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

[jobjed]

stop.... fueling him

Aww... come on, even he can't make 1 + 1 = 3.

 

[broadsword]

Aww... come on, even he can't make 1 + 1 = 3.

But he can make 1 + 2 = 3.

 

[ladioussupp]

New enhanced pics. Now I'm totally confused how this thing might work. It doesn't look like it's just door open and rail pops out. Whatever that is in the pic looks like it swings out from the bottom edge of the bay door opening.

I guess that the door may close up even the rail (and mounted missile) is swung out.

 

[airsuperiority]

Deino

I want to ask you, what is stay on topic?

The J-20 is an aircraft. so if i speak about its aerodynamics is it wrong?
If i speak about stealth its Basing my points upon resources i know is it wrong?


Tell me what is the way i should reply? what can i say what i am allowed to say?

Be open to others opinions, your background is different to mine.

I usually post my sources to say an opinion.

If i will say an aircraft can do this or that i base it upon sources, i do not rely on my pure opinion, but base it upon what i read.

Is it wrong to talk about the way they might detect J-20?


I do not think i am off topic i just think you have different interests than mine and different background, in fact what is wrong about using sources to support your opinions.


I also have the right to give my opinion using the knowledge available to me, and in that i do not think i have broken any forum law.

Perhaps you do not like seeing J-20 from an aerodynamic point of view, my view is from an aerodynamic view, my opinion is from an aerodynamic view, try to guess what i am studying at University.

i do not think seeing J-20 as from an aerodynamic point of view is off topic because J-20 is an aircraft.

You might be interested only in pictures, me too, perhaps in dates, me too, but i also see the J-20 as an aerodynamic object.
Remember we see the world through the filters of our experience and our interests.

I know sometimes we might stray from topic but i do not think the way i see J-20 is wrong, i simply base my opinions upon what i read.

But okay i will open another thread titled J-20 analysis just to compromise with you.

The moment you start a discovery channel on Flanker's aerodynamics just to compare to T-50 just to compare to my grandma's toilet seat before you relate all that back to J-20 is called off-topic.
And posting articles about the Frogfoot's development and how the Mig-29 test pilot spent 3 hours in the toilet because there simply wasn't enough fiber back in Soviet Russia and then telling us that demonstrates why the T-50 can destroy the black hole simply by looking at it and therefore it's more stealthy than the J-20 is also off-topic. In other words, giving us a huge database of articles you read and collect from elsewhere to back up another off-topic claim is also off-topic.
If you still don't know what it means, it's better you not post here yet(so you save yourself the embarrassment and us the torture of using that mouse wheel to scroll down irrelevant stuff) and go find out what these 2 words mean first. I know it's difficult for you, but don't worry we won't run away while you're taking a course to learn that first.

 

[Blitzo]

New enhanced pics. Now I'm totally confused how this thing might work. It doesn't look like it's just door open and rail pops out. Whatever that is in the pic looks like it swings out from the bottom edge of the bay door opening.

You described it in a nutshell

hhg posted this over on CDF

Definitely a different way to go about the sraam weapons bay. At least no one can accuse them of copying F-22.

I wonder if this configuration and the lower launch rail position is a necessity of the canards. Either way it looks like the time taken from door opening to rail return should be sufficiently fast. The shorter time of the bay door being open should also reduce overall drag of the entire sraam firing mechanism compared to f-22, whose both side bay doors stay open the entire time .

 

[airsuperiority]

You described it in a nutshell

hhg posted this over on CDF

Definitely a different way to go about the sraam weapons bay. At least no one can accuse them of copying F-22.

I wonder if this configuration and the lower launch rail position is a necessity of the canards. Either way it looks like the time taken from door opening to rail return should be sufficiently fast. The shorter time of the bay door being open should also reduce overall drag of the entire sraam firing mechanism compared to f-22, whose both side bay doors stay open the entire time .

I wonder if this would also reduce RCS compromise as well while during weapon launch. And if this really does work, this is really a classic definition of "Chinese characteristics" (aka learning something from other people and adding your ideas to touch it up a notch)

 

[Deino]

Here's a new image which seems to confirm this theory ... attached are the original (huge one) + two smaller ones I tried a bit to modify !

