What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

F-22 stealthy or not, I don't know.
The RCS @ specified band of F-22 is classified, we don't know. They covered it as top secret and bubbles cannot "bang".

They say its comparable to the RCS of a DIME. GO figure. Its like a fly, if you can see it with a radar, GREAT!
Ask the Iranians about the RCS of this thing, they tried to attack a UAV in the international waters and it was being escorted by a -22. The -22 went underneath these two jets' belly, flew like that to see their payload (and I am sure some pictures too), pulled back on these two jets side and told them "you ought to go home". Yea, so ask the Iranians on here. I am sure someone might give you feedback. Its VERY visible to human eye within a mile :)
 
.
They say its comparable to the RCS of a DIME. GO figure. Its like a fly, if you can see it with a radar, GREAT!
Ask the Iranians about the RCS of this thing, they tried to attack a UAV in the international waters and it was being escorted by a -22. The -22 went underneath these two jets' belly, flew like that to see their payload (and I am sure some pictures too), pulled back on these two jets side and told them "you ought to go home". Yea, so ask the Iranians on here. I am sure someone might give you feedback. Its VERY visible to human eye within a mile :)


I'll believe it when I see it. This is LM's statement. I'll take it with a truckload of salt.
 
.
I'll believe it when I see it. This is LM's statement. I'll take it with a truckload of salt.
Then why should we place any value on the crap that you have been spewing here ? :lol:

The nonsense of a mentally 12 yr old sucking up to the Chinese vs an aviation company that have been the world's leader in aviation for as long as the Chinese trying to make airplanes ?
 
.
Then why should we place any value on the crap that you have been spewing here ? :lol:

The nonsense of a mentally 12 yr old sucking up to the Chinese vs an aviation company that have been the world's leader in aviation for as long as the Chinese trying to make airplanes ?


LM is the leader of aviation? That title is disputed.
 
.
I'll believe it when I see it. This is LM's statement. I'll take it with a truckload of salt.

Sure. May be when you find one underneath the J-20 that it couldn't detect, you'll have something better to say :). Do ask the Iranians. They might have something to contribute.
Also, you stoke our -35's designs.....the primary purpose was to learn the Stealth tech. So not sure why you'd steal something when you don't want to accept its manufacturer's statements
 
.
@gambit .... m.phys.org/news/2012-12-quantum-stealth-material-invisible.html#&ui-state=dialog

is it possible to use quantum stealth for fighter jet..
What you brought on is in the visible spectrum.

Let me put it this way: If I cannot see the well camo-ed sniper, does that mean my radar cannot see him as well ?
 
.
Here's a direct quote from Aviation Week regarding the F-22's inlets:

The “diverterless” supersonic inlet avoids a signature problem caused by a conventional boundary layer diverter plate. For example, the F-22 has a conventional inlet, which is likely to require extensive radar absorbent material (RAM) treatment.

China’s Stealth Aircraft Program Will Face Advanced Defenses | AWIN content from Aviation Week


Kit0Igw.jpg
 
.
.
Gambit, so what happened to your first rule regarding controlling the quantity of radiators? The F-22 has a pair of boundary layer diverter plates (splitter plates). The diverter plates have leading edges. The leading edges are radiators. Next to the diverter plates are rather large forward-facing gaps. The gaps themselves are radiators.

The J-20 avoids all of this by having two DSI bumps, a minor radiator at best.
 
.
Gambit, so what happened to your first rule regarding controlling the quantity of radiators? The F-22 has a pair of boundary layer diverter plates (splitter plates). The diverter plates have leading edges. The leading edges are radiators. Next to the diverter plates are rather large forward-facing gaps. The gaps themselves are radiators.

The J-20 avoids all of this by having two DSI bumps, a minor radiator at best.
You really are dense, are you ? Did you not read post 4063 ?

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft | Updates & Discussions. | Page 271

Am willing to bet that if you examine the J-20, should you ever have a chance, you will find many many many corner reflectors, of which are more serious than leading edges in terms of contributions to final RCS. But again, you already proved yourself incapable of understanding that an aircraft is a complex body to start.

A corner reflector falls under rule 2: Control of ARRAY of radiators.

If you find this structure on the J-20 -- and you WILL -- are you willing to leave the F-22's inlets alone ? :lol:

Do not bother to answer that. We already know the answer.
 
Last edited:
.
Now lets come back to the J-20, I am sure that the J-20 went through a similar procedure. The designers of the J-20 might have(as we calculate a guess) seen similar red areas for the aircraft with the cockpit, the intakes and the Canards over a full 360 degree sweep. They would then start looking for design ideas(compromises) that reduced those red areas; they could coat the cockpit with RAM, they would change intake shape and coatings, the would design algorithms built into the FLCS that manages the Canards to change position to minimize its energy return and avoid red spikes in favour of yellow or light yellow ones. The same sort of compromises go into aircraft such as the F-22, F-35, PAK-FA .. and are a reference to all those trying to come up with ideas to reduce RCS of conventional aircraft such as the F-15(F-15SE) or the JF-17.
Another problem is that people believes that 'stealth' is a definitive line when in reality, radar engineers do not care for that word. In their view, there is only one thing: distance of detection.

