J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[siegecrossbow]

Interesting article about J 20 Turn out it can be parked at ordinary hangar with no climatic control unlike F35. And 20 have been produced so far not sure the sources
The empty weight is given as 15 ton lighter than estimated by western analyst which will result in better maneuverability. Here is excerpt
Judging from these specs, the fighter will be more nimble in real combat than foreign estimates.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China hails its fifth generation J-20 stealth jet fighter
The brand-new air-superiority fighters, developed by Chengdu Aerospace Corporation, will be primarily deployed for precise and decapitation strikes

By ASIA TIMES STAFF NOVEMBER 20, 2017 5:19 PM
China’s J-20 jet fighters are no longer being kept away from the glare of the media since they entered service in March. Quite the opposite – party mouthpieces have been creating a buzz around the nation’s indigenous fifth-generation fighters, hailed as the cachet of the Chinese military’s air defense technology and manufacturing.

State broadcaster China Central Television aired an interview of a J-20 test pilot last week, who revealed that the brand-new air-superiority fighters, developed by Chengdu Aerospace Corporation, will be primarily deployed for precise and decapitation strikes, taking advantage of their all-aspect stealth even when armed, as well as low probability of radar interception.

A J-20 is seen in front of a hanger. Photo: CCTV
The hangar in the background of the above photo has also piqued intense interest: It appears that J-20s can be parked in an ordinary hangar rather than one with constant temperature and humidity, while the US Air Force’s multirole F-35 Lightning II fighters are very expensive to maintain as they must be kept in a highly regulated environment to protect their ultra-delicate stealth coatings.

This means J-20s are more economical and easier to manage and can respond to emergencies more quickly than F-35s, noted an observer.

It has been reported that the US and British militaries have decided to reduce the F-35’s airborne time, rather than splurging money on an aircraft that is mocked by Chinese media as “eye candy.”

Beijing-based military magazine Ordnance Industry Science and Technology has also revealed that J-20 appear to be 20.77 meters in length, featuring a long and slim fuselage, with a wingspan of 12.99 meters and merely 15 tons in empty operating weight, after analyzing photos of the fighters. Judging from these specs, the fighter will be more nimble in real combat than foreign estimates.

China unveiled its J-20 stealth fighter during an airshow in Zhuhai last year. Photo: Reuters
With its compact dimensions and airframe, the J-20 may have no limits on takeoff from or landing on the next generation of aircraft carriers, Chinese news portal Sina reports, citing a source with the Dalian Shipyard, where the construction of China’s first nuclear-powered carrier is said to have commenced.

No fewer than 20 J-20s have been delivered to the People’s Liberation Army Air Force, at a time when the Pentagon has stationed 12 F-35As at its Kadena Air Force Base in Japan’s Okinawa prefecture.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Must-reads from across Asia - directl

Personally I am still dubious of the 15-tonne weight class claim. I think 20~21 metric tons is probably more likely.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Personally I am still dubious of the 15-tonne weight class claim. I think 20~21 metric tons is probably more likely.

That's almost a certainty Siege,, I mean heavy fighter's are heavy fighters because of the systems and armament, the airframe requires structural integrity to support those armaments at up to 9Gs, that means your 20 metric ton bird actually weighs 180 metric tons.......

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Personally I am still dubious of the 15-tonne weight class claim. I think 20~21 metric tons is probably more likely.

I don't think it is impossibility if they use a lot of Titanium inthe structure just check your titanium eye glass compare to steel eye glass

 

[siegecrossbow]

I don't think it is impossibility if they use a lot of Titanium inthe structure just check your titanium eye glass compare to steel eye glass

Titanium usage on the J-20 has been confirmed to be around 20% by weight, which is high for a domestic fighter but significantly lower than the 40% on the Raptor. Although I personally believe that the official empty weight for the Raptor is exaggerated, it is difficult for the J-20
weigh less than 19 tons even factoring in advances in manufacturing and use of composite materials since its nose to nozzle length is around 3~4 meters longer than that of the Raptor.

 

[manqiangrexue]

A lot of Chinese technological strength is based on China playing catch-up and outright pirating technologies. In cases where China does have the lead, it's often a matter of funding and secrecy: Chinese quantum cryptography successes are based on China diverting funding to the field, whereas fundamental research is more neglected in the West.

In either case, note that the figures for the WS-10 suggest it's a roughly 2015 product that's roughly equivalent to a 90s F-110. The Chinese have been throwing money at engines for decades with little to show for it, whereas the Russians have been able to produce innovative and interesting products despite a massive loss of funding. In terms of cash efficiency, it makes more sense to outsource everything that is not sensitive to the Russians, such as a TVC-capable FCS.

