J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
PS: can anyone confirm WS-15 is done by a XAE/CAC combo and not Shenyang-Liming?

Well everyone has said WS-15 was done by XAE, since however many years ago it was first rumoured to exist.
 

hmmwv

Junior Member
Well everyone has said WS-15 was done by XAE, since however many years ago it was first rumoured to exist.

It's interesting because WS15's state secret classification seems to be on the same level as the strategic bomber since the manufacturers are not even allowed to hint anything in any types of news, i.e they can't even mention "new type of engine" in any sort of the public media outlet. No one dares to share the information on public forums neither, much like 2001's progress at Yanliang.
 

dingyibvs

Senior Member
Can't the J-20 can change pitch without using its canards?

Of course it can. Only those who don't understand physics and bases their aeronautics knowledge entirely on snippets from the internet can't understand that.

There are indeed stealth disadvantages to having canards, but they have more to do with surface-hugging radar waves.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
It's interesting because WS15's state secret classification seems to be on the same level as the strategic bomber since the manufacturers are not even allowed to hint anything in any types of news, i.e they can't even mention "new type of engine" in any sort of the public media outlet. No one dares to share the information on public forums neither, much like 2001's progress at Yanliang.

What about this sign a few years back?

75ac9738aaab6d2f27a8dcf029acfac7.jpg


Anyway, the fact that it may be very classified could be why we've heard nothing about it in so long. The engines to J-20 would be considered an important secret, not unlike how the F119s are the secret to F-22's performance, WS-15 will be similar (perhaps to a lesser degree as J-20's advanced aerodynamics are a greater factor too).
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Wait, wait, wait.

I remember reading that part from his paper.

So, what you're saying is, yes it can, but, in some situations, it would use it's canards to change pitch anyway?

I have a feeling that most of the arguments between MiG-29, and others are the fact that MiG often makes very broad sweeping claims without explaining the premises. And in when he does explain, the discussion gets so bogged down in point for point rebuttals that the original topic is lost.

One example being MiG's claim that TVC improves thrust. Can you just explain in a couple sentences the basic idea of how TVC would do that?

To answer your last question first----there is really no way that TVC will increase thrust, it merely deflects exhaust gases to enhance aircraft control----the engineer is correct when he asserts that there is a minimal reduction in thrust as the exhaust gases lose energy when they encounter the deflected nozzle. He is also correct when he points out that TVC increases maintenance and complexity- while it enhances control authority of the aircraft.

In normal flight operations the FCS sytem commands the flight control actuators to "couple the canards and elevons together", the application of aft stick for instance will deflect the canard upward, while the elevons deflect upward to push the tail down,,,,the application of forward stick will deflect the canard downwards and the elevons will also deflect downwards to deflect the tail up,,,,,the canards pulling and the elevons pushing so to speak. Application of slats and flaps will cause the the leading and trailing edge flaps on the main wing to deflect downward to increase lift, in that configuration, the FCS might "prioritize" the pitch control to the canard, it really depends on how the engineers "schedule" the FCS. This is gross oversimplification, and why I have referred to the J-20 as a very "smart" airplane, Dr. Song states that the FCS is quite complex, and many of his innovations occur in the FCS.
 

kyanges

Junior Member
To answer your last question first----there is really no way that TVC will increase thrust, it merely deflects exhaust gases to enhance aircraft control----the engineer is correct when he asserts that there is a minimal reduction in thrust as the exhaust gases lose energy when they encounter the deflected nozzle. He is also correct when he points out that TVC increases maintenance and complexity- while it enhances control authority of the aircraft.

In normal flight operations the FCS sytem commands the flight control actuators to "couple the canards and elevons together", the application of aft stick for instance will deflect the canard upward, while the elevons deflect upward to push the tail down,,,,the application of forward stick will deflect the canard downwards and the elevons will also deflect downwards to deflect the tail up,,,,,the canards pulling and the elevons pushing so to speak. Application of slats and flaps will cause the the leading and trailing edge flaps on the main wing to deflect downward to increase lift, in that configuration, the FCS might "prioritize" the pitch control to the canard, it really depends on how the engineers "schedule" the FCS. This is gross oversimplification, and why I have referred to the J-20 as a very "smart" airplane, Dr. Song states that the FCS is quite complex, and many of his innovations occur in the FCS.

