J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[Inst]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So close-coupled canard is preferred. Moreover, the J-20 emphasizes supersonic maneuverability at the cost of merely decent subsonic maneuverability. TVC is extremely helpful in supersonic flight as it has more control authority than mere control surfaces. Canards, especially long-coupled canards, do help, but the combination of TVC and canards is what permits the J-20 better performance.

On another note, I noticed this article from a while back.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Since the J-20 has about a 30% aperture diameter advantage over the F-35, translating to a 69% radar energy advantage, however, it is quite possible for the J-20 to manage to jam the F-35 radar if both radar technologies are comparable. If AEW&C reveals the approximate location of the F-35, it'll be possible for J-20s to behave in jamming mode and disable F-35 radars, forcing it to rely on EODAS. This is an interesting advantage the J-20 has over the F-35.

 

[b787]

The problem is, we've had no evidence that the J-20 is maneuverable at all. It's definitely made reasonably fast turns in the videos we've been shown, but it hasn't impressed in the same way the F-22 or Su-57 has.

The reason the Eurofighter considered TVC, while the Rafale did not, was because the Eurofighter was a long-coupled canard fighter while the Rafale was short-coupled. The Eurofighter made maneuverability compromises compared to the Rafale, which TVC helped it to recover. The J-20, like the Eurofighter, is also a long-coupled canard fighter. You can do the math.

I will give you a little of food thought

J-20 has compromises good for stealth and the all moving vertical tail more or less does a very good job, in that the Chinese did a very good job however there are compromises that affect it, for example on MiG-1.144 has a mid-wing; while on the J-20 it is a high wing, on the MiG the wing trailing edge extension is thin and is hinged but on the J-20 the same part is chiseled for stealth purposes and is not thin due to the fact is a high wing and it is a continuation of the lateral nacelles wall, if you think they do not generate drag be might guest, in the Russian machine they are really part of the wing and at the trailing edge generate less drag, however in the Chinese machine a smaller dorsal vertical tail generates relatively less drag and it is better for stealth.
On the vertical ventral fins, the Russian machine is hinged, thus helping more than the ones on the J-20.

So far the Chinese designed a good tail, but the trailing edge extension will generate too much drag, but will allow a relatively good transition for the wing fuselage blending at the aft part of the aircraft but it will not generate so much lift

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[latenlazy]

Placing the image closer to the center may reduce lens distortion. But very few modern telephoto lenses have enough distortion as to matter for our purposes. The distortion that really creates problems is perspective distortion. That can only be cured by finding images where both the pitch and roll axis of the plane are as close to the image plane of the lens, or as perpendicular to the line of sight to the plane as possible.

Getting closer to the center can also reduce perspective distortion.

 

[Inst]

The nice thing about longer length is that it suggests the bay length is 4.5 meters, by my estimate. That's fairly long, and might actually be long enough to fit Chinese long-range missiles.

I'd like to see if you're willing to help clear up some confusion on the PL-15, by the way. There's pictures going around claiming that the J-10C's been sporting a PL-15, but the missile the J-10C is carrying is about 4 meters long, instead of 6 meters long. The PL-15, according to CDF, used to be the designation for a cropped version of the PL-12, but the PL-15 seems to be getting confused with the other PL-15, which is purported to have between 300 and 400 km of range.

What's going on with the short PL-15? Is this in fact a missile with enhanced range, or is it just the cropped PL-15?

 

[latenlazy]

The nice thing about longer length is that it suggests the bay length is 4.5 meters, by my estimate. That's fairly long, and might actually be long enough to fit Chinese long-range missiles.

I'd like to see if you're willing to help clear up some confusion on the PL-15, by the way. There's pictures going around claiming that the J-10C's been sporting a PL-15, but the missile the J-10C is carrying is about 4 meters long, instead of 6 meters long. The PL-15, according to CDF, used to be the designation for a cropped version of the PL-12, but the PL-15 seems to be getting confused with the other PL-15, which is purported to have between 300 and 400 km of range.

What's going on with the short PL-15? Is this in fact a missile with enhanced range, or is it just the cropped PL-15?

I think we've concluded the PL-15 is the PL-12 successor, and the PL-X is the LRAAM. At least, that's where the naming conventions seemed to have settled for now.

 

[Blitzo]

The nice thing about longer length is that it suggests the bay length is 4.5 meters, by my estimate. That's fairly long, and might actually be long enough to fit Chinese long-range missiles.

I'd like to see if you're willing to help clear up some confusion on the PL-15, by the way. There's pictures going around claiming that the J-10C's been sporting a PL-15, but the missile the J-10C is carrying is about 4 meters long, instead of 6 meters long. The PL-15, according to CDF, used to be the designation for a cropped version of the PL-12, but the PL-15 seems to be getting confused with the other PL-15, which is purported to have between 300 and 400 km of range.

What's going on with the short PL-15? Is this in fact a missile with enhanced range, or is it just the cropped PL-15?

