J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VIII

[Deino]

I know, 未来军事画匠 is mostly known for his PS & AI-manipulated images and so most likely this one showing the J-20A prototype no. 2052 with WS-15 is also not 100% legit! But maybe it is since it looks almost taken a moment before the one we know already?

 

[taxiya]

I know, 未来军事画匠 is mostly known for his PS & AI-manipulated images and so most likely this one showing the J-20A prototype no. 2052 with WS-15 is also not 100% legit! But maybe it is since it looks almost taken a moment before the one we know already?

View attachment 170127

I am pretty sure it is 100% fake, e.g. AI generation. The telltale is the transition of polygons to smooth curves.

The original


If it is real the distance from camera does not change, the detail should remain, therefor the polygons should remain polygons. AI generation on the other hand does not know whether there is a circlar hole or polygon, if it know it is polygon it would not necessarily know how many segments, so it will put anything similar there.

There is also the visible gap (bright line) around the EOTS and the forward fuselage. That is the sign of phoshop "selection expansion" when copy and moving objects.

I suggest we avoid posting anything from him and any known PS/AI "authors", they are not interested of facts and truths.

 

[siegecrossbow]

We should ban AI slop in flagship threads.

 

[Blitzo]

We should ban AI slop in flagship threads.

Agreed, but the problem is if they are posted by people mistakenly or unsure if something is AI generated or not.

Then there's the problem of drawing the line: do we ban AI generated imagery only, or AI enhanced imagery as well -- what if new pictures of a new aircraft are only AI enhanced because of modern smartphone camera default settings and there are no "unenhanced" pictures available?

 

[siegecrossbow]

Agreed, but the problem is if they are posted by people mistakenly or unsure if something is AI generated or not.

Then there's the problem of drawing the line: do we ban AI generated imagery only, or AI enhanced imagery as well -- what if new pictures of a new aircraft are only AI enhanced because of modern smartphone camera default settings and there are no "unenhanced" pictures available?

I think AI enhancement of original image should be okay if the original is too lo-res. Even then it should be marked as AI enhanced before posting.

If you are unsure if it’s AI, use AI checker tool or post and confirm with other members like Deino has.

 

[Deino]

I think AI enhancement of original image should be okay if the original is too lo-res. Even then it should be marked as AI enhanced before posting.

If you are unsure if it’s AI, use AI checker tool or post and confirm with other members like Deino has.

Thanks for your post and I totally agree, but like @Blitzo explained, there is a faint line between "automatically AI-enhanced", "deliberately improved due to small size & resolution" and "deliberately faked" which - I must admit at least to me - is not always discernible. I think it helps esp. when seen who posted what, but especially concerning this J-20A image for me it looked legit like being taken just a moment before the known one. And that however was surely his intention.

 

[Deino]

A lot of these upgrade problems ultimately comes down to power consumption of electronics. 300kw main radar already strains WS10C2 and can only be fully supplied by WS15 which has a brand new design with electricity supply in consideration. The bland J20 with WS10C won't have enough electricity to run these new power components. Just like F35 is struggling with a mere 85kw APG85 radar.

May I ask, where these power data is from? I wasn't able to find anything on the 85kw for the APG85 let alone 300kW produced from the two WS-10C2?

 

[douglaxd]

May I ask, where these power data is from? I wasn't able to find anything on the 85kw for the APG85 let alone 300kW produced from the two WS-10C2?

There's a lot of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

saying 82kw is needed for the APG-85 but I thought the consensus was that 82 kw wasn't specifically for the new radar and was referring to the total power needed for all the systems of the block 4 upgrade.

 

[Deino]

There's a lot of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

saying 82kw is needed for the APG-85 but I thought the consensus was that 82 kw wasn't specifically for the new radar and was referring to the total power needed for all the systems of the block 4 upgrade.

Thanks a lot!!

 

[latenlazy]

There's a lot of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

saying 82kw is needed for the APG-85 but I thought the consensus was that 82 kw wasn't specifically for the new radar and was referring to the total power needed for all the systems of the block 4 upgrade.

The 82 kw was specifically needed for amongst other things the pumps used for additional cooling systems required to run the upgraded radar and other electrical systems.