MiG-29
Banned Idiot
I gave you the equation for drag and definition but you still can not understand that is not my fault, but if you answer that way at an univertsity test you will flunk the test.
J-20... The New Generation Fighter II
- Thread starter Asymptote
- Start date
- Status
I gave you the equation for drag and definition but you still can not understand that is not my fault, but if you answer that way at an univertsity test you will flunk the test.
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
show me a video and i can prove you the J-10 only uses the canards as pitch control, in this video the J-10 does some rolls it never moves differentially the canards because it uses the wing trailing flaps as roll control and keeps the canards as lift devices.
so far your J-10 shows you are incorrect the J-10 shows you are wrong
[video=youtube;iA7Pwek0nEc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iA7Pwek0nEc[/video]
Engineer
Major
Similar to your previous argument regarding the stability of the J-20, you cannot judge the position of aerodynamic center based on the position of the wings. The aircraft's aerodynamic center is not the same as the aerodynamic center of the wings. When discussing stability, it is the former that counts.
Separation distance between canards and the wings is not the same as separation distance between aerodynamic center and the center-of-gravity. Whether vortices by canards can better re-energize flow above the wings is irrelevent when we talk about stability, since stability is not agility.
False. The designation "J" indicates J-20 is a fighter. It's as simple as that.
J-20's chins, canards, and LERXs also create vortices to increase lift at high AoA.
No. This proofs nothing with regards to stability, since you do not have knowledge about the position of aerodynamic center with respects to the center-of-gravity.
Canards are placed where they are because the aircraft's designers deem that location is the good position. I would not challenge their decision.
J-20 is a fighter.
Engineer
Major
You gave the equation which states drag is a function of air density, drag coefficent, air velocity, and wing reference area. You cherry picked wing reference area to try to argue area being the sole determining factor on drag, and try to draw inference to conclude J-20 having higher drag by misrepresenting fuselage area as wing reference area. You sir, will be the one who will flunk the test.
Last edited:
Engineer
Major
False. J-10's canards can deflect independently, this is a fact. Thus, the canards contribute to roll control, as well as limited yaw control. Your inability to distinguish small deflection between the canards during the aircraft's flight is not a proof that the canards cannot deflect independently, nor is it proof that such canards do not provide roll control authority.
No offense but just because the J-10 didn't use the canards for roll in one video means that it can't use it for roll, ever? What kind of logic is that?
That is an important point. Too many analysts use Western time frames to judge the developmental speed of Chinese military projects.
I feel that will be a recurring theme in this decade as the aerospace and general arms industry starts to reap the rewards of years of investment and the goal of indigenization.
Personally I'm looking forward to the Y-20 and SAC's X-45/47 like UCAV, hopefully by 2013.
- Status