Crop wing PL-12 = PL-15, supposedly with dual pulse motor and AESA seeker. It has been seen carried by J-20, J-10C, J-16, so far.

Big missile is being called PL-X. It has been seen carried by J-16 and possibly J-11B.

 

[Inst]

We used to have the PL-15 and PL-21 designations. That said, the PL-15 gets attributed 300 km range, which gets me wondering: are they talking about PL-15 or PL-21/PL-X? Attributing the PL-15 300 km range would also help clear up some confusion: there's also reports of a 400 km missile, so the PL-15 would be the 300 km missile and the 400 km missile.

With the dual pulse motor, the PL-15's range would be plausible. The AIM-120D never received the asked-for dual pulse motor, and it maxes out at around 180 km.

If you assume 800 km range on the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, and assume an L-Band RCS of -20 dBsm, the J-20 would be detected at 252 km by the AEW&C. With 1200 km range, it would require a 380 km missile to hit the AEW&C on detection.

With the AEW&C gone, the J-20s can safely jam F-35 AESA and force it down to EODAS. Assume EODAS, beyond the EOTS, is not very long range. Then the J-20 can snipe the F-35 from above and at subsonic speeds at leisure using its own height advantage and EOTS to see the F-35 when the F-35 can't see it.

This type of tactic would require a type of 3D formation with J-20s operating both on high and low altitutdes, with low-altitide J-20s tasked to counter the AEW&C and high-altitude J-20s tasked to counter the F-35s. At maximum range, it would take the PL-15 about 4 minutes to impact the AEW&C, more if the AEW&C attempts to maneuver out of the PL-15's range and if the goal simply becomes to jam the F-35.

It'd be an interesting game; the AEW&C could likely counterjam the J-20s given its higher output power, but the J-20s would be more numerous.

 

[Blitzo]

We used to have the PL-15 and PL-21 designations. That said, the PL-15 gets attributed 300 km range, which gets me wondering: are they talking about PL-15 or PL-21/PL-X? Attributing the PL-15 300 km range would also help clear up some confusion: there's also reports of a 400 km missile, so the PL-15 would be the 300 km missile and the 400 km missile.

PL-21 was a designation used for the ramjet A2A missile. I don't think that designation has ever been used for either PL-15 or PL-X.

As for the naming the missiles, originally there was some debate over what the name of now-PL-X and now-PL-15 should be called, with now-PL-X called PL-15 and now-PL-15 called PL-12C.

But AFAIK, the now-PL-15 was never referred to with a 300km range. The 300km range was instead used as a low range estimate for the now-PL-X, which last year was called PL-15 for a while before an understanding was reached regarding the designation.

With the dual pulse motor, the PL-15's range would be plausible. The AIM-120D never received the asked-for dual pulse motor, and it maxes out at around 180 km.

If you assume 800 km range on the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, and assume an L-Band RCS of -20 dBsm, the J-20 would be detected at 252 km by the AEW&C. With 1200 km range, it would require a 380 km missile to hit the AEW&C on detection.

With the AEW&C gone, the J-20s can safely jam F-35 AESA and force it down to EODAS. Assume EODAS, beyond the EOTS, is not very long range. Then the J-20 can snipe the F-35 from above and at subsonic speeds at leisure using its own height advantage and EOTS to see the F-35 when the F-35 can't see it.

This type of tactic would require a type of 3D formation with J-20s operating both on high and low altitutdes, with low-altitide J-20s tasked to counter the AEW&C and high-altitude J-20s tasked to counter the F-35s. At maximum range, it would take the PL-15 about 4 minutes to impact the AEW&C, more if the AEW&C attempts to maneuver out of the PL-15's range and if the goal simply becomes to jam the F-35.

It'd be an interesting game; the AEW&C could likely counterjam the J-20s given its higher output power, but the J-20s would be more numerous.

Too much assumptions of capability here, I won't respond to it.

 

[Deino]

Guys ... either You concentrate on the J-20 or You simply shut up !

If I take a look at the discussion where again the usual suspects prefer to eyeball instead of calculating, where they avoid each and every single question with a clear answer and I again have to clean about 12 pages of BS. That's TROLLING !

Are You nuts???
It's really annoying what's recently going on here ...

Deino


@WebMaster PLEASE give us finally the new mods and also the power to do something.

 

[Inst]

@Bltizo: you should respond to the 300 km assumption, though. There's a variety of defense reports that claim the PL-12's successor, i.e, the PL-15, has a 300 km range. I'm not sure how sanitized they are, but the underlying claim is that the PL-15 incorporates a dual-pulse rocket motor which is more advanced than conventional rocket motors used by most countries. These are actually included in ESSM and advanced American surface or ship to air missiles.

As to the rest, we've gone over the E-2D and the interception mission for the J-20 a thousand times. But what matters is the 300 km claim. Did CCTV describe the PL-X as the 300 km missile, as Chinese television did report a 300 km missile?