J-20... The New Generation Fighter II

Status
Not open for further replies.

Speeder

Junior Member
I am guessing titanium composite ;)

So you think that J-20 is made of steel with paint, deadly lead paint needless to say? I'm sure that Chengdu desingers would appreaciate your sense of humour... but say what spysats? Americans should have sent you up there for a change ;)
 

Asymptote

Banned Idiot
So you think that J-20 is made of steel with paint, deadly lead paint needless to say? I'm sure that Chengdu desingers would appreaciate your sense of humour... but say what spysats? Americans should have sent you up there for a change ;)


I don't know, I am just an arm chair general like everyone else here ;)
All I can say is, is it coincidence that WZ-10 has the same surface reflectance as the J-20??
Come to think of it, why do they paint it "shiny black"? The Iranian "Shafaq" stealth fighter was also painted similarly. I am just pointing out the similarity.

What I would like to see, is to have all the current "stealth fighters" under development displayed side by side, and we can compare exactly what surface properties each one has. From memory, from all the photos I have seen of T-50, F-22, YF-22, YF-23, F-35, Mitsubishi ATD-X, "Shafaq" and J-20, it just seems J-20 is particularly "shiny" out of the bunch. It implies it use a material or paint different to the others, and it also implies it could very well be very reflective to the radar waves.


But then again, it could just be the black color is particularly reflective under the sun. :D
I don't know why they choose black for secret projects though. Is that maybe suppose to be american pun "black project" by the Chengdu Engineers?
 
Last edited:

MwRYum

Major
Smoothness is most likely due to the lack of details from the pics - if you want to see the details, you need to find yourselves very close and personal to observe the surface, like with J-10 for instance, smoother than the likes of J-7 but you can still see the nuts and bolts and bumps.

For the camo, PLAN and PLAAF never adopted the 3 tone gray found on US and NATO fighter jets, or low observable emblems and markings, just a single tone gray, numbers and emblems in bright colors. Of course in this era of BVR combat, those are not so much of a necessity unless come into engage in dogfights.

Back to the J-20, until there's a leak of pics that shows the state of affair regarding to the surface treatment, I'd draw no conclusion.
 

kyanges

Junior Member
J-10B
j01b261248180208.jpg

What an unflattering angle.
 

johnqh

Junior Member
What I would like to see, is to have all the current "stealth fighters" under development displayed side by side, and we can compare exactly what surface properties each one has. From memory, from all the photos I have seen of T-50, F-22, YF-22, YF-23, F-35, Mitsubishi ATD-X, "Shafaq" and J-20, it just seems J-20 is particularly "shiny" out of the bunch. It implies it use a material or paint different to the others, and it also implies it could very well be very reflective to the radar waves.

First, keep "Shafaq" out of it. Usually anyone talking "Shafaq" as a stealth fighter is automatically considered a troll in military forums.

Second, "shiny" has nothing to do with reflective nature to radar waves. Far from it. I can even argue that glossy is a quality to reflect the visible light to a particular direction. Nothing can be glossier than a mirror. Yes, mirror reflects light (close to 100%), but only to a particular direction. If you are in a complete darkness, and shine a flashlight toward a mirror, unless you are 90% to the mirror, you won't see anything. On the other hand, any matte surface will reflect enough (even 1%) to your direction for you to see.

However, visual light is different frame radar wave, so I am not going to make stupid argument as above.

The only reason that I am responding to your post (instead of disregarding it as troll) is that I can indeed think of a valid reason for glossy paint - although it is just my guess.

Have you ever painted a house (either exterior or interior)? There is a difference between glossy and matte paint. A wall with glossy paint is easier to clean. If you get dirt or dust on it, you can use soapy water and wash it off. You cannot do that with matte paint surface.

Dust and dirt have a negative impact over stealth. No matter how good your stealthy design is and how good your RAM coating is, with a layer or dust, it will be a nice target on radar.

It is not a particular problem in US. However, China has a serious pollution problem. That J-20 staying on the ground for one day, wipe your finger over the surface and you will pick up a black layer on your fingertip. I guarantee that. Any Chinese will tell you that.

That means the fighter has to be frequently washed to maintain its stealth feature. That's where the glossy agent is for. It bounds the paint to withstand repeated wash.

That's why all cars have glossy paint, and it is also recommended to use glossy paint for bathroom and kitchen.

Of course, it is just my guess.

In any case, every fighter has its own unique requirement, so its design is a combination of requirement and the technical know-how. Whatever paint it uses, technically it is the easiest part of the design, so don't assume it is a limit of technical knowledge. Rather, it reflects the operation requirement - in this case, the dust-heavy environment it must operate in.
 

kyanges

Junior Member
Why unflattering? I always thought the frontal view of J-10B looks like a smiley face :)

Haha it does, which is fine. But to me it looks like it's got some kind of long bulbous, and slightly droopy stalk thing for a nose, even without the pilot tube. Like I said, it's just the angle though. :p .

--------------------------------------

About the shininess, I feel it's just the lighting and I wouldn't read too much into it. In Asymptote's post, the pictures he chose in particular were at different times of day. The J-20 image had the sun lower on the horizon than in the F-22 image, which illuminated the plane at a shallower angle and gave it more of a direct light similar to a spotlight. That leads to more emphasized shadows and thus more pronounced highlights, giving it that shiny look. It's the same sort of trick used for dramatic lighting, or in advertising, which you'll see more often in promotional shots of gadgets, cars and the like.

latenlazy's post above is another good example of that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top