Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[gambit]

That is only your baseless accusation; there is no evidence except your suspicion.

No it is not. The evidence is right here...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eady-doing-whole-lot-more-42.html#post2751770

YOU did not know that 'dB' is a measurement method for large ratios.

By fact there are countless of your misconception and clueless that have been proved in these 2 threads

There is no 'fact' about it. You are new here so you are excused from knowing that I encourage people to double check my arguments. To date, no one, not even the Chinese boys, have provided proof that my sources are wrong and that my arguments are flawed. What you call 'misconceptions' on my part are YOURS, who did not even know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement.

So tell us, since you claimed to have aviation experience, what was it?

LOL at the USAF enlisted maintenance worker comparing J-20 to non-existent Mig 1.44 and single vertical stabilizer Rafale. Ironically ignoring the 4th generation aircraft J-20 really evolved from -- the J-10 from the same Chengdu Aircraft Company!

This Western-worshipping Vietnamese has finally become indian. Congratulations gambit, jai hind!



That enlisted maintenance worker who talks like he's a chief aircraft designer is a joke. He just copies and pastes irrelevant excerpts from engineering texts. I guess that's what you spew when you are a Sinophobic Vietnamese-American jealous of the J-20.

And so the conscript reject try to cover for his equally ignorant and no experience friends.

 

[antonius123]

No it is not. The evidence is right here...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eady-doing-whole-lot-more-42.html#post2751770

YOU did not know that 'dB' is a measurement method for large ratios.

Which sentence of mine that saying dB is not a measurement method for large ratios there? none! only your suspicion or twisting my mouth.

I did not say about that; I was questioning your point regarding the vague picture you drag to proof you claim that 120 degree corner = corner reflector too, and until now you fail to prove that claim

There is no 'fact' about it. You are new here so you are excused from knowing that I encourage people to double check my arguments. To date, no one, not even the Chinese boys, have provided proof that my sources are wrong and that my arguments are flawed. What you call 'misconceptions' on my part are YOURS, who did not even know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement.

So tell us, since you claimed to have aviation experience, what was it?


And so the conscript reject try to cover for his equally ignorant and no experience friends.

You are twisting my argument again; I never said that your source was wrong! I said your understanding and concept are wrong! and that you just drag article and vague picture arbitrarily without understanding the content and subject.

 

[gambit]

Which sentence of mine that saying dB is not a measurement method for large ratios there? none! only your suspicion or twisting my mouth.

If you did not know it, then of course you did not say it. But the truth is that the debate is about EM, not sound, so for you to respond the way you did mean you were ignorant about it.

I did not say about that; I was questioning your point regarding the vague picture you drag to proof you claim that 120 degree corner = corner reflector too, and until now you fail to prove that claim

Of course I proved that a 120 deg corner is corner reflector. It is only YOUR limited understanding that a 'corner reflector' MUST be 90 deg.

So here it is again...

Those are radiation pattern measurements of 60, 90, and 120 deg. corner reflectors. People who are far smarter than you would not have provided such information unless the 60 and 120 are not corner reflectors, which they are. You do know what radiation pattern measurement does, right?

You are twisting my argument again; I never said that your source was wrong! I said your understanding and concept are wrong! and that you just drag article and vague picture arbitrarily without understanding the content and subject.

So what kind of aviation experience do YOU have? People here know mine and others. Why not enlighten us with your experience? We welcome people of diverse aviation experience. Or is it that you are scared sh!tless of being busted being a fraud?

 

[antonius123]

If you did not know it, then of course you did not say it. But the truth is that the debate is about EM, not sound, so for you to respond the way you did mean you were ignorant about it.

it is only your assumption.
Say nothing doesn't always mean doesnt know.

Of course I proved that a 120 deg corner is corner reflector. It is only YOUR limited understanding that a 'corner reflector' MUST be 90 deg.

So here it is again...

Those are radiation pattern measurements of 60, 90, and 120 deg. corner reflectors. People who are far smarter than you would not have provided such information unless the 60 and 120 are not corner reflectors, which they are. You do know what radiation pattern measurement does, right?

I have told you that the corner reflector mentioned in that vague picture may not refer to the corner reflector that returning the wave back to its origin. Bring us solid evidence that you terribly lack so far!

No evidence you have brought except vague picture + your own bias explanation

So what kind of aviation experience do YOU have? People here know mine and others. Why not enlighten us with your experience? We welcome people of diverse aviation experience. Or is it that you are scared sh!tless of being busted being a fraud?

only clueless indians with substandard physics understanding who fall for your claim that you are an expert.

