Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[Viet]

Gambit and friends: Pls ignore this kid antonius123. He is just stupid and ignorant but does not know that.

 

[amalakas]

You are demonstrating your bad motive pal.

You just want to attack me blindly, and defend your beloved friend blindly

You should be more interested to know from one who claim know better than me.
To be fair, at least you should ask both of us not only me alone.

When person A posts something I am interested in, I ask person A,
if person B posts, I ask person B.

You posted it, you explain it. Why should I ask someone else?

 

[antonius123]

When person A posts something I am interested in, I ask person A,
if person B posts, I ask person B.

You posted it, you explain it. Why should I ask someone else?

That means you are very subjective.

There is someone else who claim know more than me and countering me regarding the issue you are asking, but you dont want to ask him.

It doesnt mean i dont want to answer you. I will, but since it is kind of test from my debating counterpart, then I need to test him too.

I am waiting whether he (the one who claim know more and me is wrong) dare to take my challenge. If he dare, then i will give my answer. So you better persuade your friend to accept my challenge.

 

[antonius123]

What a crybaby...!!!

The kid is a member in a military oriented forum, with no military experience. He engages in a highly technical discussion, of which he lied about his experience, then when challenged he boo-hoo-hoo about being questioned.

Talking about technical discussion, you forget that you have lost your face when you FAILED to defend your imaginary claims here:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eration-aircraft-updates-discussions-185.html

Gambit and friends: Pls ignore this kid antonius123. He is just stupid and ignorant but does not know that.

Unfortunately your master is not that kind of person

If he were like that, then he had been back off from the beginning.

In fact - he consistently demonstrates stubborness, ignorance in defending his claims and self proclaimed expert by any means; that make many of his contenders become frustrated.

But finally it comes to an end that he cant defend his imaginary claims anymore, as you can see here:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eration-aircraft-updates-discussions-185.html

He cant defend his assumption/claim about inlet cone, semi transparency that cause absorption, more RCS contributor than fanblade, DSI is at best half of cone, etc

 

[Hyperion]

Wow... going through this thread, the word "troll" gets promoted to whole different level...."trolls with a vengeance"

 

[amalakas]

Wow... going through this thread, the word "troll" gets promoted to whole different level...."trolls with a vengeance"

may I ask what you mean?

 

[gambit]

Talking about technical discussion, you forget that you have lost your face when you FAILED to defend your imaginary claims here:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...eration-aircraft-updates-discussions-185.html

So say the kid who cannot distinguish the difference between a 'structure' and a 'material'.

Q: What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?
A: Power.

This is DIRECTLY related to aviation at the top most level, not three or even two degrees away like what you tried to do earlier. This is basic aerodynamics in the first year. You said you answered it. Show us where.

Q: In designing a spoiler system, what is the most dangerous condition/effect a spoiler system could have?
A: Flutter. Spoiler flutter could come from the spoiler itself or from its deployment mechanisms such as actuator and support or from both spoiler and its deployment mechanisms. For the spoiler itself, the issue is with its torsional and bending stiffness. For the spoiler deployment mechanisms, the issue is with their overall design such as hydraulic pressure and material.

This make a dozen basic aerodynamics and eight flight controls questions that you could not answer despite claiming an aviation 'background' and 'study'.

Next...

Q: What are the forces that have direct physical effects on a body that enable their exploitations and resulting in flight, in other words, what are these forces that help create what is called 'kinematics'?

kin·e·mat·ics (Noun):
1- The branch of mechanics concerned with the motion of objects without reference to the forces that cause the motion.
2- The features or properties of motion in an object, regarded in such a way.

 

[PLA supremacy]

So say the kid who cannot distinguish the difference between a 'structure' and a 'material'.

Q: What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?
A: Power.

This is DIRECTLY related to aviation at the top most level, not three or even two degrees away like what you tried to do earlier. This is basic aerodynamics in the first year. You said you answered it. Show us where.

Q: In designing a spoiler system, what is the most dangerous condition/effect a spoiler system could have?
A: Flutter. Spoiler flutter could come from the spoiler itself or from its deployment mechanisms such as actuator and support or from both spoiler and its deployment mechanisms. For the spoiler itself, the issue is with its torsional and bending stiffness. For the spoiler deployment mechanisms, the issue is with their overall design such as hydraulic pressure and material.

This make a dozen basic aerodynamics and eight flight controls questions that you could not answer despite claiming an aviation 'background' and 'study'.

Next...

