be competitive versus F-16 or Eurofighter needs the 4th generation fighters carrying many weapons.

They say F-35 true advantage is stealth with a compromise in lesser weapons carried, but as stealth increases the survaivility, then it gives better success per mission than the more agile F-16 or Typhoon.

T-50 must be something similar compared to Su-27 or MiG-29.
J-20 must have also aerodynamic compromises that stealth covers.


In fighter design you can not get the perfect machine, everything comes to tactics and pilot training.

also external stores impose restrictions that a F-35 will suffer more due to a lesser cleaner aerodinamics than F-16.
Stealth fighters fly well due to no external stores, TVC nozzles and stealth.

Rafale was capable enough to more or less resist F-22 in WVR combat when it was lightly loaded and Eurofighter using HMS was able to beat F-22 several times, see both Eurocanards do not have TVC nozzles.
Without TVC nozzles in unlikely all stealth fighters are as good as 4th generation.

I highly recommend you this article

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Engineer]

to be honest i do not think all these stealth fighters are so impressive in agility, stealth imposes some aerodynamic restrictions in terms of flight envelope, that is the reason they use TVC nozzles or HMS with high off bored missiles.

Up to what i have seen YF-22 was in the range of F-15 or F-16 without TVC nozzles.
But everything is a mixture of conditions, F-35 is less agile than the Eurofighter and this is known by western pilots, for F-35 to be competitive versus F-16 of F-35 needs the 4th generation fighters carrying many weapons.

They say F-35 true advantage is stealth with a compromise in lesser weapons carried, but as stealth increases the survaivility, then it gives better success per mission than the more agile F-16 or Typhoon.

T-50 must be something similar compared to Su-27 or MiG-29.
J-20 must have also aerodynamic compromises that stealth covers.


In fighter design you can not get the perfect machine, everything comes to tactics and pilot training.

also external stores impose restrictions that a F-35 will suffer more due to a lesser cleaner aerodinamics than F-16.
Stealth fighters fly well due to no external stores, TVC nozzles and stealth.

Rafale was capable enough to more or less resist F-22 in WVR combat when it was lightly loaded and Eurofighter using HMS was able to beat F-22 several times, see both Eurocanards do not have TVC nozzles.
Without TVC nozzles in unlikely all stealth fighters are as good as 4th generation.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

5th generation aircraft are not only about stealth, but also about superior aerodynamics. Without canard, a 4th generation fighter without TVC can never hope to sustain flight at 50° AoA as the F-35 did. Not only that, but when installed with more powerful engines, 4th generation fighter still cannot compete with F-22 in supercruise performance. So contrary to your claim, 5th generation aircraft with their stealth actually have bigger flight envelope than most 4th generation aircraft.

The use of TVC has no relevance to stealth. Aircraft use TVC typically employ traditional configuration as well where the tailplane becomes ineffective at high angle of attack. As shown in the SAC engineer's writing, aircraft with canard have no such issue and can still maintain control at high angle of attack. Hence, aircraft with canard do not need TVC. This fact is not only illustrated by

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, but also illustrated by your own examples of Eurofighter's and Rafale's holding out against the F-22 during exercises.

 

[Engineer]

Fifty degrees was the design target, and in high AoA testing with the spin chute, things went so well that they expanded the envelope to 73 degrees, which is out standing and quite likely very close to the J-20s max AoA, which brings us back to the likelyhood that the Raptor is also in the same neighborhood without TVC. I am rather certain that they will limit the AoA to around 50 in normal operations as there is really no point in going post stall. While the distant coupled canard does have some obvious advantages in this regime, it likely has some disadvantages in others, or else every-one would be building aft mounted delta's with canards. I doubt there is a great deal of difference in every day ops, but I am convinced that TVC has definate advantages, not limited to the post stall regime. Some of this is just fashion, porsche has a very soft spot in its heart for the rear engined horizontally opposed six banger, figure that, although I will confess that my sole drive in a 911 left me greatly dissapointed? Brat

Of course there are disadvantages to use of canard; namely the increase in sophistication in flight control system and the associated increase in risks. When it is done right, canard layout can result in tremendous aerodynamic advantages. When it is done wrong, the aircraft can crash easily, exemplified by the numerous crashes during Gripen's flight test program.

 

[MiG-29]

5th generation aircraft are not only about stealth, but also about superior aerodynamics. Without canard, a 4th generation fighter without TVC can never hope to sustain flight at 50° AoA as the F-35 did. Not only that, but when installed with more powerful engines, 4th generation fighter still cannot compete with F-22 in supercruise performance. So contrary to your claim, 5th generation aircraft with their stealth actually have bigger flight envelope than most 4th generation aircraft.

The use of TVC has no relevance to stealth. Aircraft use TVC typically employ traditional configuration as well where the tailplane becomes ineffective at high angle of attack. As shown in the SAC engineer's writing, aircraft with canard have no such issue and can still maintain control at high angle of attack. Hence, aircraft with canard do not need TVC. This fact is not only illustrated by

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, but also illustrated by your own examples of Eurofighter's and Rafale's holding out against the F-22 during exercises.

When you show me a cobra by any aircraft with canards and delta wing we talk, no video has ever shown, too much talk little proof Su-27 has tailplanes and does the cobra.

in fact LERX do increase lateral stability as such Su-27 can do the cobra.
this source proves it

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Su-37, S-37 had tailplanes triplane configuration is proven the best configuration but for stealth is not good.

 

[kyanges]

When you show me a cobra by any aircraft with canards and delta wing we talk, no video has ever shown, too much talk little proof Su-27 has tailplanes and does the cobra.

Su-37, S-37 had tailplanes triplane configuration is proven the best configuration but for stealth is not good.

Wait, didn't the X-31 do the cobra a couple decades ago?