New J-10 thread II

[bladerunner]

Maybe you should take a look at Typhoon...

Did that but unable to get a picture of the typhoon with the same clarity as those of the J10, but having said that a think the typhoon is a little a little cleaner around the air intakes, so I would favour the typhoon and the typhoon on name apart from its aesthetics, looks more menacing.and u could think , man what would I give to go for a ride in one of those.

iI know this has nothing to do with how sexy the plane looks,but the demo of the typhoon at a German airshow was miles miles better than the demo of the J10.The German demo had no music bacground, or talkover, so one could appreciate the sound of the jet engines, and the plane was really put through its paces, while the J10 demo is more constrained.

 

[crobato]

What J-10 demo?

 

[bladerunner]

What J-10 demo?

The supposed official one on U Tube.

Anyway the Eurofighter and J10 look very similar in Concept especially if The J10 comes out in Twin engine format.
and I wouldnt really rate the Euro as a beautiful looking aircraft either.not in the same way one would compare the old British Spitfire to Germanys Me109. Or the Comet to the 707.
I just suppose some aircraft when painted up with all their livery etc etc just have that little mor Xfactor about them in looks anyway. Makes you wet your pants just looking at them and fantasising being behind the cockpit

 

[kw64]

The supposed official one on U Tube.

Anyway the Eurofighter and J10 look very similar in Concept especially if The J10 comes out in Twin engine format.
and I wouldnt really rate the Euro as a beautiful looking aircraft either.not in the same way one would compare the old British Spitfire to Germanys Me109. Or the Comet to the 707.
I just suppose some aircraft when painted up with all their livery etc etc just have that little mor Xfactor about them in looks anyway. Makes you wet your pants just looking at them and fantasising being behind the cockpit

Come on, do we really need to use "the look" to compare those two planes? Typhoon and J10 are totally different class of fighters, comparing them is like comparing F-15 and F-4, not the same league to begin with.

 

[bladerunner]

Come on, do we really need to use "the look" to compare those two planes? Typhoon and J10 are totally different class of fighters, comparing them is like comparing F-15 and F-4, not the same league to begin with.

I Think u missed the point, I was replying to another posterwho brought the Eurofighter up..it was only a subjective remark on my part when I said I dont think the J10 is a elegant looking aircraft, in the sense it LOOKS a bit strange around the front and underbelly by the air intakes, purpose and capability are excluded, I just came across another thread (military) where a poster suggested it was an ugly looking aircraft.At the end of the day its no big deal, its a military craft of war after all,but perhaps it suggests that China has still a long way
to go in incorporating functionality into design.

 

[crobato]

You compared a Youtube video to a live demo? Your credibility goes down hill from here.

Personally I think the Typhoon has ugly intakes, and I certainly won't rate it a beautiful aircraft. I would consider the Rafale the best looking of the canards, followed by the Gripen, then the J-10 in between, and the Typhoon the last.

 

[Londo Molari]

I think the J-10 looks beautiful... like a delta wing viper

 

[tphuang]

You compared a Youtube video to a live demo? Your credibility goes down hill from here.

Personally I think the Typhoon has ugly intakes, and I certainly won't rate it a beautiful aircraft. I would consider the Rafale the best looking of the canards, followed by the Gripen, then the J-10 in between, and the Typhoon the last.

Yeah, Rafale is one sexy bird to look at from the front. Of course, F-22 still looks better, but Rafale looks extremely stealthy from that frontal view.

 

[SteelBird]

Yeah, Rafale is one sexy bird to look at from the front. Of course, F-22 still looks better, but Rafale looks extremely stealthy from that frontal view.

Rafale is one of my favorite aircraft, like you said, it looks sexy. But we are talking about canard wings, I would suggest you not to bring F-22 in, to prevent further off-topic discussion.

I personally don't like J-10's low wings and high/slim body. It looks like the 70's/80's era aircraft to me. The wings look small compared to its body. However, this is just eyed impression.

 

[crobato]

Low wings are good, because they give you a potentially higher rate of roll than if you're to put wings in the middle or shoulder. And keeping the plane slim is good too, less cross section for less drag and less "fat" for less weight.

I don't like the long curved of the back, because for some reason, the eye and the brain don't perceive long unbroken structures as beautiful. You need that interrupted somehow. Some people think the J-10S looks better, for the same reason the Su-27 two seater looks better than the single seater, the long uninterrupted back-hump line is shorter.

If you like to understand the psychology of beauty, lets take another example, the J-8II. The J-8II looks ugly on the ground and on the top, when you see that long long fuselage line. But when flying and seen underneath it looks rakishly good. This design psychology can apply to ships, cars, houses, or just about everything, including cartoon characters.

Continuous line = boring
Interruption = excitement