J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[siegecrossbow]

The closest thing I’ve heard to a radar problem on the J-20 from a semi-reputable Chinese source was a leak by Kongjunchang on CJDBY. According to him the Russian engines currently can’t supply enough power for the J-20’s radar to work at peak capacity. They are working around the problem by putting the radar in a low power sleep mode until it is ready for use.

I would take some of the stuff from the DoD report with a grain of salt. Up until a few years ago it claimed that the J-20 was optimized for attacking aircraft carriers and other surface vessels.

 

[Hyperwarp]

The closest thing I’ve heard to a radar problem on the J-20 from a semi-reputable Chinese source was a leak by Kongjunchang on CJDBY. According to him the Russian engines currently can’t supply enough power for the J-20’s radar to work at peak capacity. They are working around the problem by putting the radar in a low power sleep mode until it is ready for use.

I would take some of the stuff from the DoD report with a grain of salt. Up until a few years ago it claimed that the J-20 was optimized for attacking aircraft carriers and other surface vessels.

J-16 also has a large radar, maybe even a bit bigger than the J-20. Any news whether the J-16 has similar problems? Or is isolated to the J-20?

 

[siegecrossbow]

J-16 also has a large radar, maybe even a bit bigger than the J-20. Any news whether the J-16 has similar problems? Or is isolated to the J-20?

He claimed similar issues for the J-16 and J-10C.

 

[jobjed]

He claimed similar issues for the J-16 and J-10C.

Do you have the link to the thread?

 

[Jeff Head]

@Air Force Brat @Brumby @Deino @bd popeye @asif iqbal @Jura @siegecrossbow

I find the new low res markings on the production J-20 aircraft to be pretty good, and compelling:

 

[Jeff Head]

...more:



I am painting and working my new J-20 from Trumpeter which is the 2016 prototype to look like these production birds. Havig trouble inding any 1/72 scale (or any other) production decals and am trying to make my own with water-slide decal paper and images of these markings to make the decals.

 

[Air Force Brat]

...more:

View attachment 52937 View attachment 52938 View attachment 52939 View attachment 52940

I am painting and working my new J-20 from Trumpeter which is the 2016 prototype to look like these production birds. Havig trouble inding any 1/72 scale (or any other) production decals and am trying to make my own with water-slide decal paper and images of these markings to make the decals.

Good luck with that, my plastic models barely had dry glue before they were involved in a class A! But I bought em to fly em!

 

[Jeff Head]

Here's the start of getting thet J-20 ready...actually petty advanced towards the goal:

 

[Air Force Brat]

I don't understand why you like so much to bring up 2001 and the prototype weapons bays. Also, I'll bring up that in the F-22 case, the SDBs have a specific launcher attached to the hardpoints on the F-22, that's distinct from the AIM-120 launchers.

My point is more that the trapeze hardpoint set-up with the F-22 is inefficient and it's possible the J-20's use of direct-drop or aerodynamic push might increase usable bay space alongside decreasing aircraft weight.

Absolute nonsense friend, those launchers are there to enable the F-22 to get missiles away, safely and effficiently. They propel the weapon outside the boundary layer into clean air, for an initial lock and clean launch.

 

[Deino]

Guys ... I must admit I'm a bit surprised by this IMO very strange discussion. Reminds me too much on any speculations we already had so often on tail-less J-20s or certain engines used by it.

Anyway, back to the J-20: What a gap in generations!
A J-20A at Dingxin surrounded by at least four J-6s ... I would love to see this image in close up from the ground.

image via Huitong's Blog/CMA


... and four more during the rehearsals: