J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[b787]

You don't know the J-20's weight, lift curve, or drag curve to be making *any* of those claims on sound reasoning. You're making pure speculations based on presumptions that you refuse to examine critically.

yes and you are not speculating! for starters you do not need a WS-15 of 15-18 tonnes if you are lighter than a Su-27, for starters, but of course in your club every one think it is as light as a feather.

The type of engine tell you the max weight and normal take off weight, in you very good analysis you forgot to say Su-27 flies at 24 tonnes weight normal take off weight, if Al-31 allows a Thrust to weight ratio at that configuration of 1:1.27 to Su-27 then, J-20 will be competitive with Al-31, but sorry it is not, sorry, you can tell every one in the club you made a mistake, you forgot to say Al-31 is not enough,, sorry you need to check F-22 normal take off weight i guess there is wikipedia for that

 

[latenlazy]

yes and you are not speculating! for starters you do not need a WS-15 of 15-18 tonnes if you are lighter than a Su-27, for starters, but of course in your club every one think it is as light as a feather.

Do you think the J-20's pilot is speculating? Do you think Song Wencong, the designer of the J-20, is speculating? The difference between your position and my position is that you speculate *despite* what more qualified people have said and insist less qualified people like yourself must be more right for no other reason than because it fits what you want to believe, while I *only* present what people and sources who are more qualified than either of us have said or indicated. I haven't made *any* absolute claims in all my years PLA watching that can't be traced to some kind of primary source, or without all the assumptions and conditions laid out clearly. You run your mouth like you're an expert, and when people grade your homework and point out gaps and leaps in your reasoning and understanding you go around name calling and repeating yourself instead of addressing those gaps and leaps.

I will not claim with any confidence that the J-20 *must* be substantially lighter, but do you have any evidence that the J-20 isn't? Do you know, *factually* what the weight of the fighter is? If you do not then don't presume. The F-15 has a wingspan of 13 meters and a length of 19 meters. We should be able to presume it has a weight of 30 tonnes at standard takeoff right? The Su-35 and Su-27 have the exact same dimensions! We can presume they must be the exact same weight too! See, the problem isn't that people here think the J-20 is light as a feather. The problem is you keep building entire arguments on what you *think* the J-20's weight is based on nothing but baseless speculation. You make up stuff to reach conclusions that make you feel good and present them as fact, and then you can't seem to grasp or accept the possibility that because you invented figures to serve your preconceived conclusions you might be wrong. What you're doing isn't analysis or argumentation, but convenient fantasizing.

The type of engine tell you the max weight and normal take off weight, in you very good analysis you forgot to say Su-27 flies at 24 tonnes weight normal take off weight, if Al-31 allows a Thrust to weight ratio at that configuration of 1:1.27 to Su-27 then, J-20 will be competitive with Al-31, but sorry it is not, sorry, you can tell every one in the club you made a mistake, you forgot to say Al-31 is not enough,, sorry you need to check F-22 normal take off weight i guess there is wikipedia for that

What are you even talking about here? I said *nothing* about engines or how well the J-20 performs with Al-31s or anything related to the Su-27 or F-22. Please respond to what I actually write, not what you think I said.

 

[manqiangrexue]

yes and you are not speculating! for starters you do not need a WS-15 of 15-18 tonnes if you are lighter than a Su-27, for starters, but of course in your club every one think it is as light as a feather.

The type of engine tell you the max weight and normal take off weight, in you very good analysis you forgot to say Su-27 flies at 24 tonnes weight normal take off weight, if Al-31 allows a Thrust to weight ratio at that configuration of 1:1.27 to Su-27 then, J-20 will be competitive with Al-31, but sorry it is not, sorry, you can tell every one in the club you made a mistake, you forgot to say Al-31 is not enough,, sorry you need to check F-22 normal take off weight i guess there is wikipedia for that

First of all, according to your Wikipedia source, Su-27 has a TWR of 0.91 at full fuel (weapon load unspecified). Secondly, J-20 is not trying to be competitive with only the Su-27; its sights are much higher than that. So just by those numbers, I can tell you right now, if I was in the air force, I wouldn't tell them to stop and be happy with a 5th gen that flies with the constraints of a 4th gen (or even other 5th gen) design. I'd very much like to have an aircraft that has a TWR of 1.4, can reach mach 3+ and supercruise at mach 2+, all on full internal fuel and weapons if the engineer can get it there. Minus that, I'd still be fine operating it at competitive or slightly better capabilities with its peers but I really want it to be head and shoulders better than every rival if at all possible. Without specific numbers, that's the direction they're trying to take the J-20 by developing such an overwhelmingly powerful engine as the WS-15 for it. Your logic of "If it flies as good as Su-27, then there's no need to ever improve the engine" is complete bogus to anyone with an ounce of self-improvement spirit.

 

[SpicySichuan]

 

[by78]

Niiice! The Chinese characters say "celebrating the 90th anniversary of the founding of PLA".

More importantly, the photo gives a nice size comparison between the J-20 and the Flanker: my eyeballs tell that J-20 has essentially the same length, perhaps just a tad shorter.

(642 x 1142)

 

[SinoSoldier]

Niiice! The Chinese characters say "celebrating the 90th anniversary of the founding of PLA".

More importantly, the photo gives a nice size comparison between the J-20 and the Flanker: my eyeballs tell me that J-20 is a bit shorter length wise.

(642 x 1142)

Nice! Only if there were a similar photo of the J-10C with FC-31s.

 

[latenlazy]

Niiice! The Chinese characters say "celebrating the 90th anniversary of the founding of PLA".

More importantly, the photo gives a nice size comparison between the J-20 and the Flanker: my eyeballs tell that J-20 has essentially the same length, perhaps just a tad shorter.

(642 x 1142)

FINALLY. No more shitty satellite photos.

 

[Deino]

FINALLY. No more shitty satellite photos.

Indeed finally no longer an estimation based on a grainy satellite image. But I’m sure certain members at the PDF will again present us a theory why the J-20 is still about 22-23m long.

 

[Deino]

 

[b787]

Niiice! The Chinese characters say "celebrating the 90th anniversary of the founding of PLA".

More importantly, the photo gives a nice size comparison between the J-20 and the Flanker: my eyeballs tell that J-20 has essentially the same length, perhaps just a tad shorter.

(642 x 1142)

nicest picture i have ever seen, basically this put into shame all those who said J-20 was 20 meters, J-20 was like always i suspected around 21 meters, what a good laugh i have now, all those who said western analysts were wrong are put to shame haha