If Sino-Russian relations have improved, there's little to lose by throwing 117S into some J-20s until the WS-15 is ready.

I think you're confused about the nature of research and development. The whole idea is to expand and evolve on what we already know. You need to build a large, sturdy base to improve upon and that takes a very long time with constant funding. Short of that, you can leap a bit if you can obtain some information via extra-legal channels.

China has only very recently begun spending massively on R&D. For the last several decades, its spending was very low, nearly non-existent compared to the US. During this whole time, the US was gradually building a very solid base for itself by constantly pouring large sums of funds into research. China was not able to do the same due to past weaknesses. China right now is pouring money and resources into building its own technological base at breakneck speed; the mental image of using a super-dredger to build an island while others expand theirs by shoveling sand during low tide comes to mind. Theirs may be still bigger, for now, cus they started a millennium ago.

So, I get the feeling from your posts that you expect China to immediately have technologically-superior end products to show just because now, it's spending more money. In other words, in 2017, China spent more on engine research than the US but its engines are far less mature, therefore, China's research efficiency is low. You did not consider the base and you did not consider the money that was spent for the last 40 years on both sides. Try adding them up and see who spent more altogether, and do account for inflation. China's base of information gained in size tremendously in a short, recent span though it takes years to turn that into mature, visible products. You couldn't expect anyone with any kind of funding or research efficiency to overcome such a large gap in base knowledge so quickly.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Titanium usage on the J-20 has been confirmed to be around 20% by weight, which is high for a domestic fighter but significantly lower than the 40% on the Raptor. Although I personally believe that the official empty weight for the Raptor is exaggerated, it is difficult for the J-20
weigh less than 19 tons even factoring in advances in manufacturing and use of composite materials since its nose to nozzle length is around 3~4 meters longer than that of the Raptor.

I see you say 20-21 tons, now 19 tons, so what exactly are you speculating? Seems you don't really know. Sources say F-22 is 19.7 tonnes and J-20 is 15-16 tonnes. Seems now that you don't wanna believe either and want to make up your own with constantly fluctuating guesses??

If J-20 is 20% titanium while F-22 is 40%, that means J-20 uses much greater amount of composites, which are even greater at saving weight. In other words, it's even more drastic than if both were 40% titanium and J-20's titanium structures were 40% lighter. 40% of 40% of 19.7 tonnes is already over 3 tonnes. But as you said, J-20 is more composite so the savings right there are greater than just over 3 tonnes. What about J-20's composite vs. F-22's composite weight? Are we to believe that China had only improved titanium construction but not composite construction at all? I dunno; can't really say without sources but is that normal to improve so much in 1 area of construction (making 20% of your jet) while ignoring another (80% of your jet)? Now consider that F-22's engines are heavier AND its thrust vectoring nozzles don't exist on J-20 so it's purely weight added. Does J-20 have a gun? Don't know.

F-22 is shorter; if there is data showing that it is less voluminous than J-20 then we should certainly note that. However, less voluminous does not necessarily mean less massive since J-20's fuel tanks are known to be larger than F-22's. With larger fuel tanks, if the fight is near, they don't have to be filled fully but that's talking about operation weight rather than empty weight.

There are some other things that more knowledgeable members pointed out as weight-saving measures that I can't dig up right now but after hearing all that reasoning, and considering that this is only what us laymen could come up with, I see no reason that a true master engineering team could not achieve this or greater.

 

[vesicles]

Design-wise, the J-20 is for me a kitchen-sink fighter. Excluding the missile rail, every aspect of the J-20 has been tried on some other aircraft, every aspect of the J-20 could have been developed simply from incorporating some other aerospace complex's work.

Many features on the F-22 had been tried and tested on the F-117A. Does that make the F-22 less revolutionary? It certainly does not. The design of the F-35 is also based on many features tested on the F-22. Does that make the F-35 less remarkable? It certainly does not. Advances in techs are typically incremental and based on previous work.

To say one design is "simply" an incorporation of "some others' work" would be a gross underestimation of the hard work that has been invested in any engineering project of this scale.

If designing and manufacturing a 5th stealth fighter is so simple and requires only "kitchen sink" kind of work, I challenge you to find more than 2 designs in the world that may match the J-20. At this point, only the F-22 is unquestionably superior to the J-20. No one can definitively say about other 5th gen fighters. If the J-20 is such an inferior design, other countries with much more extensive aeronautical experience should put together something superior to the J-20 in no time since they have all the kitchen sink parts available and can simply grab whatever they need off the shelf...

