J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

Status
Not open for further replies.

latenlazy

Brigadier
Why not?? What prompts you to think so? A pillarless canopy has a lot of advantages over the current pillared canopy (I know that there is only one pillar but it still makes a difference.)
Doubt the framed canopy makes much of a difference relative to the frameless canopy, given that the frame is in the interior of the cockpit.
 

Schwerter_

Junior Member
Registered Member
Why not?? What prompts you to think so? A pillarless canopy has a lot of advantages over the current pillared canopy (I know that there is only one pillar but it still makes a difference.)
I don't see how it'd affect aerodynamics, and while the better field of view would be nice, ditching the internal support pillar most likely would mean also changing the ejection method from through-canopy (detonation chords buried in the canopy blows up and ejection seat flys through the open top) to eject-canopy (no idea if it's the right way to describe, but this method require the canopy to be ejected fully before the pilot can eject), with the latter generally speaking taking more time and most likely being less effective.
 

jobjed

Captain
Are you referring to the gold plated tinting? I believe the canopies are tinted but it is only apparent at certain angles. Even the canopies of J-10B/C are tinted.

They abandoned the "one-piece" canopy since it was heavier than the current design. Due to the engine limitation they needed to shave off as much weight as possible for the time being.
It's still a one-piece canopy, it just has a brace now. The brace allows them to make the front part thicker to resist bird strikes while keeping the rest thin to save weight and break easier during ejections. Also, since the canopy is on the outside of the brace and is treated with the metal lining, the canopy is RF opaque, shielding the brace from radar. This is in contrast to the Su-57 canopy where brace is between the two pieces of the canopy and therefore unshielded, contributing significantly to RCS.
 

The Observer

Junior Member
Registered Member

EjQ26bUVoAALtpZ.jpg

Comparison of 2018 and 2020 version of J-20 by East Pendulum.

One of the more subtle changes IMO is the shape of the lower front fuselage and lower intake. The lower front fuselage from the bottom of the radome to just below the intake looks wider and the transition from the 'cheek' portion (where side viewing radar is installed in Su-57) smoother in 2020 version. The 'cheek' portion also seems smaller.

From the angle, I think the lower intake portion is also reshaped.

Note: I know the 2020 version pic had been posted here before, but the side by side comparison makes it so much easier to spot the changes.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
It's still a one-piece canopy, it just has a brace now. The brace allows them to make the front part thicker to resist bird strikes while keeping the rest thin to save weight and break easier during ejections. Also, since the canopy is on the outside of the brace and is treated with the metal lining, the canopy is RF opaque, shielding the brace from radar. This is in contrast to the Su-57 canopy where brace is between the two pieces of the canopy and therefore unshielded, contributing significantly to RCS.

I must say it bothers me when people talk about J-20's canopy as if it isn't one piece.

A brace behind the canopy does not a "two piece" canopy make... whether it's F-35 or J-20.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Guess where?

RLLAvta.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top