That and the large vertical bar demarking the two sides of the cockpit -- it hampers rear vision.
J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
That and the large vertical bar demarking the two sides of the cockpit -- it hampers rear vision.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
I don't think so. It is cheaper to use dedicated trainer that can mimic J20 flight envelope than using expensive air frame as trainer .Most likely it will be used to guide and direct UCAV and as command center for other fighter a mini AWAC
They don’t need to go through J-16
Simulator?
I reckon its a little too early to get answers to that question? The plane is literally in the beginning phases of initial operational test and evaluation, we'd probably get a better idea when it's finally fielded onto the front lines.
According to , historically some pilots on tandem seat aircraft are selected so that they are qualified to operate in both the front and back seat (see page 247, Phase 3: Combat Aircraft Transition Training). Whether this will be the case with the tandem seat J-20... I don't know. Like I said its too early to tell, especially since we know so little about it's intended capabilities.
Did I state otherwise?
I wonder how much weight is added with this twin-seater configuration? I don't think that much because of the empty space of the back cockpit, seemingly no increase in the length of the J-20 and whatever possible fuel is stored with its associated systems in the single seat version that is now omitted in the two seater.
If I am so bold to make a guess, the increase in weight, if any, would be less than 1000kg.
Last edited:
trainer actually puts higher premium on visibility from the back seat than a two seat combat aircraft because it requires the instructor in the backseat to be constantly on top of what the pilot trainee in the front seat is doing in the air, And see what the trainee sees. A two seat combat aircraft would only require the WSO to fly the aircraft on rare occasions, and for visual look out giving the pilot better all round visible is more important than giving the WSO a better vantage point to aid in visual search.
the fact the no major airframe modification seems to have been done to improve rear seat visibility, as had been done on two seaters of SU-27 series, would actually IMHO lend weight to the theory the second seat is primarily for the addition of a WSO, and with dual trainer demands being the less important consideration.
Is this meant as a rebuttal or conformation of my statement?
- Status