J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

[Air Force Brat]

In the cockpit but always no Winchester for this boy

I would suggest he will not only carry several "Winchesters", but a "Browning High Wall" or maybe a "Shiloh Sharps" for plenty of "repeating action" and long range "sniper shots", in a scabbard on the saddle, LOL. The only thing we are arguing is whether or not he is carrying a "Colts SAA" Sheriffs model", tucked deep in his sash for concealed carry close up work.

My good friend Blitzo argues that he is not "emotionally invested" in an internal gun, but then asks us to disprove that there is a gun, when no one has seen evidence of there being an internal gun?? so my preposition is that until we see evidence of its inclusion, or read in the factory spec that there is indeed and internal gun, we should NOT ASSUME, that there is??

One thing we can be certain of, is that the Primer Bird shows just how much effort "Chengdu" has put into L/O by observing those "butted, serrated skins". They are not "overlapped and riveted" as many aircraft skins have been in the past, they are flush mounted and butted up against one another in a very precise serration, in order to minimize the radar signature.

As the AFB, I have a very profound affection for the F-22, many suggest that affection at times hinders my objectivity, but my affection stems not the the F-22's drop dead beauty, but from it "drop dead KILLER" performance. Many may recall I was NOT a big fan of the F-35, and I still use my nick, which I know I will regret not "copyrighting" of the ThunderHogge II? however, once the high-alpha testing was commenced and published?? I became a "true believer"!

Master Deino shares a very similar affection for the J-20, and at some point the PLAAF and Chengdu will "spirit him away" in the dead of night for a "factory tour", and a ride along in a two seat J-10 or J-11B chase aircraft, I have volunteered to go along and carry his luggage, or maybe his camera bag?? for that little jaunt, I am a fan of the J-20, and can't wait to read Deino's article published in "Air Combat monthly"!

 

[AssassinsMace]

Not quite the same but similar angle:

View attachment 32667

Yes I flipped that one upside down but the intakes looked asymmetrical. The other one looked more like the fan art that came out right before the J-20's emergence. Almost trianglish blended wing design. Almost the unicorn pic I've been looking for a long time. A high angle frontal shot with wheels up.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Yes I flipped that one upside down but the intakes looked asymmetrical. The other one looked more like the fan art that came out right before the J-20's emergence. Almost trianglish blended wing design. Almost the unicorn pic I've been looking for a long time. A high angle frontal shot with wheels up.

Yep, if you click on that link, you will find an inverted J-20 with a little forward stick, lots of left rudder and aileron, so a little more than an aileron roll, almost a barrel roll to the left. with left boot getting the tail to "kick it right around", and accelerate the roll rate. No doubt the J-20 flies very well, and I have been stating this since we observed our first aileron rolls above the factory field many years ago!

That FCS seems to have very sound logic, and as I have reminded everyone, that distant coupled canard and aft mounted high wing delta make the FCS very difficult, but it no doubt works very well, and seeing this airplane thrown about with abandon only makes my point more forceful.

I'm so happy to finally see this airplane back out in public, it would be a real shame to hide this jewel! and while my case has not been as bad as Deino's, I have been suffering from "withdrawal", LOL.

 

[Blitzo]

My good friend Blitzo argues that he is not "emotionally invested" in an internal gun, but then asks us to disprove that there is a gun, when no one has seen evidence of there being an internal gun??

Sigh, I never said to disprove that there is a gun. I have no idea where you got that from.

What I essentially said was that it is incorrect to assume that there is no gun just because we can't see one. The conclusion based on this, is that there is no definitive evidence for a gun, and no definitive evidence against a gun at present.


Please don't twist what I write.

so my preposition is that until we see evidence of its inclusion, or read in the factory spec that there is indeed and internal gun, we should NOT ASSUME, that there is??

Right now we have no definitive evidence to suggest there is a gun, and no definitive evidence to suggest there is no gun.

So until that kind of information is available to us, we should acknowledge that nobody knows whether a gun is there or not, and that there is no definitive evidence to suggest either way.
There is no need to "assume" anything, simply to state the evidence (or lack of evidence) and to state a current conclusion.

There is no shame in saying "we don't know" especially when we do not have enough evidence to reach a definitive conclusion, and in fact for the whole of PLA watching, being able to say "we don't know" is a big part of the activity.

 

[dingyibvs]

There are things where the default assumption should be yes, and there are things where the default assumption should be no. For example, I've never met Blitzo, but if someone were to ask me to guess if he has a nose, I'd say yes until proven otherwise. Similarly, the question of whether a stealth jet designed for air superiority has a gun should be yes until proven otherwise. Not seeing one is no reason to assume it doesn't have one, same as Mr. Blitzo's nose.

 

[Blitzo]

There are things where the default assumption should be yes, and there are things where the default assumption should be no. For example, I've never met Blitzo, but if someone were to ask me to guess if he has a nose, I'd say yes until proven otherwise. Similarly, the question of whether a stealth jet designed for air superiority has a gun should be yes until proven otherwise. Not seeing one is no reason to assume it doesn't have one, same as Mr. Blitzo's nose.

Yes, that is also definitely a valid argument.

Overall, in the case of J-20's gun, I think the conclusion we can reach at this stage is either one of "we don't know if it has a gun or not because we do not have definitive evidence for or against it" or one of "it probably should have a gun, but we do not have definitive evidence of it yet".

I do believe that the conclusion of "it probably does not have a gun because we do not see an obvious gunport" is not a very strong argument, however, as I've made clear in my previous posts.


And yes, I do have a nose lol.

 

[Air Force Brat]

There are things where the default assumption should be yes, and there are things where the default assumption should be no. For example, I've never met Blitzo, but if someone were to ask me to guess if he has a nose, I'd say yes until proven otherwise. Similarly, the question of whether a stealth jet designed for air superiority has a gun should be yes until proven otherwise. Not seeing one is no reason to assume it doesn't have one, same as Mr. Blitzo's nose.

actually dingy, if you look at Mr. Blitzo's avatar??? we do NOT see his nose??? LOL Whatever guys, somebody DOES KNOW, just not saying are they???

 

[Air Force Brat]

Yes, that is also definitely a valid argument.

Overall, in the case of J-20's gun, I think the conclusion we can reach at this stage is either one of "we don't know if it has a gun or not because we do not have definitive evidence for or against it" or one of "it probably should have a gun, but we do not have definitive evidence of it yet".

I do believe that the conclusion of "it probably does not have a gun because we do not see an obvious gunport" is not a very strong argument, however, as I've made clear in my previous posts.


And yes, I do have a nose lol.

I'm happy to know that, but you really ought to draw one on your avatar so we could see it?? LOL

 

[dingyibvs]

actually dingy, if you look at Mr. Blitzo's avatar??? we do NOT see his nose??? LOL Whatever guys, somebody DOES KNOW, just not saying are they???

I did hear of the existence of his nose, though I heard it looks like the MiG 1.44

 

[Hyperwarp]

This is to all you aeronautical and aerospace engineers! Found this at CDF -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Any comments? Just imagine if J-20 Block 2 with WS-15 looked like that

Chinese Journal of Aeronautics
Volume 26, Issue 2, April 2013, Pages 334–342
Aircraft vulnerability modeling and computation methods based on product structure and CATIA

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!