Deino

 

[Blitzo]

I wonder if this would also reduce RCS compromise as well while during weapon launch. And if this really does work, this is really a classic definition of "Chinese characteristics" (aka learning something from other people and adding your ideas to touch it up a notch)

I think it would simply because there will be less surfaces to reflect off for a shorter amount of time, say compared to an F-22's door. But chances are by the time you need to fire an SRAAM at an enemy , radar stealth won't be particularly important.

 

[Deino]

Deino

I want to ask you, what is stay on topic?

The J-20 is an aircraft. so if i speak about its aerodynamics is it wrong?
If i speak about stealth its Basing my points upon resources i know is it wrong?


Tell me what is the way i should reply? what can i say what i am allowed to say?

Be open to others opinions, your background is different to mine.

I usually post my sources to say an opinion.

If i will say an aircraft can do this or that i base it upon sources, i do not rely on my pure opinion, but base it upon what i read.

Is it wrong to talk about the way they might detect J-20?


I do not think i am off topic i just think you have different interests than mine and different background, in fact what is wrong about using sources to support your opinions.


I also have the right to give my opinion using the knowledge available to me, and in that i do not think i have broken any forum law.

Perhaps you do not like seeing J-20 from an aerodynamic point of view, my view is from an aerodynamic view, my opinion is from an aerodynamic view, try to guess what i am studying at University.

i do not think seeing J-20 as from an aerodynamic point of view is off topic because J-20 is an aircraft.

You might be interested only in pictures, me too, perhaps in dates, me too, but i also see the J-20 as an aerodynamic object.
Remember we see the world through the filters of our experience and our interests.

I know sometimes we might stray from topic but i do not think the way i see J-20 is wrong, i simply base my opinions upon what i read.

But okay i will open another thread titled J-20 analysis just to compromise with you.

Dear MiG-29 !

Even if now again off-topic I’ll try it again to explain … and let me use the words of a moderator college from another forum in regard to the same problem:

I have a real problem – not sure if this is simply a problem of our times – but I notice this at several boards (Key-Forum, ... I nearly left due to this reason ! and now also SDF, ...) There are simply a few members who can't accept other opinions, they always and only try to persuade – I would even say force – others to follow their opinion and what's often even more worse, most of their claims are nothing but claims, wishful thinking on behalf of them and assumptions based on ... that might not be the case in You but it simply is annoying if You are interested in news and all You get is pages, pages and pages of links in regard to stealth, aerodynamics, counter-stealth, propulsion, the Russion superiority, air Defence systems and so on …

I for myself use these forums to ask and learn especially in regard to news ... maybe even to discuss a bit - if I don't understand - but most of all as a huge source of information. These latest news of the side-weapons bay is a fine example Others - at least IMO - take this as their private playground to continue their crusade for a holy grail and each and everyone with another opinion - in their view: another religious belief - must be persuaded, converted from this false believing ... and if this does not work the final option are personal attacks.

A very sad development.

The problem is each and every argument they get presented is torn down and even more by again even more stupid "proofs" (CG's, model images and fantasy (see below) ... and if nothing else works, they get personnel. That again might not be the case with You but overall it is a real torture to search out what’s relevant or irrelevant and to find out what’s really new and interesting !

I don’t know how often we tried to explain that to You but once the word J-20 is mentioned You immediately bring something in comparison to XYZ … and better than (mostly Russian !) … and so on.
In German we have a joke about a student who learned for his exam in Biology and all he learned is his most favourite animal the “worm”. Tragically the professor asked him something about the elefant and immediately knowing the worm was not the animal in question he tells a huge story about the e elephant’s proboscis which shares indeed a faint similarity to a worm ! The professor then reminded him that this was not the question and again he tried to turn the discussion to the elefant’s tail …

To admit I for myself would like to forbid these nasty "back and forth" discussions which are recently so common. The F-35 and T50 treads are an example and this one too.

And now back to the J-20 !

Deino

 

[latenlazy]

You described it in a nutshell

hhg posted this over on CDF

Definitely a different way to go about the sraam weapons bay. At least no one can accuse them of copying F-22.

I wonder if this configuration and the lower launch rail position is a necessity of the canards. Either way it looks like the time taken from door opening to rail return should be sufficiently fast. The shorter time of the bay door being open should also reduce overall drag of the entire sraam firing mechanism compared to f-22, whose both side bay doors stay open the entire time .

THAT is an absolutely fascinating solution to the weapons bay launch rail.

EDIT: I wonder if they can use this as an extra hardpoint for weapons that can't fit into the side bays for non stealthy missions?