Keep in mind that China has been and still is under arms embargo. They had had little access to most of the "kitchen sink parts" in your analogy. Unlike other countries, the Chinese either had to come up with their own design from scratch, or had to "acquire" certain knowledge through other means, which is a testament of the effectiveness of their intelligence services. To continue with your kitchen sink analogy, while other US allies can simply go to an appliance store owned by the US and pick parts off the shelf, the Chinese had to design / make / steal every screw, nut and pipe themselves (quite literally). Just imagine buying grocery at your local store vs. having to plant vegetables and raising cattle for every of your meal...

It's somewhat more similar to a masters thesis than a doctoral dissertation;

Having a novel idea is not the definition of a doctoral dissertation. A doctoral dissertation means a complete project, while a master's dissertation focuses on only part of it. For instance, a master's project would be to figure out how to make a weapons bay work. Another master's project would be to figure out how the landing gear functions properly. Designing and manufacturing a complete plane is a doctoral dissertation by any means.

No one, I mean no one, can work in a vacuum and come up with revolutionary designs. It's all incremental. To this day, I have not seen a single doctoral dissertation that is so revolutionary, completely brand new, and completely novel. Even Nobel laureates' works have almost always been inspired by previous work. Hence the famous saying "standing on the shoulders of giants".

Do we get completely novel ideas? Yes, once in a few centuries, we get an Einstein or a Newton who can completely revolutionize their fields. But that is an anomaly, not the norm. Everyone else has to work with kitchen sinks. If you can mount the faucet from an angle, that might be enough to get you a Science paper. If you can figure out how to install a garbage disposal in the sink, that might be novel enough to win you a Nobel price...

 

[manqiangrexue]

At this point, only the F-22 is unquestionably superior to the J-20.

I question it. Much heavier fighter, older avionics, older intake design, older construction materials/methods, older RAM, known oxygen problems, defeated by 4th gen fighters in international exercises, prematurely discontinued in favor of problematic yet not much cheaper F-35. The only thing that amazes me about the Raptor is how much dry thrust it has giving it wonderful supercruise capability but in full afterburner, it seems that it likely has worse TWR than J-20 because of its weight (137x2/16T>156x2/19.7T). Because of all these, the possibility cannot be ruled out that much of the Raptor's purported excellence is just propaganda spread by the US government in hopes of creating a culture of fear in the international community of challenging the F-22 to give its pilots a psychological edge. Thus, I question, but do not necessarily outright dismiss, the superiority of the F-22 very much, especially when compared to newer 5th gen designs.

 

[FORBIN]

Keep in mind that China has been and still is under arms embargo. They had had little access to most of the "kitchen sink parts" in your analogy. Unlike other countries, the Chinese either had to come up with their own design from scratch, or had to "acquire" certain knowledge through other means, which is a testament of the effectiveness of their intelligence services. To continue with your kitchen sink analogy, while other US allies can simply go to an appliance store owned by the US and pick parts off the shelf, the Chinese had to design / make / steal every screw, nut and pipe themselves (quite literally). Just imagine buying grocery at your local store vs. having to plant vegetables and raising cattle for every of your meal...
.

It is not a problem now they build all as we do in France we build since about 40 years 90 % of our weapons and we are a much more small country and the Rafale is completely versatile fine bird capable do all missions nuclear, recc, etc...

And i don't want be pretentious but by ex Rafales stiking ISIS bad guys terrorists without faith or law ... and this job serves everyone ( as do USA, UK and others more small countries ) for all country they are also Chines ISIS guys... all countries ! and have a cost about 0.5 - 1 billion € !

So when i see some posts on SCS i think possible understand my disapointment and more.

But sorry OT i begg your pardon but need to say

 

[Blitzo]

I question it. Much heavier fighter, older avionics, older intake design, older construction materials/methods, older RAM, known oxygen problems, defeated by 4th gen fighters in international exercises, prematurely discontinued in favor of problematic yet not much cheaper F-35. The only thing that amazes me about the Raptor is how much dry thrust it has giving it wonderful supercruise capability but in full afterburner, it seems that it likely has worse TWR than J-20 because of its weight (137x2/16T>156x2/19.7T). Because of all these, the possibility cannot be ruled out that much of the Raptor's purported excellence is just propaganda spread by the US government in hopes of creating a culture of fear in the international community of challenging the F-22 to give its pilots a psychological edge. Thus, I question, but do not necessarily outright dismiss, the superiority of the F-22 very much, especially when compared to newer 5th gen designs.

The weight you give for both is their empty weight, more relevant would be combat weight or even MTOW. I suspect J-20 to have a similar if not higher MTOW than F-22.