Thanks, the part about the FCS was very informative.

Regarding the TVC, well, that's what I thought. MiG-29 insists otherwise, and I was curious why.

Can this be moved to a new thread please? Or is there already a TVC thread? I only saw an aerodynamics thread, but it looks like that died.
 
Last edited:

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Thanks, the part about the FCS was very informative.

Regarding the TVC, well, that's what I thought. MiG-29 insists otherwise, and I was curious why.

Can this be moved to a new thread please? Or is there already a TVC thread? I only saw an aerodynamics thread, but it looks like that died.
let us make another thread and i can post to you that Air force Brat is wrong Thrust vectoring does indeed increase thrust in fact i can prove you with this simple analogy, you can reduce or increase thrust just changing the shape of a nozzle but let us make the new thread i will make it and if you want we discuss this there

here is thread

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/thrust-vectoring-stealth-fighters-does-matter-china-s-new-j-20-j-31-a-6142.html#post204760
 
Last edited:

NikeX

Banned Idiot
I wouldn't call it 'solvable' either until it's actually been solved ...........

As mentioned earlier there seemed to be no reference to F22 problems during the recent Red Flag encounters with the Eurofighters in one-on-one dogfights, so I would say that is a pretty good indication that the problems have been solved
 

NikeX

Banned Idiot
Great, let me know what you think, he echoes many of your concerns about the powerplants but also has some great insight on the Raptor and talks quite extensively as I recall about the distant coupled canards.

The paper was pretty detailed as Dr Song covered all the bases regarding building a modern 5th generation fighter. One thing that stood out for me was a reference to the F-15 ACTIVE which had TVC and Canards. My guess is that Dr Song studied this aircraft extensively.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


F-15 ACTIVE on a test stand showing its 3D Pitch Yaw Balance Beam Nozzles (P/YBBN). These nozzles are mounted on the stock F100-299 engines and provide 20 degrees of thrust vectoring in any direction.
 

Engineer

Major
yes F-22 remains the benchmark still, in the case of other jets for two main reasons

F119 still is the top engine.

Russia admits the IR control of 117 is not as efficient as still they would like and remains a problem to tackle
and as long as J-20 has no TVC and supercruise it won`t achieve niether the RCS or speed require to catch up with F-22

F-22 test pilot Paul Metz:
"-All aircraft experience a loss of control effectiveness at supersonic speeds. To generate the same maneuver supersonically as subsonically, the controls must be deflected further. This, in turn, results in a big increase in supersonic trim drag and a subsequent loss in acceleration and turn performance-"

Check the word big increase in supersonic trim drag
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as J-20 achieves supercruise it requieres the pitch control canards to deflect further than at subsonic speeds so TVC nozzles are required to reduce its RCS and since J-20 is not B-2 haha it reminds me something i read before its RCS will increase as long as it uses canards and any aerodynamic control surface to control the jet.


However once they achieve the engine they will catch up.

So yeah you are right F-22 still is the yardstick in 5th generation aircraft however i would say the lack of IRST and helmet mounted sight is a big flaw in thinking as the recent Eurofighter vs F-22 mock combat has shown

Wrong. F-22 is the benchmark for the simple reason that it is the first 5-th generation aircraft and the only such aircraft in operation.

The J-20's designers anticipated potential problems in the development of F-119 class engine, thus chose to compensate with very sophisticated and advanced aerodynamics. J-20 features the most numerous vortex generators on any aircraft seen so far, with a total of four pairs from the chine, strake, canard, and LERX. Such design intends to provide large amount of lift especially at high AoA situation. This lift along with thrust are what enable an aircraft to turn and out maneuver another fighter, not TVC.

If WS-15 delivers the requirements, then the combination of advanced aerodynamics and powerful engines will enable J-20 to out maneuver the F-22. If not, the aerodynamics will enable the J-20 to handle itself visa-versus an F-22.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top