J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Is the picture below old or new? Please forgive me.
by78
General
Already shared very recently.
Here's a bigger version. WS-10 engines.
There should be pictures before one can "smuggle" them. There is none however. The fact is that a blurry mobile phone picture won't tell anything that you expect. And somebody with a high-end DSLR and telephoto lens around the area won't last more than some minutes before he could even take a decent photo.I'm quite surprised by this. With today's mass communication and a lot of military enthusiasts with knowledge of the English and Chinese language, there should be a healthy stream of pics coming out of China circumventing the GCFW.
The Chinese members of this site and other sites should put in more effort to build up friendships with these photographers without risking themselves and others. Once in a while some pics being 'smuggled' across the border with Hong Kong is not that difficult to do right?
Put in more effort please!
"Friendship" means nothing if the price is imprisonment for 10 years and more, and the chance of being caught is almost guaranteed. It is not really the "GCFW" or some physical border that stops the photos, it is the "everybody knows everybody in the area, anybody near the site can be the police or volunteer citizen guard" that stops the photos. This is China that we are talking about.
It should not be surprising. WS15 would have to be much closer to being a pure turbojet than an WS10 in order to facilitate supercruising without afterburners. So in the dry mode it very likely has higher specific fuel consumption compared to an turbofan engine with much higher bypass ration like WS10 due to the nature of cycle. WS15 probably has more advanced hot section than WS10, but that will only claw back some of the fuel efficiency lost to lower bypass ratio.
in this case, the joke is probably on you. He believed a story that made sense, if superficially offensive to hypernationalistic sentiment.
Not so fast. All else held equal, a higher bypass turbofan is going to be much more fuel efficient than a lower bypass turbofan. But the point of having a more powerful compressor with fewer stages, and a hotter running turbine section to drive your engine cycles, and more thrust per weight, is to have a more efficient engine that you can *then* also leverage for higher thrust at a lower bypass ratio. So it’s actually *not* apparent that the WS-15 should have higher fuel consumption than the WS-10. Maybe it does, and maybe it doesn’t, but if it weren’t possible to increase both thrust and efficiency at the same time then jet engine performance would be stuck in the 1940s.
You can apply this line of thinking on F119 as well, but we don't know if F119 is less fuel efficient than its predecessor or not. That turns back to square one, it is pointless to speculate without any raw information.
F119 at full military thrust most definitely has higher specific fuel consumption than F100 at full military thrust. That is part of the reason why the F22 fell so far short of mission radius goals.
F119 at full military thrust is also about 30% more powerful than the F100. The apples to apples comparison would be what the F119’s fuel consumption is when it’s pushing at the same thrust level as the F100.
- Status