Q: What are the forces that have direct physical effects on a body that enable their exploitations and resulting in flight, in other words, what are these forces that help create what is called 'kinematics'?

kin·e·mat·ics (Noun):
1- The branch of mechanics concerned with the motion of objects without reference to the forces that cause the motion.
2- The features or properties of motion in an object, regarded in such a way.

you have no life besides PDF do you?

go get a job you bum!

 

[conworldus]

you have no life besides PDF do you?

go get a job you bum!

Some people get paid for posting things.

 

[gambit]

Some people get paid for posting things.

Guess that is why we see so much 'Chinese physics' for the J-20 and extravagant claims for the PLA.

 

[antonius123]

Guess that is why we see so much 'Chinese physics' for the J-20 and extravagant claims for the PLA.

They are referring to you

Judging your post like the above

And remember you have just been busted heavily

 

[gambit]

They are referring to you

Judging your post like the above

And remember you have just been busted heavily

Can you explain why you did not know this basic first year aerodynamics question?

Q: What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?
A: Power.

This post => http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...raft-updates-discussions-186.html#post3368186 <= describe you perfectly -- Ignorant and a liar.

Last chance...

Q: What are the forces that have direct physical effects on a body that enable their exploitations and resulting in flight, in other words, what are these forces that help create what is called 'kinematics'?

kin·e·mat·ics (Noun):
1- The branch of mechanics concerned with the motion of objects without reference to the forces that cause the motion.
2- The features or properties of motion in an object, regarded in such a way.

 

[ptldM3]

That means you are very subjective.

There is someone else who claim know more than me and countering me regarding the issue you are asking, but you dont want to ask him.

I do know more than you, I taught you a few lessons while you have not shown me anything I didn‘t already know. Lets get back to the real purpose of our debate, it is not whether I know more than you but whether you can show that you knew what you quoted especially after all the bragging you did about having knowledge of your quotes.

You stated that only a qualified person can explain their quote, so why after several months and dozens of requests have you not been able to answer? Furthermore, you made claims that we do not understand or explain our sources--yet why have you not explained your source?

You say one thing and do something very different. Why would I explain your source for you? I would just be doing half of the work for you. I don’t want you to explain half the source, or 1/3, but the source in its entirety. Remember all those things you said? Only a qualified person can explain their source and we don’t understand our sources. If the above is true than prove it.

 

[antonius123]

I do know more than you, I taught you a few lessons while you have not shown me anything I didn&#8216;t already know. Lets get back to the real purpose of our debate, it is not whether I know more than you but whether you can show that you knew what you quoted especially after all the bragging you did about having knowledge of your quotes.

No you dont know anything; your answer to my questions is mistaken and misconceptions.

I know what I quote. But do you know what you are debating?

If you want to test me it is ok, but you have to be willing to be tested likewise.

So it depends on you, if you dare to take the challenge then I will give you answer immediately. Otherwise, you only play hide and seeks.

You stated that only a qualified person can explain their quote, so why after several months and dozens of requests have you not been able to answer? Furthermore, you made claims that we do not understand or explain our sources--yet why have you not explained your source?

I can explain my quote, and ready to do that for you.

But I demand you to explain me your own version after I explain to you.

Why do you mind, and afraid of the challenge? You just claim again above that you have more knowledge than me, so you should not be afraid. You test me and I test you.

You say one thing and do something very different. Why would I explain your source for you? I would just be doing half of the work for you. I don&#8217;t want you to explain half the source, or 1/3, but the source in its entirety. Remember all those things you said? Only a qualified person can explain their source and we don&#8217;t understand our sources. If the above is true than prove it.

I am using the same source that you were referring.

Why should I elaborate my quoted source to you, while you -with the same source - are debating me and claiming know more than me?

Instead I am wondering if you know your own resource? because you keep debating and refusing while claiming you know more than me.

Why you are evading while demanding me to answer?

Again I challenge you: I will explain what I understand about the citation I quote, and you should do the same too because you are confronting me using the same citation, even you claim you know more than me.

So will you take it or not?? if not then you are a coward. Bcs I am ready to give you my answer.

 

[Martian2]

Antonius, these clowns have been annoying me for years. I suggest you just ignore them.

I ask them for reputable citations and they don't have any. They make ridiculous claims with no relation to reality.

You can keep arguing with them if you want to, but there is no end.

Instead of wasting my time with these numbskulls, I made a YouTube video on the J-20 Mighty Dragon with over 92,763 views. I got my message out and these anti-China clowns can only vent their frustration in here. I won and they lost. Too bad for these dummies.

Anyway, that's just my two cents.