J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
I notice a small detail that in the recent photos of J-20 the EOTS on the chin are generally exposed, unlike in older photos we saw them being covered most of times. Even in some ops like Changchun Airshow which is just a show have nothing to do with combat training, they keep them exposed.
I don't know why, maybe it's just my bias? Or it means the EOTS is finally fully operational? Or is it the requirement of a new doctrine?
I don't know why, maybe it's just my bias? Or it means the EOTS is finally fully operational? Or is it the requirement of a new doctrine?
It was always functional, they just had a cover on them before.
I think the recent pictures from Changchun airshow just happen to have them fly without the cover on.
We really don't have enough pictures over J-20s service life thus far to judge how many sorties and which sorties had the cover on the chin EO IRST and how many did not have the cover.
The birds at Changchun are from Wuhu, which operates frontline combat aircraft. No doubt the EO IRST is functional.
Are the IRST covered up that much?
I believe all of the EO IRST's we've seen on production J-20s are functional, but sometimes they fly with covers installed.
If you look at high quality images of J-20s with the EO IRST cover, they are not merely non-functional objects, but rather an external cover which encloses the EO IRST itself.
That can be noted as the cover is geometrically wider in every dimension than the actual EO IRST itself by comparison, which suggests to me that it's an external protective cover that can be installed to protect the EO IRST housing during normal operations unless it is needed to be exposed.
There is a bit of a rationale for this -- for IRSTs on other aircraft like Flankers, J-10B/C and Rafael or Typhoon etc, their IRST balls can rotate backwards so the actual glass housing with the sensor faces backwards.
Similarly, targeting pods like LITENING and ATFLIR and some Chinese ones etc, rotate the front optics housing so that the actual glass housing doesn't face the incoming airstream.
It seems they have taken this extra effort to develop a protective cover for the J-20's EO IRST as well for this.
In the first picture, it seems the vortex almost hits the vertical tail. Does this happen to f22 and f35?Three more.
yes, in fact, this is a pretty common issue for a lot of aircrafts, including F-22 and F-35, during the development of X-35, front edge of dsi intake and wings were partially redesign to redirect the vortex in order to ease the impact, but this issue remains in F-35, so Lockhead had to reenforce the tail design to make sure they won't crack like f-18.
I’d add that during the F-22’s development they also had to add reinforcements to the tail, adding (if I recall correctly) about 500 kg of weight to the aircraft in the process.yes, in fact, this is a pretty common issue for a lot of aircrafts, including F-22 and F-35, during the development of X-35, front edge of dsi intake and wings were partially redesign to redirect the vortex in order to ease the impact, but this issue remains in F-35, so Lockhead had to reenforce the tail design to make sure they won't crack like f-18.
The biggest victim of the vortices might be the F-18. Supposedly it caused excessive stress on vertical slabs so adjustments must be made.
I think that there is a reason that the shape of LERX changed from semi-circular to triangular and it is not purely related to RCS optimization.
I think that there is a reason that the shape of LERX changed from semi-circular to triangular and it is not purely related to RCS optimization.
- Status