Aviation was one of my study. Maintenance experience (if true that you have experience in it) only guarantee you the practical knowledge in the field, but wont make you to have the right concept and understanding if you do not learn correctly.

 

[gambit]

it is only your assumption.
Say nothing doesn't always mean doesnt know.

You are busted. Again. There was no 'assumption' on my part. The debate is about EM and you brought up sound. You did not know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement.

I have told you that the corner reflector mentioned in that vague picture may not refer to the corner reflector that returning the wave back to its origin. Bring us solid evidence!

No evidence you have brought except vague picture + your own bias explanation

What a weak response. News for you, 'Chinese physics' believer...

The above is a 'pentagonal corner reflector' and the sides are NOT 90 deg to each other. There are hexagonal corner reflectors as well. All corner reflectors direct back to source direction but there are times when we do not want the strongest, which is the 90 deg. So we use more 'diffused' designs. In weapons testing, different designs help calibrate the weapon's seeker radar.

You are busted for being stubbornly ignorant. Again.

Aviation was one of my study. Maintenance experience (if true that you have experience in it) only guarantee you the practical knowledge in the field, but doesn't guarantee you to understand the right concept and understanding.

Study? Is that it? So how far was this 'study'? Past the introduction in the text book and you found that it was too difficult for you?

I am not an aerospace engineer, but for sure my aviation background is much much better than clueless ignorant child like you

First it was 'background' and now it is 'study'. Make up your mind. You are a fake.

 

[antonius123]

You are busted. Again. There was no 'assumption' on my part. The debate is about EM and you brought up sound. You did not know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement.

If you think say nothing = must always doesnt know then you are narrow minded.

You just accuse without evidence; means you are playing with your own assumption.

What a weak response. News for you, 'Chinese physics' believer...

The above is a 'pentagonal corner reflector' and the sides are NOT 90 deg to each other. There are hexagonal corner reflectors as well. All corner reflectors direct back to source direction but there are times when we do not want the strongest, which is the 90 deg. So we use more 'diffused' designs. In weapons testing, different designs help calibrate the weapon's seeker radar.

You are busted for being stubbornly ignorant. Again.

This is again demonstrating your idiocy and clueless about corner reflector.

The corner reflector that the picture indicates should refer to the 90 degree one (the one that face upward), not the 120 degree "side ones" that form hexagon shape

Btw your picture credibility is questionable, as the one in that picture is Hexagon not Pentagon

Study? Is that it? So how far was this 'study'? Past the introduction in the text book and you found that it was too difficult for you?

Quite sufficient to know either you are clueless or a liar

First it was 'background' and now it is 'study'. Make up your mind. You are a fake.

My background since it is my study as well :p

 

[gambit]

If you think say nothing = must always doesnt know then you are narrow minded.

No...You responded with 'sound' when the discussion is about EM. You did not know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement.

This is again demonstrating your idiocy and clueless about corner reflector.

The corner reflector that the picture indicates should refer to the 90 degree one (the one that face upward), not the 120 degree ones that form hexagon shape

Btw your picture credibility is questionable, as the one in that picture is Hexagon not Pentagon

More lameness. A corner reflector is shaped to concentrate and to be directional. There is nothing to say that a corner reflector MUST be 90 deg. You must be very stupid because it is not that difficult to use keyword searches to verify what I say.

Quite sufficient to know either you are clueless or you are a liar

My background since it is my study as well :p

So the truth is that you have NO aviation experience at all. You are a fraud.

 

[antonius123]

No...You responded with 'sound' when the discussion is about EM. You did not know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement.

Because you were only bringing vague picture; dont blame me if I assumed/suspected you were making another misconception by mixing the sound wave with EM wave.

More lameness. A corner reflector is shaped to concentrate and to be directional. There is nothing to say that a corner reflector MUST be 90 deg. You must be very stupid because it is not that difficult to use keyword searches to verify what I say.

I have showed you solid evidence + solid diagram according to physics rule. While you are bringing nothing except claim and vague picture.

Should I repost the diagram and solid evidence to remind you?

So the truth is that you have NO aviation experience at all. You are a fraud.

I never claim experience. It is you that claim your self experienced one but demonstrating clueless, making people suspect you were a big liar.

 

[gambit]

Because you were only bringing vague picture; dont blame me if I assumed/suspected you were making another misconception by mixing the sound wave with EM wave.

I have showed you solid evidence + solid diagram according to physics rule. While you are bringing nothing except claim and vague picture.

Should I repost the diagram and solid evidence to remind you?

Yeah...Keep going with that 'vague picture' garbage.

I never claim experience. It is you that claim your self experienced one but demonstrating clueless, making people suspect you were a big liar.

