J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
They got removed for 2031 and got added back for 2032. It might be the same for 2051. Maybe they didn’t bother adding it for the first frame to save time. Or maybe the room for the sensor needs to be used for test instrumentation for the first frame so they have to remove the sensors and then add it back in later.
The optic windows are pieces of glass, the aircraft is in primer. It could be that the device is installed but the windows are simply covered by some tape to prevent being painted over, or it is not installed.
A similar "missing" part is the two hexagon vents not visible on 2051, but I am sure they will be there or actually are there but blurred beyond recognition.
This is 2051
This is a regular J-20.
It looks like you can see rivets on the canopy edge, but no where else. They could just be blurred though.
I have also seen people referring to this new 2051 (and in some cases the twin-seater) as having a major internal overhaul. This, if true, may explain the absence of some of these features
As it's been repeatedly mentioned, the twin seater has had some EOPDS apertures present and some missing between different prototypes.
We fully expect J-20B to have major avionics overhauls, but it doesn't really make sense for its production version to lack some EOPDS apertures without some others to replace them.
Thus, the best thing to do is to first wait for further prototypes in the future and then to wait for the production version to see if they will have all the apertures there or if some will be missing.
We shouldn't make any big calls too early, especially if the conclusions don't really make sense.
Agreed that we shouldn’t jump to conclusion’s prematurely, just relaying what I’ve seen being tossed around, not trying to claim it as truth. I think the EO aperture and side sensor arrangement that we currently see on 2051 (be it from very limited angles and poor resolution) is mostly similar to the configuration of the newer twin-seat J20, personal take so take with a generous pinch of salt
edit: found some pics for cross-referencing, the lack of EO aperture on the side of the nose, and the sensor arrangement (i.e. the vertically stacked hexagons, those are in front of the intake on production model J20, but both 2032 and 2051 moved it) on the lower half of the intake sidewall has at least a strong similarity between the two, can’t speak for anything else tho
Last edited:
Right
My point is that the logic behind the hypothesis, IMO, is not necessarily logical, because:
- significant avionics/internal modifications/materials modifications for J-20B doesn't mean it makes sense to remove the EO PDS apertures on it without replacement
- if anything, it makes more sense for J-20B to continue having EO PDS apertures in a 360 degree fashion because passive electro optic full spherical coverage is not something that can be replicated by other means
- J-20B prototype 2051 does not have a similar configuration to the J-20AS twin seater, because we only have two J-20AS flying prototypes that we've had good pictures of, and both of them have different EO PDS aperture setups as I've mentioned before (see link below), meaning there is no "J-20AS" EO PDS configuration to begin with!
J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII
I think he deliberate PS two ws-15 nozzles, so that yall would think it's fake. The real image as per above, is only fitted with one ws-15.:eek: The image I shared above was already shared months ago.
www.sinodefenceforum.com
.... Additionally, on the latest photo of 2051, we can see that the dorsal ventral EO PDS aperture is present, in the same general location as regular J-20As.
My overall point being -- I don't think the lack of some EO PDS apertures on J-20B 2051 should be inferred to mean anything at present, and speculation that it represents an intention to remove or reduce EO PDS apertures on the J-20B doesn't make logical sense, and is also inconsistent with evidence that we have of past recent newer J-20 variant prototypes (J-20AS for 2031 and 2032) where EO PDS presence has been different even between prototypes.
I don't mean to criticize you, but this is just a general explanation of the logic given you raised the point.
I understand your post is relaying what has been tossed around, but IMO unless you believe in the logic and the basis of what you are conveying, then it may be better to not convey it.
Sometimes certain illogical ideas and speculations should be actively countered, and subsequently suppressed if they simply don't make sense. Of course, if you do believe in the argument to begin with, then that's fine, and the position can be dissected and scrutinized.
I agree with this 100% percent. If it’s okay I want to reestablish a few of my previously stated points to make them clearer and to avoid confusion. No offense intended, nor am I trying to start an argument, saying this just in case
One small thing is that I was specifically comparing 2051 with 2032 to show some of the similar new features between them, and not really trying to extrapolate the argument to “prototype 2051 has same internals as J-20S”. I agree that there isn’t a definitive “J-20S layout”, not currently at least, so my observations were made using the two photos as reference and nothing else.
