J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[TerraN_EmpirE]

You have to consider one thing; the Chinese has traditional of placing an aircraft gun under the belly. I think it is for easy cartridge ejection because the Chinese does not have the complex system like the U.S that recycle the used cartridges back into the drum. Further, I look at the hi-re photos above, I don't see anything look like a gun cover. Gun cover can't be completely flat.

I am still of the opinion that the weight and complexity of a gun out weighs the benefits.

Oh lord, oh lord... All high-resolution.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

These images pretty well I think rule out a belly mounted cannon. Unless you mount the gun in the place of the EOTS there is just no room to shoot around the war load and doors.

 

[by78]

Now check out these vortices... They are like cotton candy.

 

[by78]

 

[Air Force Brat]

this is the real deal! Close up full performance in 1080p!!!!

it is indeed!

 

[Air Force Brat]

Now check out these vortices... They are like cotton candy.

Well as the Dark Lord would say? "Impressive!, Most IMPRESSIVE!"

 

[Figaro]

Like this so called expert who said China TVC is 20 years behind What? It is 3 D thrust vector nozzle which is more complicated compared to 2 D nozzle in F22 Are they crazy or what?.
However, Layton said China remains 10 to 20 years behind the leaders in thrust vectoring.
"It would have been more impressive to have (thrust vectoring) shown already flying in the J-20 stealth fighter. But it wasn't, lowering its impact on foreign observers," he said.

I think the guy probably meant that the Chinese TVC appeared 10 to 20 years after American/Russian TVC (the F-16 MATV did indeed test in the 90s). Regardless, you can rest assured that CNN is not a credible source in whatever form. 2 years ago, they quoted some Justin Bronk guy to diss the J-20 at Zhuhai 2016. Now, they're doing the same thing.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Aerodynamics question:

Why does the vortex sweeping over one of the wings split off into two streams?

Playwolf gives a great answer, the high pressure air beneath the canards/wings is "bleeding over" into the low pressure air above the wing in a violent, tornadic action at two very specific aerodynamic features, the inboard gap between the canard and fuselage juncture as well as the outboard tips of the canard, and the inner dog-tooth formed by the leading edge slats..... those vortices "energize" flow and further lower the pressure and create additional liftit also bleeds over at the very tips of the wings, creating "tip vortices", which are also extremely violent, in fact so much so that a smaller aircraft following a larger aircraft will indeed loose control if flown into those vortices....the reason why smaller aircraft following larger aircraft are advised to remain above and aft of a "heavy" as they approach the airport, these "vortex generators" may be observed doing their work in the presence of moisture laden air, where clouds form as that denser high pressure air gives up that moisture in those little cotton candy clouds....

we are able to observe that the J-20 has a very "active" airflow....

 

[Air Force Brat]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

They'll think that the J-20 is an interceptor even after thrust vectoring is installed .

Siege, in all honesty brother, in the Western vernacular the F-14, F-15, F-18, and F-22 are also right and properly referred to as interceptors, I mean, what are those F-22's doing when they fly out to meet those Russian Bears??? they are "intercepting", so I think folks are far to sensitive to the term interceptor, its most decidedly NOT a derogatory term in Western think!

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

The objections against canards come mainly from American fanboys who love to quote one designer

It is usually cited as some ‘Northrop designer’ who said that the best place for a canard is one someone else’s plane.

I cannot remember the fellow’s name.

Kelly Johnson is often attribute to that quote or rather " the best place for Canards is someone else's plane not mine."
He worked for Lockheed not Northrop and was the mind behind the U2 and SR71.
He is also quoted as saying that if a plane is ugly it flus about the same.

About the cannon debate... Since the gun on Chinese made fighters are "outside", for a stealth fighter that would be a new mechanical design having to be internal if there is one. So who knows how it would turn out. I remember reading people pointing out how practical the J-20's side weapons bay works during combat. How about an optional gun pod instead of a PL-10? The gun is safely hidden and when needed it pops out with the same practicality.

I think someone else said that before but I imagine that would incure a lot of drag.
Also the weight and limits on gun and ammo would make it questionable practically. Already gun systems in fighters have limited ammo supply.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Even guys on F-16.net are getting more impressed with J-20 after the November 11th demo.

p.s. Still got to get it off my chest. Even the author of the article admitted that the J-20 demonstrated fast roll rate, good AOA abilities, and "decent" (understatement of the century) nose pointing capabilities. However, since it bled "too much" energy, it can't maneuver!

Is there any delta-winged fighter that doesn't bleed energy? You know what else bleeds a lot of energy but has good nose-pointing capabilities? Mirage 2000. Is that a dedicated interceptor too?

All aircraft "bleed energy" if cranked long enough, any time you apply positive pitch to an airframe, two things happen, you "bleed energy" and that energy is converted into "LIFT".... same thing happens with Su-35, Su-57, and F-22......

(I used those three because they each have OVT)