J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

Status
Not open for further replies.

plawolf

Lieutenant General
The F16 had a one-piece canopy way back in the day. Although the F16's canopy limited it's airspeed to around 800 knots at lower altitudes when the airframe could have happily done 900, this was because the heat generated beyond 800 knots would cause the canopy to weaken and soften.

It could be that other aircraft did not opt for the one-piece as they did not want to be restricted to such a speed, especially not the likes of the F15.

Given the requirement for supercruise and the higher top speed of the F22, I would imagine that material sciences have improved somewhat since the F16's day and that is why it was chosen.

I also remember that the structural strength of a single piece canopy is not as strong as two-piece, and that is why the F18 and F35 uses a two-piece solution - the single piece canopy would not have met the Navy's requirements as there is a higher chance of bird strike in naval fixed wing operations.

Cost would obviously also play a part also, so as you can see, there are many factors to consider in choosing between one and two piece canopies even if you have the means to fabricate the single piece, which no-one except America and China has demonstrated so far.
 

CottageLV

Banned Idiot
The F16 had a one-piece canopy way back in the day. Although the F16's canopy limited it's airspeed to around 800 knots at lower altitudes when the airframe could have happily done 900, this was because the heat generated beyond 800 knots would cause the canopy to weaken and soften.

It could be that other aircraft did not opt for the one-piece as they did not want to be restricted to such a speed, especially not the likes of the F15.

Given the requirement for supercruise and the higher top speed of the F22, I would imagine that material sciences have improved somewhat since the F16's day and that is why it was chosen.

I also remember that the structural strength of a single piece canopy is not as strong as two-piece, and that is why the F18 and F35 uses a two-piece solution - the single piece canopy would not have met the Navy's requirements as there is a higher chance of bird strike in naval fixed wing operations.

Cost would obviously also play a part also, so as you can see, there are many factors to consider in choosing between one and two piece canopies even if you have the means to fabricate the single piece, which no-one except America and China has demonstrated so far.

F16 has two piece canopy, not one, the frame is in the rear, hard to spot.
 

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
225d1317483402-chinese-j-20-5th-generation-fighter-jet-eetdz.jpg

226d1317484319-chinese-j-20-5th-generation-fighter-jet-eetdz.jpg

EEtdZ.jpg



Specifications (J-7MG)Data from Jane's All The World's Aircraft 2003–2004[36]

General characteristics

Crew: 1
Length: 14.885 m (Overall) (48 ft 10 in)
Wingspan: 8.32 m (27 ft 3½ in)
Height: 4.11 m (13 ft 5½ in)
Wing area: 24.88 m² (267.8 ft²)


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

latenlazy

Brigadier
225d1317483402-chinese-j-20-5th-generation-fighter-jet-eetdz.jpg

226d1317484319-chinese-j-20-5th-generation-fighter-jet-eetdz.jpg

EEtdZ.jpg



Specifications (J-7MG)Data from Jane's All The World's Aircraft 2003–2004[36]

General characteristics

Crew: 1
Length: 14.885 m (Overall) (48 ft 10 in)
Wingspan: 8.32 m (27 ft 3½ in)
Height: 4.11 m (13 ft 5½ in)
Wing area: 24.88 m² (267.8 ft²)


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

....They are using a different truck from the J-20? Unless you're referring to the building behind them.

Care to do the math?
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
....They are using a different truck from the J-20? Unless you're referring to the building behind them.

Care to do the math?

I got 20.1 meters using the J-10 as a reference. Looks like a slight underestimation since Hu said that the J-20 is 20.3m long.
 

paintgun

Senior Member
using J-7 length at 14.885m, i got this number :
20.4m~20.6m if accounting for J-7's pitot
22.25m~22.6m discounting the pitot

i overlayed the two pictures using the background hangar window as precise as possible, maybe someone else want to give it a try on math

edit : using Trident's comment on keypub, that J-7 without pitot is 13.95m, i also came up with 20.9
 

Attachments

  • overlay2.jpg
    overlay2.jpg
    130.1 KB · Views: 25
  • overlay.jpg
    overlay.jpg
    57.6 KB · Views: 25
Last edited:

i.e.

Senior Member
COST!

wind shield cracks especially when going high speed at low altitude bird strike.

since J20 and F22 will spend most of its life in high altitude, bird strike is not an issue.

F-2 is primarily a strike fighter.

It has nothing really to do with "Master-the-technology". cost!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top