J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread V

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kurutoga

Junior Member
Registered Member
Air Force Brat said:
But the photo does look doctored?? yes, it does, its been manipulated at least a little,,, the two departing aircraft are very close??? but indeed the gear is in transit, and one has the gear almost coming into the wells, while the other has the gear shortly after it has come out of "down and locked".

so its a legitimate question, and it is a movie promo pic?
Click to expand...

It's been processed by digital image post-processing software to increase contrast etc. Since all digital photos go through this step it has been accepted as normal. Consider this the fashion shoot for jets.

The two other jets in the back ground are certainly added later, their heads point to different direction to add balance to the image.
 
J

jobjed

Captain
by78 said:
Never mind whether the two in the background are doctored, but did anyone notice the EOTS on the parked J-20? I looks functional to me. I wonder if this is an operational bird or an earlier prototype that was known to have a functional EOTS installed.
Click to expand...

Yep, was looking at that. I think it's like @plawolf said in a previous comment; there's definitely something inside but the windows are opaque in the visible spectrum and instead optimised for the IR wavelength like the PL-8 seeker.
 
by78

by78

General
jobjed said:
Yep, was looking at that. I think it's like @plawolf said in a previous comment; there's definitely something inside but the windows are opaque in the visible spectrum and instead optimised for the IR wavelength like the PL-8 seeker.
Click to expand...

Assuming the aperture covers are not reflecting the tarmac, I can make out a faint outline of the apparatus inside. Now the question is whether this is one of the prototype birds or from the production batch. Any ideas? The answer could settle an earlier debate regarding whether the production J-20s are equipped with functional EOTS.
 
K

kurutoga

Junior Member
Registered Member
Oh the movie will be a great PR for PLAAF which they desperately needed. The previous shots usually feature smoggy skies.

This new picture definitely has local contrast adjusted to show more details. That means the actual surface is even smoother than what we see here. Also the underbelly lighting conditions can't be this good, they must have adjusted "shadow" as well. I see nothing outrageous about these adjustments, well below the post processing threshold of today's glamour shots

One other thing is the original prototypes have very large actuators. This one only have small bumps.

You should not worry too much about the two in the back. It is accepted practice to add a moon to the photo or sometimes small objects, especially for large movie posters like this one.
 
Last edited:
Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
siegecrossbow said:
Two J-20s in the background taking off in close proximity look photo-shopped. You can tell that they are actually just the same plane duplicated.
Click to expand...

The two J-20s are not just duplicated. Look at how differently the left canard and right vertical stabilizer intersect for each aircraft. There're other noticeable differences too, like the shadows on the right ventral fins.


Air Force Brat said:
But the photo does look doctored?? yes, it does, its been manipulated at least a little,,, the two departing aircraft are very close??? but indeed the gear is in transit, and one has the gear almost coming into the wells, while the other has the gear shortly after it has come out of "down and locked".

so its a legitimate question, and it is a movie promo pic?
Click to expand...

It could be a matter of one pilot pushing the door close button slightly later than the other?
 
O

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
As nice as the picture is, I don't think it's J-20's best angle. In fact, J-20 does not have many good angles, a common trait. Flankers and Su-57 are the exception. J-20 still looks thick around the centre and its length only accentuates this thickness. Then again I've never liked canard layouts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top