J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

AssassinsMace said:

It's interesting reading articles following the emergence of the J-31 stating that making a stealth fighter stealthy goes beyond just stealth shaping which includes RAM paint. I seem to recall critics of Chinese fanboys when the J-20 came out downplaying RAM paint saying if it was that effective as the fanboys were arguing, then you can significantly reduce the radar signature of any aircraft by RAM painting. I'm an admitted amateur but it's sort of odd to me that supposed professionals are now arguing what Chinese fanboys were criticzed for. I assume they're just not talking about RAM paint either. So what else? Isn't electronic means detectable? You might not know exactly where it's at but you have an idea to send interceptors at least.

Click to expand...

While it is true that stealth is far more complicated than mere external shaping, and that advanced materials like RAM and radar transparent materials and even the internal structure and arrangement of a fighter all matter and need to be carefully arranged and aligned to achieve the smallest possible RCS for a design, I seriously doubt the people making such claims have any actual evidence to base their criticisms and doubts on, because that would require them to actually know top secret information about the internal structural design of the new Chinese stealth fighters and test results from Chinese RAM and radar transparent materials.

I think it's just more denial and sour grapes tbh. The same haters have been proven wrong and burnt so many times when they made specific claims to bash China that even their thick skin isn't enough to completely insulate them from embarrassment and shame anymore. But they still cannot stomach the idea that China can actually get things right so they are now moving into areas where it is hard to get tangible facts, so they can continue bashing on China without having to worry about being made to look like muppets any more.

So, claiming the Chinese are behind in RAM or software, or the old favorite of training/experience becomes the preferred avenues of attack for these people as it would be almost impossible to categorically prove them wrong even if they just pulled their claims straight from their butts. Because the only way to categorically prove those claims false is to release the exact same top secret information about the internal structural design of the new Chinese stealth fighters and test results from Chinese RAM and radar transparent materials which those people making the claims could not possibly have access to. Even if someone in the know had access to such materials, they would never ever dream of disclosing them to win some pointless internet argument.

whatever field China catches up on, suddenly bashers will find reasons to make it seem less significant.

When Chinese stealth plane camed out, suddenly every well developed industrial nations could make their own stealth fighter. Japanese, korean fighters that were on paper suddenly becomes superior. When carrier enter service, suddenly all these nations around china finds ways to counter aircraft carriers, and it becomes insignificant, or they crap on training and other issues. etc etc.

I think, while China cannot (currently anyway) be on the top in every field, in terms of technology integration, she is ahead of her surrounding countries, simply because she has to feel every way stone by stone herself.

duncanidaho said:

The same reason, why the vertical stabilizers are not showing in the same direction?

Click to expand...

Thats correct duncan, normally we would expect to see both rudder/vators pointed in the same direction, but you will notice that the right vert-rudder/vator is in the neutral position and the left is showing a left rudder deflection to counteract adverse aileron yaw, caused by the right flaperon/elavons downward deflection. Remember by deflecting them downward, we have created lift, and that creates drag, which would tend to slew the nose to the right if not compensated by the rudder/vator deflection to the left, that is only necessary on the initial roll in, when you stabilize the aircraft in the turn and neutralize the elevons/flaperons, they will all four resume an upward deflection to maintain the positive AOA, if you continued to pull the stick aft, at some point they will be joined by the two ruddervators which also participate in pitch control, depending on speed and need, this is a mind numbingly complex fly-by wire, but, it appears to function very well and without any apparent jinking around and the real reason I refer to the J-20 as such a "smart" airplane.

Once you begin to dissect, this it all makes perfect sense, but there is a lot going on, on of the reasons I would love to see this chick in the wind tunnel with some blue smoke.

Quickie said:

The canted vertical stabilizers function both as elevators and rudders. When they move in different direction, they function like elevators. When they move in the same direction, they function as rudders.

Click to expand...

Right Quickie, I didn't see your post, if I had I would have left well enough alone. good job!

mack8 said:

Come on peoples, it's clear as day: the "patern" you see are strain gauges. Light play tricks in certain conditions, i'm sure pics from above of 2001 from different angle/ light conditions will show it's not "beaten up". It's less than 2 years old and has in the region of at least 100 sorties (i suspect), how can it be "beaten up"?

Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer. However, the same question, I'm still wondering why "strain gauges" on both wings are asymmetric? Is it possible to install the gauges under wing surfaces?

AssassinsMace said:

It's interesting reading articles following the emergence of the J-31 stating that making a stealth fighter stealthy goes beyond just stealth shaping which includes RAM paint. I seem to recall critics of Chinese fanboys when the J-20 came out downplaying RAM paint saying if it was that effective as the fanboys were arguing, then you can significantly reduce the radar signature of any aircraft by RAM painting. I'm an admitted amateur but it's sort of odd to me that supposed professionals are now arguing what Chinese fanboys were criticzed for. I assume they're just not talking about RAM paint either. So what else? Isn't electronic means detectable? You might not know exactly where it's at but you have an idea to send interceptors at least.

Click to expand...

I guess that the comments of fanboys maybe the output of the "Three War Strategies", i.e., propaganda war, psychological war, and legal war (in Chinese, 三戰：輿論戰、心理戰、法律戰)

The goal of propaganda and psychological wars is to build up credit of China military industries, scientific research and engineering. It wants Chinese people to believe PLA can counter stealth fighter when no J-20 and J-31. After China stealth prototypes flied, the wind changes its direction 180 degree. Aircraft carrier is another example.

Three War Strategies don't care about real military capability but shaping images in minds, no matter Chinese or foreigners. In fact, they were not invented by Chinese. These theories and implementations/manipulations are came from West.

it will be interesting if perhaps eventually China will be the first to deploy naval stealth fighters, not the US...I simply do see this possibility since both J-20 and J-31 are just that close already

When people say that stealth shaping isn't everything, they also mean that stealth lies in the fine details. One story goes about how an F117 developed a huge RCS out of nowhere, and when the technicians had figured out what was wrong, it was because one of the rivets was jutting out of the airframe. This kind of fine precision is something that the Chinese have historically had problems with.

The great thing about history is that if you go back far enough, you can use it as an excuse for any bias or prejudice you might want to express.

History is just that, history, the past. Unless you can actually give recent examples to suggest that the Chinese still have any problems with fine precision, all you have exposed is you own bias and prejudice.

Inst said:

When people say that stealth shaping isn't everything, they also mean that stealth lies in the fine details. One story goes about how an F117 developed a huge RCS out of nowhere, and when the technicians had figured out what was wrong, it was because one of the rivets was jutting out of the airframe. This kind of fine precision is something that the Chinese have historically had problems with.

Click to expand...

Hehe... Historically, you people once couldn't make even screws, and look where you are today? How is this historical fact relevant to your great country today anyway?

And of whatever nation you may be, what I say will apply. And I'm fairly sure it must be true about the people once living in the caves in where China is today.

Besides, the Chinese, historically, were in meny centuries far more advaced than many other nations. So if we were to look into history, I shouldn't look only at the part that suits our present argument, right?