It has been noted that the canards appear to "slipstream", or align with the relative wind at high angles of attack, that is correct. This is illustrated by a steep turn of 60 degrees or so, as the aircraft attains a 60 degree bank it tends to want to bank steeper or "overbank", the very simple solution is to apply opposite aileron. So as you are in a 60 degree bank to the left, you are actually holding a small amount of right aileron. Now back in ancient history, its quite amazing to realize than 1903 was less than 110 years ago, engineers fixed these poor flying characteristics brilliantly, wingtips were "washed out" or twisted down in relation to the wing root, so that the ailerons would remain affective in and through the stall, also as the aileron was deflected downward for a left bank a lip would protrude into the slipstream on top of the wing to create a very slight drag to counter "adverse aileron yaw". On the light Cessna high wing singles a cusp was added to the leading edge of the wing to increase lift, at low speeds by increasing camber, making the aircraft far more docile and safe for the average Joe. As we can see with the J-20 the program seems to be progressing very well, and the designers/builders have incorporated an existing body of knowledge into a beautifull " thanks paintgun and the other photogs", apparently sweet flying, "those aileron rolls look very slick", well integrated aircraft. That all of our 4th, 4.5, and 5th gen aircraft are so simular seems to be obvious. To attain the LO and Hi Performance of the mature ATF has taken us 25+ years, it my sense looking at J-20 and her current competitors, that the LO component has been scaled back a bit to JSF standards as the bar to measure up to and with enough airplanes thats probably a good bet. I believe the J-20 is flying a fairly benign test profile, but it has definately become more aggressive lately so time will tell. As paint gun and others have illustrated for the rest of us, it looks like it will deliver the goods, my Dad always quoted the old engineers adage, if it looks good, it will fly good! Gentlemen I think we have a horse race.LOL
Last edited:
This is a fantastic question guys that someone who is aerodynamicaly savvy should tackle, Scratch you might see if Jeff could jump in as he is a "real engineer". Scratch this is why I was wondering out loud about the planform of the sino jet as the Mig 1.42/1.44 are so configured, but the Russians seem to have abandoned this approach and gone with the F22sky? Any way the all flying stabilator on a conventional main wing forward package is actually quite straightforward, throw a canard on the front and I get a "little confused". They haven't changed the laws of aerodynamics, but they have learned to "cheate a little bit" in a good way.
