J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

Status
Not open for further replies.
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Quickie said:
More like a fourth J-20 was in that parking space?
Click to expand...

Yes our old SR-71 used to "weep" JP fuel around where it sat as the tanks wouldn't seal completely until it was hot and fast, and it was said that you could see the outline of it on the ramp after it would pull away. In fact anecdotally the SR had to slow down to re-fuel from the KC-135s, as it slowed below super-sonic the aircraft cooled and the tanks would unseal and start to weep fuel even as it was being refueled, JP-7 is very kool fuel, and had a very low volatility number so no one worried about it "flashing off".

danielchin said:
a cloaked Klingon Bird of Prey
Click to expand...

Indeed!, I would concur! very little doubt about that??? and where else would you catch such a bit of news as on the Sino Defense Forum??
 
M

MastanKhan

Junior Member
Air Force Brat said:
Yes our old SR-71 used to "weep" JP fuel around where it sat as the tanks wouldn't seal completely until it was hot and fast, and it was said that you could see the outline of it on the ramp after it would pull away. In fact anecdotally the SR had to slow down to re-fuel from the KC-135s, as it slowed below super-sonic the aircraft cooled and the tanks would unseal and start to weep fuel even as it was being refueled, JP-7 is very kool fuel, and had a very low volatility number so no one worried about it "flashing off".



Indeed!, I would concur! very little doubt about that??? and where else would you catch such a bit of news as on the Sino Defense Forum??
Click to expand...

Hi,

Didn't they need a catalyst to ignite the fuel. Anyway---the SR71 is an amazing aircraft---when I go to March ARB with kids---I can just stand back and look at it in awe---.
 
superdog

superdog

Junior Member
An interesting interview with Xu Yongling, Chief test pilot of the J-10, regarding J-20 and various other questions:

Summary of the interview:
  • J-20 (the model name) is no longer classified so he can publicly discuss it.
  • He said he's not in the test flight team of any new models, and he's not going to comment about the specific technologies, but he can provide time-frame analysis on J-20's development using his own methods (he claims that his past estimates were very accurate).
  • He believes that J-20 is an airplane for mass deployment (instead of limited deployment), there should be at least 100+
  • He expects the J-20 to be delivered to the PLAAF within next year.
  • PLAAF will be very wary about the IOC timeframe because this will be a mass deployment
  • There won't be any major technical obstacles (delays) for the J-20 towards delivery. China's plane development cycle has been comparable to the US or Russia since the J-10, because they went through full learning cycle from building older generation jets. (Here he used Tejas as a counter example)
  • There will still be minor issue (issues that does not affect delivery) to sort out. The most problematic area is probably in information integration. It will take a lot of trial and error to figure out how this can be done effectively.
  • Someone asked: it's information integration, but not engine? Xu said the problem of engine is not a "heart disease", it is not fatal, but rather a chronic problem/limiting factor to improve on. He said "diabetes" should be a better metaphor.
  • The diabetes can only be cured by next generation engines, based on what's learned from Kunlun and Taihang. He believe all bottlenecks will eventually be overcome.
  • He said the most important factor for solving the engine problem is human. China lacked a team that has failed and then succeeded, there are only people who failed and then partially succeeded. They must invest heavily into building a mature R&D team. Hiring outside talents will also help but eventually it is essential to have your own team.
  • In talking about Su-35: Su-35 purchase is to satisfy immediate needs. Tech wise China could mainly learn from its flight control, especially its "low-speed all-situation super maneuverability" which is the only example in the world. It also achieved this maneuverability without canards, something that China is unable to achieve today.
  • The deal on Su-35 depends on the political situation between China/Russia/US. In addition, China is not going to buy a lot but wants to get it in a hurry, so it has very little bargaining power as a buyer. As a result of these complicating factors, whether the deal can go through is highly uncertain, it could happen next month or it could keep dragging on, or it may never go through.
  • He also commented on the restart of F-22 manufacturing. He said the US doesn't have much options because 6th gen fighters are still very far away, people still don't have any concrete ideas about what it should be. In the near future 5th gen fighters will continue to play a major role. The F-35, in his opinion, is too chubby looking and not good enough to compete.
  • But it will be very very expensive to restart F-22 manufacturing, it cost a lot to get all the tooling and people back together, not to mention there's a very long supply chain. There will also be political backlash as this would be like a slap to the face for those who shut down F-22 manufacturing back in the days.
  • About China's carrier-borne fighters, he said it depends on whether there will be 2 carriers or 4. If there are only 2 then J-15 will be the only answer. It will be too expensive to develop a new model for such small deployment numbers. However if there will be 4 carriers, then it will make sense to have a new model on the next 3 carriers. About 80-100 fighters will justify the cost of development.
  • He estimate that even if there will be 4 carriers, they will be moderately enlarged versions of the Liaoning, as it might be too expensive to develop 100k ton carriers with vastly different system of operation. But as long as there will be 4 (or more) carriers, we could expect to see carrier-borne fighters with 4th gen (5th gen) characteristics.
  • Can the future carrier borne fighter be based on the J-20 or J- 31? He said the position of carrier in the military is important but not absolutely at the core, so it must balance between combat-effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. He believe it is possible to base it on current prototypes, and in his opinion the J-31 is the more likely choice.
 
vesicles

vesicles

Colonel
superdog said:
An interesting interview with Xu Yongling, Chief test pilot of the J-10, regarding J-20 and various other questions:

Summary of the interview:

...........
  • In talking about Su-35: Su-35 purchase is to satisfy immediate needs. Tech wise China could mainly learn from its flight control, especially its "low-speed all-situation super maneuverability" which is the only example in the world. It also achieved this maneuverability without canards, something that China is unable to achieve today.
  • The deal on Su-35 depends on the political situation between China/Russia/US. In addition, China is not going to buy a lot but wants to get it in a hurry, so it has very little bargaining power as a buyer. As a result of these complicating factors, whether the deal can go through is highly uncertain, it could happen next month or it could keep dragging on, or it may never go through.
..........
Click to expand...

I don't want to start another heated discussion... but can't help but note that the Su-35 deal is NOT final, as I suspected. He should be in a position to know the status the deal if the deal has been finalized and the manufacturers had publicly announced it...
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
vesicles said:
I don't want to start another heated discussion... but can't help but note that the Su-35 deal is NOT final, as I suspected. He should be in a position to know the status the deal if the deal has been finalized and the manufacturers had publicly announced it...
Click to expand...
But it *is* serious. The FCS is a very interesting point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top