J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

latenlazy said:

Japan having advanced radars is fine and well known, but you claimed that the F-2 has a more advanced radar than any Chinese fighter. I would wonder how you reached that conclusion, but okay w/e.

Click to expand...

If you consider that F-2 had the first AESA operational and today you have 94 F-2 operational, it is hard not to acknowledge Japan has a very well developed radar industry, i do not know if it is better or not, but i know we can not belittle the japanese aircraft technology and it is a fact that Japan had AESA radars before many other nations.

Bltizo said:

CAC and 611 institute are not lockmart (for good or for worse depending on your interpretation ), and PLA are not known for having modest projections. Sure, why not keep an open mind, and that goes for all of us.

Click to expand...

Agreed. An open mouth with a closed mind is more expensive than a closed mouth with an open mind.

MiG-29 said:

If you consider that F-2 had the first AESA operational and today you have 94 F-2 operational, it is hard not to acknowledge Japan has a very well developed radar industry, i do not know if it is better or not, but i know we can not belittle the japanese aircraft technology and it is a fact that Japan had AESA radars before many other nations.

Click to expand...

"The J/APG-1 was the first AESA radar to go into service on a fighter, so program officials regard Japanese engineers as quite adept in the technology and say it was only natural that development of the J/APG-2 should present no great challenges. Be that as it may, the J/APG-1 has a reputation for poor performance, and it is not good enough to fully exploit the AAM-4B. There is a hint that the J/APG-2 is comparable to Raytheon’s APG-79 on the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: That U.S. radar is supposed to make full use of the Amraam, whose kinetic performance, according to the Japanese ministry, is comparable to the AAM-4B’s."



Make of that what you will.

Bltizo said:

@ Mig 29 That's a whole different issue then. Personally I'm taking general he weirong's date with good faith, and most other people are too.
the PLA are not known to exaggerate their dates and numbers when they do an interview or public information release type shenanigan.

But sure, I'll accept that most projects are delayed to some degree or another. By how much will be a different question, and how long shinshin's own "inevitable" (by your train of thought) delay will be.

Click to expand...

I think "general weirong's date" already include the fact that the project could be possibly delayed.

escobar said:

I think "general weirong's date" already include the fact that the project could be possibly delayed.

Click to expand...

Eh. The thing about delays is that they're never predictable.

escobar said:

I think "general weirong's date" already include the fact that the project could be possibly delayed.

Click to expand...

Correction: It's General He. "He" is the family name. In Chinese, family name is put before the given name. In other word, last name first, and first name last.

To extend on this a bit: The Chinese think differently: We go from general (the big picture) to the specific (the details). For example, in Chinese, an address is put this way: (People's Republic of China), Jiangsu Province, Nanjing City, Jiangling District, Renmin Road, Huayuan Building, 1001 Room (or Apartment), He Xiansheng (i.e. Mr. He)

I'm of the opinion that the J-20 may not opt for thrust vectoring (at least for the earlier production batches) if it's proven during the flight tests that the J-20 in its current prototype configuration is already reaching the G-limit that pilots could safely handle.

They will then have to look into whether the other aspects of thrust vectoring, like for example energy efficient cruise trimming, are advantageous enough, after taking into account its additional cost and weights, to consider implementing it on a later J-20 version.

Player99 said:

Correction: It's General He. "He" is the family name. In Chinese, family name is put before the given name. In other word, last name first, and first name last.

To extend on this a bit: The Chinese think differently: We go from general (the big picture) to the specific (the details). For example, in Chinese, an address is put this way: (People's Republic of China), Jiangsu Province, Nanjing City, Jiangling District, Renmin Road, Huayuan Building, 1001 Room (or Apartment), He Xiansheng (i.e. Mr. He)

Click to expand...

thanks for the info.

Bltizo said:

CAC and 611 institute are not lockmart (for good or for worse depending on your interpretation ), and PLA are not known for having modest projections. Sure, why not keep an open mind, and that goes for all of us.

Click to expand...

The main question is what fighter can be deployed in 2018, what technologies are now available and are tested and what fighter requierements are needed.
TVC nozzles have two main advantages that are used to increase Stealth and supercruise thrust effectiveness.
If the Chinese want a fighter with let us say F-35 stealth, then TVC nozzles are not as important, F-22 uses TVC nozzles to reduce RCS and drag, by using thrust vectoring the F-22 aerodynamic controls are less requiered, thus increasing thrust by reducing drag and RCS by deflecting less the aerodynamic controls.
TVC nozzles could also potentially eliminate the ventral fins, thus 3D TVC nozzles would be come handy.
Now the question is do they have TVC nozzles, i personally do not know, however i think if this is true, China`s TVC nozzles might not be ready or not as reliable and same would be supercruise ability why?　well China requested Sukhoi Su-35 fighter buy which potentially could mean as in the case of Su-33, they want a few models either to improve their design or speed up its development.
If they want improve stealth of J-20 and the engine effectiveness TVC nozzles are very important, if they have the engine personally i do not know, but it seems they are not as advanced as to have an operational one, which means a potential delay for a 2018 date.
Is difficult to know the state of the chinese 5th generation engine, but if they are asking for Su-35s it means their design might not be as reliable yet as the 117 and still less reliable than F-129.

As such it is possible the fighter that might enter operational service in 2018, will be still a not fully developed model, why? well Su-35 flew in 2008, and it took them 4 years to start initial operational service, so to fly a J-20 wiith TVC nozzles they will need to start flying it in the next 2 years at least, otherwise is very unlikely the J-20 in 2018 will have TVC nozzles and 1.7 mach supercruise.

Quickie said:

I'm of the opinion that the J-20 may not opt for thrust vectoring (at least for the earlier production batches) if it's proven during the flight tests that the J-20 in its current prototype configuration is already reaching the G-limit that pilots could safely handle.

They will then have to look into whether the other aspects of thrust vectoring, like for example energy efficient cruise trimming, are advantageous enough, after taking into account its additional cost and weights, to consider implementing it on a later J-20 version.

Click to expand...

I thought WS15 is confirmed to have 3D TVC.