We can 'massage' existing aircrafts, re F-15SE, and we will gain some benefits, as in reducing the detection distance, but as far as radar engineers are concerned, a true radar low observable aircraft must be designed from paper.

There is a legitimate tactical reason on why all major aircraft manufacturers are pushing on the 'massaging' method. No, it is less about money and exploiting the 'stealth' aspect, although money is a part of it. Am going to have to tread carefully here.

There are enough sophisticated radar systems that contains signature libraries, that while are not exact representation of all the major combat vehicles, they are well within statistical range of what is an F-15 or F-16 or even a ship as the radar system analyzes the target. Each signature for each aircraft is compiled from intelligence gathering efforts that ranges from scientific analyses of third hand sources to direct EM observations from events such as airshows or visiting air forces. For exported fighters like the F-15 and F-16, the libraries for their signatures contains true physical dimensions.

So assuming a radar system that is sophisticated enough, also meaning costly enough, if an incoming threat have a flight profile and radar return that matches a signature inside the libraries, the defense can better formulate a response if they know that at so-and-so distance, a target or cluster of targets is likely to be a flight of so-and-so fighters, which inevitably leads to reasonably accurate estimates of what kind of weapons the defense can expect to face.

An F-15 or J-17 that is 'massaged' to have a reduced RCS, thereby reducing the detection distance, can (not will) shift the immediate tactical situation to the attacker's favor. Whatever algorithms the radar are using now reduces the statistical probability of whether the incoming threats are F-15 strike fighters or F-15s flying CAP for other strike fighters that are not yet detected. Back in Desert Storm, Allied fighters often spoofed Iraqi air defense radars by flying at altitudes and speeds that are assumed to be common to certain other aircrafts, and yes, the Iraqi air defense was smart enough to differentiate between different aircrafts. This is a combination of technical and human experience and a good air defense commander is worth his weight in gold, even though we usually pay them far less and his job description is not as glamorous. Human experience is difficult to quantify and preserved and that is why we had to go the route of creating these signature libraries.

Here is an example of what we do to create a signature of a complex body with known and fixed physical features...

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a461958.pdf
The high-resolution full-polarimetric Ka-Band turntable signatures of the MBTs were acquired over a two-week period in April of 1999. The signature data was acquired at five elevations spanning 5° to 60° for a T-72M1, T-72B, M1, M60-A3 and one classified vehicle.
To 'massage' an existing aircraft to reduce its RCS is not an easy endeavor, and an endeavor it is, not merely a task. It will cost money and while not as much as designing a radar low observable fighter from paper, it remains out of reach for most companies and countries out there, especially the ones that have to import their defense.
 
Last edited:
.
Am willing to bet that if you examine the J-20, should you ever have a chance, you will find many many many corner reflectors, of which are more serious than leading edges in terms of contributions to final RCS. But again, you already proved yourself incapable of understanding that an aircraft is a complex body to start.

A corner reflector falls under rule 2: Control of ARRAY of radiators.

If you find this structure on the J-20 -- and you WILL -- are you willing to leave the F-22's inlets alone ? :lol:

Do not bother to answer that. We already know the answer.

We've already had this discussion a long time ago. The J-20 has no 90 degree corner reflectors. If you're talking about non-90 degree corner reflectors, the F-22 and F-35 has those too.
 
.
Then why should we place any value on the crap that you have been spewing here ? :lol:

The nonsense of a mentally 12 yr old sucking up to the Chinese vs an aviation company that have been the world's leader in aviation for as long as the Chinese trying to make airplanes ?

Aviation is not charged by doctor in hospital, the older the better.

When new generation tech developed, old ones would be thrown into trash bin if they cannot catch up.
We've already had this discussion a long time ago. The J-20 has no 90 degree corner reflectors. If you're talking about non-90 degree corner reflectors, the F-22 and F-35 has those too.

It's really a waste to spend time on him. He decreased the quantity, array, modes of this post.

Most of his copy and paste stuffs are highschool-level readings and out-of-date (1970-1990S).

If any of the theory he copied is reasonable, F-117/F-22 would not have been failed.
 
Last edited:
. .
Please...The way you guys spin the J-20, you guys can make your own centrifuge trainer.
There goes the mindless Chinese 'bots praising each other's ignorance filled and illogical posts. :rolleyes:
Mr gambit your all posts are informative and logical, keep going, ignore these chinese fan boys, they do not have knowledge about Aerodynamic and i also agree with you that J-20 is based on MIG 1.44 but with lots improvement and innovation and it has frontal stealth only:rolleyes::-)
 
.
Back
Top Bottom