J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

Status
Not open for further replies.

zbb

Junior Member
Registered Member
What makes you think that the twin seater has lower stealth requirement?
One of the hypothesized roles for the twin seater is as a commander of drones and less advanced fighters. If the J-20S is always flying with a group of much cheaper and less stealthy planes, then there is little benefit to making the J-20S as stealthy as possible when it is already so much more stealthy than the other planes that it will be flying with.

If anything it would be superior to the single seater since it is able to take advantage of a lot of new tech not present when the single seater’s design was frozen.
That is true and we do see some places where there seems to be improvements, e.g, the entire front edge of the intake is now one single continuous piece of composite material instead of 3 separate strips separately by slivers of metal at the corners of the intake.
 

Schwerter_

Junior Member
Registered Member
One of the hypothesized roles for the twin seater is as a commander of drones and less advanced fighters. If the J-20S is always flying with a group of much cheaper and less stealthy planes, then there is little benefit to making the J-20S as stealthy as possible when it is already so much more stealthy than the other planes that it will be flying with.


That is true and we do see some places where there seems to be improvements, e.g, the entire front edge of the intake is now one single continuous piece of composite material instead of 3 separate strips separately by slivers of metal at the corners of the intake.
being a command unit doesn’t necessarily mean it has to mingle with other units. As a matter of fact I don’t think the command unit should be anywhere near the drones, much safer and more effective that way.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Could some of the changes in use of composite materials from J-20 to J-20S (DSI and actuator bumps) be due to lower stealth requirements for the two-seat version? Enlarging the cockpit to add the second seat likely have significant adverse effects on stealth, so some of the small stealth optimizations used for single-seat J-20 may no longer makes sense economically.
Many stealthy treatments have become standard practice in recent aircraft. You don't save anything by not using them.
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
being a command unit doesn’t necessarily mean it has to mingle with other units. As a matter of fact I don’t think the command unit should be anywhere near the drones, much safer and more effective that way.
Drones aren't good enough to be simply routinely 'commanded' something too complex yet. Simple missions - sure, pre-set complex missions - sure as well, but for complex orders "on fly" (for proper independent drones) we still need at least 1 operator per unit.

In complex operations loyal wingmen basically do sorta "distributed aircraft" thing, which assumes the presence of the twin-seater within the formation. Original idea was that such a concept works well even with single-seaters(just do as I do) - but there are multiple signs it doesn't, or fail to realize the potential of those aircraft.
J-20S is just the most prominent among those signs.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
That is the line of thinking by Tirdent. I asked him in the same manner as you about his thought if it was F-22 using 3D printed bulkhead instead of SAC. But yours is better as it is fact rather than hypothesis.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Spotted this video in the Science and Technology thread. It’s an interview with the guy responsible for developing the printing technique for the FC-31’s bulkheads and there’s a segment in it that actually helps answer why China is able to use large 3D printed structures as high load bearing parts. At around the 18:30 mark he and the interviewer inspect a magnified image of a 3D printed titanium part’s grain structure and he talks about how he has full control over the grain size, shape, and orientation in the printing process, and that in turn helps them control, even alter, the basic properties and characteristics of the material they are working with. In that particular image it seems they’ve created a titanium part with cross hatched grain microstructures that essentially reinforces the strength of the part. This is much more sophisticate, complex, and deliberate control of grain structures than I’ve seen from any open source materials investigating this aspect of 3D printing to improve material performance.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Spotted this video in the Science and Technology thread. It’s an interview with the guy responsible for developing the printing technique for the FC-31’s bulkheads and there’s a segment in it that actually helps answer why China is able to use large 3D printed structures as high load bearing parts. At around the 18:30 mark he and the interviewer inspect a magnified image of a 3D printed titanium part’s grain structure and he talks about how he has full control over the grain size, shape, and orientation in the printing process, and that in turn helps them control, even alter, the basic properties and characteristics of the material they are working with. In that particular image it seems they’ve created a titanium part with cross hatched grain microstructures that essentially reinforces the strength of the part. This is much more sophisticate, complex, and deliberate control of grain structures than I’ve seen from any open source materials investigating this aspect of 3D printing to improve material performance.
Good interview, his hair all turn white, time flies. Wang Huaming published a paper in 2009. This is the paper that all my posts are based on.
1658506367140.png

Active control on grain size, grain morphology and grain texture.1658506185609.png

This is what you saw in the interview.
1658506267183.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top