J-20... The New Generation Fighter II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Martian

Martian

Senior Member
There are plenty of Russian T-50 deficiencies that everyone sees.

airsuperiority said:
The lower fuselage of the Flanker is extremely unstealthy. Doesn't take too much to figure that one out
Click to expand...

The current Russian T-50 design has serious stealth limitations. If the Russian government has any sense, it will demand that Sukhoi radically redesign the T-50 to match the J-20 and F-22 in serpentine air-inlets, DSI technology, frameless cockpit canopy, continuous curvature, RAM coating, etc.

The puzzlement is: Why didn't Sukhoi adhere to the design elements pioneered by the U.S. F-22 and followed by China's J-20? The French also adhered to an almost-serpentine air-inlet design. It appears that Sukhoi was lazy and didn't bother to put too much effort into designing a stealthy T-50.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"Not so LO [low observable] Features [for Russian T-50]

1. Circular exhaust.
2. Infrared-search-and-track ball on the nose.
3. Canopy frame,
4. Gaps around the inlets.
5. Various unshielded intakes and grilles.
6. Limited use of composites for now. Eventually, 40% of the aircraft will be made using composites.
7. Many surface intersections and flight-test probes that increase the radar signature."
 
F

flateric

Junior Member
oh, my, how does this B-2 fly with its framed canopy? oh, gosh, they even wanted to go with framed canopy for EMD F-23A and NATF-23! They didn't bother of it on A-12!
surely armchair idiot Thakur knows much more than Bob Sandusky and Irv Waaland of Northrop!
oh, gosh, how that X-35 that flew with circular exhaust became an F-35 with LO nozzle!
oh, gosh, limited use of composites! just 40% (25% for T-50 according to chief designer Davidenko, in fact)! how does F-22 fly with just 25% of them! how does F-35!
panic, panic!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


most of all I liked fanboy video of T-50 blocker that Thakur takes for real (and has nothing in common with real thing)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
thought too that Tiger was hands off technically superior to T-34...and it probably was so in fact
The puzzlement is: Why didn't comrade Morozov from Ural Tank Factory No. 183 adhere to the design elements pioneered by the German Tiger and followed by German Panther?
 
Last edited:
Martian

Martian

Senior Member
My estimate of J-20's RCS is 0.005-0.0001 m2 (or -30 to -40 db)

From the front, the J-20 matches the F-22's stealth profile. While the J-20 is flying at you, the incremental increase in area from its canards is minimal (e.g. look at a piece of paper edge-wise; you only see a line). Also, the J-20's canards are probably made of composite material, coated with RAM, and curve-shaped to deflect radar waves. For all intents and purposes, the J-20 has a F-22 RCS frontal profile of 0.0001 m2.

From the rear, with its circular saw-toothed engine nozzles, the J-20 looks like the F-35 and it should have a similar rear RCS of 0.005 m2.

In conclusion, depending on your point of view, the J-20's RCS ranges from 0.005 to 0.0001 m2 (or -30 to -40 db).

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Radar Cross Section (RCS) / RCS (m2) / RCS (dB)

  1. automobile 100 20
  2. B-52 100
  3. B-1(A/B) 10
  4. F-15 25
  5. Su-27 15
  6. cabin cruiser 10 10
  7. Su-MKI 4
  8. Mig-21 3
  9. F-16 5
  10. F-16C 1.2
  11. man 1 0
  12. F-18 1
  13. Rafale 1
  14. B-2 0.75 ?
  15. Typhoon 0.5
  16. Tomahawk SLCM 0.5
  17. B-2 0.1 ?
  18. A-12/SR-71 0.01 (22 in2)
  19. bird 0.01 -20
  20. F-35 / JSF 0.005 -30
  21. F-117 0.003
  22. insect 0.001 -30
  23. F-22 0.0001 -40
  24. B-2 0.0001 -40
 
IronsightSniper

IronsightSniper

Junior Member
kroko said:
Why did you bring the subject of engines? we all know that russia is more advanced than china in this regard. We are talking about stealth. Besides, this is a clearly biased article against j-20/chinese pilots/china. Why dont you bring a more imparcial assesment??
Click to expand...

I didn't bring up the subject of engines.

I noticed that you registered on this forum only on december. Are you sure you didnt come to this forum just to stealth bash J-20/china defence tech ???
Click to expand...

I signed up to talk about Tanks, the J-20 just happened to fly a few days later. Asides from that, how is this relevant?
 
MwRYum

MwRYum

Major
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Obviously the official line didn't change, still the "everybody said we got something like that" deal, but what caught my attention is the part 2, @01:19...the "expert" hinted that
1. the surface material is using RAM or other "special material" or
2. those parts are not metal, thus without the yellow primer or
3. the primer is redundant for the structural material thus no need yellow primer
 
Last edited:
L

Lion

Senior Member
IronsightSniper said:
I didn't bring up the subject of engines.