Also I wasn’t really endorsing the idea of the lack of side-facing EO apertures being a feature of the so-called “internal overhaul”. The apparent lack of these apertures and the supposed “overhaul” are two separate things. The former is a conclusion from limited pictures from only a few angles thus little more than a speculation (they may have these apertures relocated and not deleted, they may be somewhere that the pictures available just doesn’t show yet, they may have some new tech that allows them to do without side-apertures, any one of these may be true, or non of them, we have no idea at this point). The latter is a claim that has been floating around on the internet, that I relayed because I think this is somewhat likely the case. I did not intend to imply that either is true or that they are necessarily linked.
Elaborating a bit on the EO aperture part: I agree that it makes very little sense to delete the side-facing ones, at least from my understanding of how an aerial combat platform operates. However, we don’t even know if they are really deleted. We only know that on the two aforementioned prototypes they’re not where they used to be. To me this signals that the internal layout has changedThis may be as small as “not installing those two EO sensors for whatever reason” and may be as big as “the internals are completely redesigned”, we don’t have enough information to decide and I’m not trying to make a claim on this.
To summarize, what I have in mind is that we can see commonalities in some of the subsystem placements on specifically the 2032 and 2051 prototypes, and these commonalities just might be hinting at this “overhaul” that’s floating around. (For the record, I do think that there likely is indeed an internal overhaul for the 2051 prototype, and by extension J20B, but I make no claims as to what it is or what this overhaul would include if it is real.)
Whether 2032 and 2051 have side-facing EO apertures, what are the reasons for apparently deleting them, whether this makes sense for J20B, these I have no idea and wasn’t planning on making claims on. Sorry if the way I presented information wasn’t clear, and I hope this can convey what I actually intend on saying.
edit: Blitzo your link has 2032 with the two side-facing apertures and I posted a photo of 2032 without those, if neither are fake then this goes on to further prove that twin-seater J20 has no fixed DAS layout, something I think we can both agree on. The observations made above and in the past few posts were purely based on the photos I posted, so I think the similarities are still there.
Last edited:
Some additional info I just found and can’t put into the post above because the edit period passed:
Apparently what I thought is a picture of the 2032 is not 2032, but a photoshopped image of 2031 with a livery and the number 2032. I apologize for making this mistake and am currently contemplating hitting myself in the head with something (
I don’t think this changes very much of what I was trying to get across, but for what it’s worth, the different EO PDS layouts on 2031, 2032 and 2051 are giving me headaches and I don’t think they should be taken above their surface value at this point.
2051 doesn’t have side apertures
2031 doesn’t have side apertures
2032 has side apertures
the photo I posted (2031 photoshopped into 2032, I know this is bass ackwards, sorry guys) doesn’t have them.
That’s it, no further conclusions should be drawn and I certainly don’t intend on drawing one. The other thing (2 vertically stacked hexagons) I noticed before does indeed have a different placement than the production J20, and this is common with all 3 prototypes mentioned above.
Again, terribly sorry to turn this into such a convoluted mess through my mistake, at this point I’m writing this down more to get my head wrapped around the situation than anything else. I’ll try to do better… next time?
Apparently what I thought is a picture of the 2032 is not 2032, but a photoshopped image of 2031 with a livery and the number 2032. I apologize for making this mistake and am currently contemplating hitting myself in the head with something (
I don’t think this changes very much of what I was trying to get across, but for what it’s worth, the different EO PDS layouts on 2031, 2032 and 2051 are giving me headaches and I don’t think they should be taken above their surface value at this point.
2051 doesn’t have side apertures
2031 doesn’t have side apertures
2032 has side apertures
the photo I posted (2031 photoshopped into 2032, I know this is bass ackwards, sorry guys) doesn’t have them.
That’s it, no further conclusions should be drawn and I certainly don’t intend on drawing one. The other thing (2 vertically stacked hexagons) I noticed before does indeed have a different placement than the production J20, and this is common with all 3 prototypes mentioned above.
Again, terribly sorry to turn this into such a convoluted mess through my mistake, at this point I’m writing this down more to get my head wrapped around the situation than anything else. I’ll try to do better… next time?
Last edited:
- Status