Nope...You just made it bigger with 'background'. When people said 'background', they usually mean to include experience. No one asks for the name of the company you worked for. No one care because those things can be made up. But what cannot be made up is experience and that will reflect in how you present your arguments. The less experience you have, the less people will take you seriously. So first you lied about your 'background', then your arguments revealed that you did not know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement, now you have to back off and resort to 'study' when pressed about your 'background'.

You are a fraud. And the Chinese 'Thanked' you for your 'useful' posts.

 

[antonius123]

Yeah...Keep going with that 'vague picture' garbage.

Loose again ehm??

Nice try, but you failed again to prove that 120 degree corner is corner reflector, even you were demonstrating clueless about the corner reflector and hexagon

Nope...You just made it bigger with 'background'. When people said 'background', they usually mean to include experience. No one asks for the name of the company you worked for. No one care because those things can be made up.

Background can refer to educational background honey

But what cannot be made up is experience and that will reflect in how you present your arguments. The less experience you have, the less people will take you seriously. So first you lied about your 'background', then your arguments revealed that you did not know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement, now you have to back off and resort to 'study' when pressed about your 'background'.

You are a fraud. And the Chinese 'Thanked' you for your 'useful' posts.

If this is true, then you are a liar because of having demonstrating countless clueless about a lot of things here.

How come the maintenance guy doesn't know about nacelle? and airduct?? etc?

I do not need to care your wall of ignorance regarding my dB explanation.

 

[amalakas]

You are busted. Again. There was no 'assumption' on my part. The debate is about EM and you brought up sound. You did not know that 'dB' is used in EM measurement.


What a weak response. News for you, 'Chinese physics' believer...

The above is a 'pentagonal corner reflector' and the sides are NOT 90 deg to each other. There are hexagonal corner reflectors as well. All corner reflectors direct back to source direction but there are times when we do not want the strongest, which is the 90 deg. So we use more 'diffused' designs. In weapons testing, different designs help calibrate the weapon's seeker radar.

You are busted for being stubbornly ignorant. Again.


Study? Is that it? So how far was this 'study'? Past the introduction in the text book and you found that it was too difficult for you?



First it was 'background' and now it is 'study'. Make up your mind. You are a fake.

Man I had enough of this utter nonsense.

He hasn't brought forward a single argument of even a true (even laughable) position. He just refutes and opposes everyone elses.. this is a childish joke.

It is clear ..
he has no aviation experience.
he has no engineering experience
he has no basic physics knowledge
he has no military experience

he has not even the faintest idea of what he is talking about. He just plays with words like a little kid.

every time he demands evidence and it is provided, he just claims the evidence is garbage and WE don't understand what we are posting.

This is enough nonsense and if nothing else is hurting the J-20 supporters credibility too.

He refuses to acknowledge angles, shapes, schematics, basic principles and real hard photographic and text evidence with sources ..

what more do you want, the guy is %&$£%"ed .. !!!

 

[antonius123]

Man I had enough of this utter nonsense.

He hasn't brought forward a single argument of even a true (even laughable) position. He just refutes and opposes everyone elses.. this is a childish joke. tr

It is clear ..
he has no aviation experience.
he has no engineering experience
he has no basic physics knowledge
he has no military experience

he has not even the faintest idea of what he is talking about. He just plays with words like a little kid.

every time he demands evidence and it is provided, he just claims the evidence is garbage and WE don't understand what we are posting.

This is enough nonsense and if nothing else is hurting the J-20 supporters credibility too.

He refuses to acknowledge angles, shapes, schematics, basic principles and real hard photographic and text evidence with sources ..

what more do you want, the guy is %&$£%"ed .. !!!

The one who has no experience, no knowledge, and no brain here is you.

The one who lack experience and knowledge and sufficient iq here is gambit

 

[amalakas]

The one who has no experience, no knowledge, and no brain here is you.

The one who lack experience and knowledge and sufficient iq here is gambit

In what way kid? I am asking you again, prove your background and your knowledge..

 

[antonius123]

In what way kid? I am asking you again, prove your background and your knowledge..

In a lot of ways kid. Your argument is empty. compared to you with your clueless my background is much more solid by far.

 

[amalakas]

In a lot of ways kid. Your argument is empty. compared to you with your clueless my background is much more solid by far.

Really ?

Once again you are NOT answering anything. You are full of talk but no juice. Which argument of mine is empty ? which one?
point it out ! say this is the one that is empty ! this is where you are wrong for this and this reason etc.

Tell us, where your background comes from and what it is you're experienced in! We have identified our backgrounds.. time for yours..