Are you trying to troll this thread? If you get so anal about baseless rumours about the 9.5 ton thrust engines, why so eager to embrace rumours of a supposed Chinese hacking of secure databases? I think you're underestimating the security of firewalls. If China can so easily hack databases, then we can assume that China has matched the US in weapons technology, which we know they HAVE NOT.
J-20... The New Generation Fighter III
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Are you trying to troll this thread? If you get so anal about baseless rumours about the 9.5 ton thrust engines, why so eager to embrace rumours of a supposed Chinese hacking of secure databases? I think you're underestimating the security of firewalls. If China can so easily hack databases, then we can assume that China has matched the US in weapons technology, which we know they HAVE NOT.
OTIf you consider my line of argument you have to remember that the existence of things is based on principles of parsimony. If you go by "it's possible" as opposed to likely, we can say that the J-31 has a new weapon that, when activated, can cause Obama's head to explode. Theoretically possible, but not particularly likely. As far as the aircraft being too dark; consider the F-60 model currently on display in Zhuhai. There's not even an indication for Irst. There is basically no reason to consider the J-31 will receive EODAS at this point other than the fact that the F-35 has it.
With regards to making changes to prototypes, I did have a link for a comparison between J-10 and J-10A aircraft, and the changes were not significant and did not involve adding significant features. Some parts were moved around to adjust the aerodynamic formula, but why, at this iteration, add EODAS?
Let's agree here that leading edge root extensions (LERX) refer to protrusions in front of the wing which energizes incoming air to create vortices, increasing lift at high AOA. In this case, the F-35 does not have LERX; the F-22 has subtle, almost undetectable lerxes on the edge of the engine intakes.
In this picture, we may see LERXes, but the picture is very blurry and hard to tell.
In the following fan diagram, there's no LERX.
As far as the F-35 being a large influence on the J-31, look at the intakes, the general planform, the hacking on LM and LM's contractors, and the size of the J-31.
Look, let me redo the weight estimates. If you accept the general F-35 planform as a basis for the aircraft weight, then scale it up for the J-31 wing area, you get something around 23 tons fully loaded. However, you've got to consider that the F-35 uses carbon nanotubes to reduce weight, and if you consider that, 24 tons or 25 tons becomes reasonable as an estimate for the J-31. In either case, 19 tons from two engines still gives you a .76-.8 T/W ratio loaded; and you do have to remember that the 9.5 ton engines are currently vaporware projects that only exist via a report on Jane's. There are no working models of the 9.5 ton engines in operation.
T/W-wise, the F-35 is likely going to be better simply because of the dramatic lead by the United States in terms of engine technology. Remember, the F-135 is now expected to be a 190KN class engine, up from 180KN a while ago, and reports indicated it managed to breach 200KN in testing. The F-35's thrust to weight issues will likely be well-controlled by simply having an incredibly powerful engine. It's the, *chuckles*, American way.
Let me define my positions clearly so we know what we're arguing about.
-J-31 is a low-end aircraft with less ambitious goals than the F-35, aiming to produce a reliable stealth aircraft for low-cost.
-J-31 is a strike aircraft, not an air superiority aircraft.
The first position is that I think the J-31 will likely be inferior to the F-35 in the near-term. It's simply less ambitious as a project, the Chinese have engine problems, and the Chinese don't have the vast experience the Americans have in aerodynamic shaping; compare the J-10 to the F-16 or the Rafale for that matter.
As I've said before, the wing loading on the J-31 is better, but the T/W is likely going to be worse. These two factors may offset each other, or they may not. The J-31 also lacks the EODAS you see on the F-35; it is, as I've said before, a less ambitious project.
The second position is that the J-31 is a strike aircraft. Let's first mention a few things: The J-31 has a small radome. Its radar will probably be in the F-35-class, and the F-35 is also a strike aircraft. The J-31 also has wing loadings comparable to that of other strike aircraft; if you're optimistic, it's somewhat worse than a Su-30MKI or Su-30MKK when it comes to wing-loading. We also generally don't see LERXes or other structures designed to increase max AOA and consequently instantaneous turn rates.
F-35 is handicapted by being designed in three versions at the same time and that will cost more than any advantage derived from the use of carbon nanotubes. In that respect #31001 is certainly much less ambitious.
OT
It would be highly irresponsible. What happens if one engine fails? The chance of that is about twice as large as with a single engined aircraft.
As for VJ-101C, it had six engines and was intended to be not too badly damaged in case of failure of one. I have seen the thing, not flying, just in a factory in Bavaria and was horrified.
ladioussupp
Junior Member
back for AESA radar modification?
Engineer
Major
Apparently not.
Link redirects here Deino , is it a new picture?
- Status