I signed up to talk about Tanks, the J-20 just happened to fly a few days later. Asides from that, how is this relevant?
Click to expand...

Hey Mr Iron Sight Sniper, Mr Martian has prove J-20 is more advance than T-50 in stealth. Does it hurt yr ego? If you are not happy. Rebuke it with facts. If not any of yr childish reasoning will only make you even more childish...

Martian has done some very professional comparison with many valid point. Well done.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
MwRYum said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Obviously the official line didn't change, still the "everybody said we got something like that" deal, but what caught my attention is the part 2, @01:19...the "expert" hinted that
1. the surface material is using RAM or other "special material" or
2. those parts are not metal, thus without the yellow primer or
3. the primer is redundant for the structural material thus no need yellow primer
Click to expand...

Does anyone know whether the F-22 prototype had yellow primers? I've seen pictures of unpainted F-35s. The skin looked white and had grey patches.
 
IronsightSniper

IronsightSniper

Junior Member
Lion said:
Hey Mr Iron Sight Sniper, Mr Martian has prove J-20 is more advance than T-50 in stealth. Does it hurt yr ego? If you are not happy. Rebuke it with facts. If not any of yr childish reasoning will only make you even more childish...

Martian has done some very professional comparison with many valid point. Well done.
Click to expand...

Well lets not get ahead of ourselves shall we, the J-20 will have 5 years extra to advance it's capabilities compared to the T-50 and 15 to the F-22. As far as we know, RCS wise, the J-20 is not all aspect, and as Martian has said, gains significantly as the angles change. The T-50 on the other hand, is all aspect, and is estimated to be around -20 dbsm. That means that passive SAM waiting for J-20s to fly by can get a huge lock once the J-20's fly by, something that won't happen with F-22s or T-50s.

Another thing, China does not have fully capable indigenous engines that can put the J-20 airframe to it's maximum capabilities, so they'll have to purchase them from Russia, which is terrible for the PRC as Russia can downgrade anything they export or not export those engines at all. Sensor wise, the J-20 does not even have it's AESA radar yet, that is still in development. Without a fully functional AESA, whenever the J-20 opens it's search lights it is lit up like a candle in a darkroom, something that is easy pickings for enemy air defenses.

So in that regards, the T-50 is still more advance than the J-20. Stealth wise, Sukhoi has stated that they're sacrificing RCS for Maneuverability, the J-20 on the other hand, does the same thing, except it sacrifices less RCS and has less maneuverability. I can agree that the J-20 air frame is fully functional, but like the PAK-FA, the J-20 is not going to get produced, at least not yet, simply because all the parts and pieces are non-existent.

And please, you have yet to provide any sources so before you call me out provide a link or two. I should also mention that I love how you guys interpret any criticism of the J-20 as J-20 bashing, that's simply absurd and a logical fallacy.
 
L

Lion

Senior Member
IronsightSniper said:
Well lets not get ahead of ourselves shall we, the J-20 will have 5 years extra to advance it's capabilities compared to the T-50 and 15 to the F-22. As far as we know, RCS wise, the J-20 is not all aspect, and as Martian has said, gains significantly as the angles change. The T-50 on the other hand, is all aspect, and is estimated to be around -20 dbsm. That means that passive SAM waiting for J-20s to fly by can get a huge lock once the J-20's fly by, something that won't happen with F-22s or T-50s.

Another thing, China does not have fully capable indigenous engines that can put the J-20 airframe to it's maximum capabilities, so they'll have to purchase them from Russia, which is terrible for the PRC as Russia can downgrade anything they export or not export those engines at all. Sensor wise, the J-20 does not even have it's AESA radar yet, that is still in development. Without a fully functional AESA, whenever the J-20 opens it's search lights it is lit up like a candle in a darkroom, something that is easy pickings for enemy air defenses.

So in that regards, the T-50 is still more advance than the J-20. Stealth wise, Sukhoi has stated that they're sacrificing RCS for Maneuverability, the J-20 on the other hand, does the same thing, except it sacrifices less RCS and has less maneuverability. I can agree that the J-20 air frame is fully functional, but like the PAK-FA, the J-20 is not going to get produced, at least not yet, simply because all the parts and pieces are non-existent.

And please, you have yet to provide any sources so before you call me out provide a link or two. I should also mention that I love how you guys interpret any criticism of the J-20 as J-20 bashing, that's simply absurd and a logical fallacy.
Click to expand...

No.. T-50 is poor stealth 5th gen attempt. Martian already say it very clearly and explain professionally with valid facts. I don't want a yes or no simple answer. BACK YR CLAIM with FACTS. If not, don't waste bandwidth trying to brainwash us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top