It looks good. Reminds me of the Iranan Qaher-313 mockup.
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
- Status
Pmichael it is quite clear that you are NOT a pilot, and that you do NOT understand the science, the span of the wing is not affected, the wing "area" of the aileron is affected, and that will reduce the roll rate minimally. The overall wing area is also reduced, but likely not enough to affect the high altitude performance significantly.
Has anyone seen anything on the likelihood of the roll-out on 2102, it is strange to have so much less information than we used to, very sad to see secrecy and intrique shut down the intellectual fruits of the research on this aircraft.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
If it's too good to be true, then it probably is. But still a nice image, nevertheless.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Did the magic unicorn finally show up? I've been waiting for a frontal shot with wheels up for a long time. I've checked my files for a shot that might've been photoshopped. If it was, the person behind it was keen enough to add the reflector. The only shot I found of a frontal shot that had a reflector was a 2017 pic but the stem on that reflector was straight. This pic looks angled.
Yeah, this screams CGI/PS.
Looking at the blurs on the ventral side of the fuselage and wings is not a natural blurring effect that you'd see from an aircraft's engine and airframe heat.
Honey, honey...
You should maybe reread some of your aerodynamics text books before going that argument of authority route. A shorter wing span reduces the inertial mass of the aircraft and improves the roll rate.
This is more or less basic aircraft design 101. Many light sport aircraft have clipped wings design for a reason.
The smaller wing area, of course, affects negatively the high altitude performance because the wings can create less uplift.
Another basic aircraft design 101 thing.
Clearly on this view he don't have some basic principle of stealth, alignment plans exceeds no good when canards are oriented also it is a point much discussed elsewhere.
Quite small drifts as T-50 good.
What frontal RCS 0.01 m2 - 20 Dbm ?
Able to supercruise with actual reactors ?
As T-50 nozzles not well masked problem for IR stealth.
Last edited:
yup! more quills than a porcupine?? she got stuff sticking out all over, but she do have "directional stability" out the wazoo! and that my friend is a great thing for a fighter aircraft, Dr. Song said she had to be able to recover from "post stall flight" without OVT, and she will, like an arrow, she has very good primary directional stability, very, very, good!
I really like this airplane, I would fly it in a heartbeat with a couple of hours in the simulator, and I am not a fan of canard's, but on this bird, they are "right on"!
kwaigonegin
Colonel
This is the best visual explanation on wing planform w/o getting too technical..
basically high AR = long span therefor reduce drag and higher lift and vice versa. Cargo/passenger aircrafts for ex generally have high AR because lifting ability is more important than speed or reduction in induced drag and maneuverability (lower roll rate).
basically high AR = long span therefor reduce drag and higher lift and vice versa. Cargo/passenger aircrafts for ex generally have high AR because lifting ability is more important than speed or reduction in induced drag and maneuverability (lower roll rate).
SinoSoldier
Colonel
It has been demonstrated numerous times that canards, when aligned perfectly parallel with the planform, are not a significant contributor to its frontal RCS.
- Status