Subedei
Banned Idiot
Hmmmmm, USS Liberty???
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
- Status
Hmmmmm, USS Liberty???
I specifically stated enemy aircraft, if you will note, there have been friendly fire incidents even in Iraq and Afghanistan, so I stand by my statement, this was an accident, there have been many more since we began operating unmanned drone aircraft to make airstrikes and there will likely be more? A tragedy of the Nth magnitude, but an accident none the less. The Israeli's go to bed everynight with their finger on the trigger, are they jumpy? not as jumpy as I would be.
Good point nevertheless, and point taken. AFB
Why is it insufficient? What you called 'stealth-shaping' is more correctly termed as 'radar cross section' (RCS) control methods and it is based upon a foundation of radar detection knowledge.
I implied no such thing. Am sure Chengdu did.
There is only one position for a canard -- front of aircraft. Or do you mean DISPLACEMENTS? Yes, am sure Chengdu measured them at different displacements and how much their diffracted signals interact with the fuselage and wings.
I implied no such thing. If the B-2 can have such a mode, so can the J-20.
First...If you have to 'solve' something, then you had a problem. Not a 'supposed' problem, but a real problem.
Second...Some problems cannot be solved at all. They can only be avoided or eliminated. Take the corner reflector, for example...
For the corner reflector, the rules in RCS control are:
1- To avoid it completely,
But if cannot...
2- Then avoid the 90 deg type.
In the above example and rule 1, the B-52 is the worst offender, much less of an offender is the Bone (B-1), and the B-2 is not an offender at all because it does not have a vertical stab.
The F-22 is rule 2. So is the F-35 and the J-20. Their vertical-horizontal stabs forms the complex corner reflector structure that is other than 90 deg. Contrary to popular belief, non-90 deg corner reflector can and will return some signals back to source direction due to the simple fact that any signal, be it from an antenna or reflected, is conical in shape, and each reflected signal does have side lobes, no different than if a signal is transmitted.
Those are the radiation patterns of non-90 deg corner reflectors. The 90 deg version just happened to produced the strongest signal. In radar system testing, non-90 deg corner reflectors are often used to test sensitivity.
My point is that Chinese engineers faces the same obstacles as US engineers, except the US have a considerable lead time in dealing with unavoidable problems, as in how to minimize their contributions to final RCS.
And that is why I have never posited a hard figure, unlike many have. I do not have a hangar size EM anechoic chamber. Do you ?
However, one does not need such a testing facility to know that a corner reflector is an immediate 'killer' to a design, or that containment of the quantity of radiation generators is important to a radar low observable design. Let me put it this way: Which is the greater RCS contributor, a flat plate in front or in rear, if the threat radar is from the front? I am not saying that the J-20's canards are that 'killer'...
But that is how an aircraft would look if we put its diverse structural contributors into a graph. Depending on the seeking radar's position, a structure may be a statistically insignificant contributor in one position, but a major contributor the next. In the above illustration, the shaded areas on the fuselage and rear horizontal stabs contains signals from their surfaces as well as reflected signals that have origins from their neighbors. Those high spikes are from plates and corner reflectors that faces the seeking radar. That is why I said in previous post: location, location, and location. The J-20's canards may or not may not show as distinct spikes but their signals that become reflected signals off the fuselage and the wings contributed to the fuselage's and wings' contributorships.
Subedei
Banned Idiot
a quote from a very famous fictional work states, "in war, the enemy is whoever will get you killed".
I have to say,that will NOT happen.
Choice had been made about 5-6 years ago，and once again CAC got the contract just like project J-20.Yes i'm talking about China's 3rd stealth war bird which is developing by CAC and targeting for navy use only. A few years later this unknown J-xx will go public and eventually be the main attack force for carrier.
Maybe PLAN will put j-31 on CV16 to do some experiments,but still i don't think that will add a bit more chance for j-31 to be a carrier-based fighter.
Last edited:
To avoid being sensational, we probably should say something like: "Rumor has it that... We'll just have to wait and see."
Hehe, Subedei, that's just argument for the sake of arguing now. For this kind of loss doesn't have much of anything to do with having a air-superiority fighter or not, which is what Brat was talking about, regarding the J-31 to possibly play such a role in the future.
Last edited:
Re: CCTV 4 discussed J-31
Very interesting CCTV 4 program "Focus Today," aired yesterday. The host and two guests from PLA had discussed several subjects, a lot of them about J-31 and its prospect as a carrier aircraft. One of the guest, Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo has talked about J-31 extensively, among other things.
Here is the video:
Here are the key points:
They also talked about Liaoning's recent returning from exercise and the skid marks on her deck. Mr. Yin agreed that PLAN may be practicing at least touch-and-go's on the recent outing. He also said that the arresting system on Liaoning, including both the materials and the mechanical system, are made indigenously. And the arresting system had been tested on land before they would put it on Liaoning.
Additonally, Mr. Yin commented, in separate topic, that PLAN has much more powerful missiles than the Russian/Indian Brahmos. Not sure whether he refers to the rumored YJ-12 or the DF-21D ASBM.
Although Rear Admiral Yin Zhou is a regular guest on CCTV, in this show he was very uncharacteristic to talk and comment in such detail. He is usually very tight-lipped and does not deviate too much from the official line. His comments and opinions carry much more weights than other guests in such programs due to his status. He is a senior research fellow in the Center for Navy Armament, a navy agency responsible for PLAN's armament evaluation and long-term planning.
Update: The link above appears invalid now. A.Man provides the valid link below:
Very interesting CCTV 4 program "Focus Today," aired yesterday. The host and two guests from PLA had discussed several subjects, a lot of them about J-31 and its prospect as a carrier aircraft. One of the guest, Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo has talked about J-31 extensively, among other things.
Here is the video:
Here are the key points:
- J-31 is a very good aircraft, particularly suitable for carrier.
- It has a front diameter of about 0.8 m and therefore can fit a relatively large AESA with detection range no less than F-35
- It weighs about (MTOW?) 27-28 tons
- It is no less stealthy than F-35 or J-20, given that the latter has canards.
- It is multi-role
- It appears to be designed with CATOBAR in mind
They also talked about Liaoning's recent returning from exercise and the skid marks on her deck. Mr. Yin agreed that PLAN may be practicing at least touch-and-go's on the recent outing. He also said that the arresting system on Liaoning, including both the materials and the mechanical system, are made indigenously. And the arresting system had been tested on land before they would put it on Liaoning.
Additonally, Mr. Yin commented, in separate topic, that PLAN has much more powerful missiles than the Russian/Indian Brahmos. Not sure whether he refers to the rumored YJ-12 or the DF-21D ASBM.
Although Rear Admiral Yin Zhou is a regular guest on CCTV, in this show he was very uncharacteristic to talk and comment in such detail. He is usually very tight-lipped and does not deviate too much from the official line. His comments and opinions carry much more weights than other guests in such programs due to his status. He is a senior research fellow in the Center for Navy Armament, a navy agency responsible for PLAN's armament evaluation and long-term planning.
Update: The link above appears invalid now. A.Man provides the valid link below:
Last edited:
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
- Status