Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[Asoka]

In such a short space of time as well, very impressive progress.

It was only in 1997, that J-10 took its first flight. That was seemingly an incredible achievement. J-10 was China's first domestic modern fighter. And now, we have the State of the Art 5th generation fighter, J-20. With this fighter, China, has caught up with the best of the world, might have even surpassed F-22 and T-50 in some measures.

1997 was a memorable year for me. I left home and start my IT career in Nortel, Ottawa in the autumn of 1997.

 

[Asoka]

From 3:08 on wards

TVC only effect post stall manoeuvrability.

I have heard above 400km/h, TVC nozzles are not effective.

 

[Ultima Thule]

I have heard above 400km/h, TVC nozzles are not effective.

this is not true i think, if this is true all TVC are useless, b/t what is source of your information

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Here you can see the comparison of the 90 degree vertical climbing between the J-20 (without afterburner starts at 1:02) and the F-22 (with afterburner starts at 1:27).

 

[Asoka]

this is not true i think, if this is true all TVC are useless, b/t what is source of your information

From F-22 pilots who participated in the Red Flag exercises. Let me find the source for you.
https://theaviationist.com/2013/02/21/raptor-vs-typhoon-us/

Basically, when you use the Thrust Vectoring, you quickly turn or point your nose to the enemy, but that quick turning also turn your plane's body against the wind and you lose energy quickly. Several moves of that, you go into post stall speed. If somebody is waiting for you to make that move, he is going to quickly kill you.

TVC is great if you happen in a low energy state already, you can dance around a ballet dancer using your TVC. At that low speed, planes using only the control surfaces can't do that, the wing don't have enough energy to work the control surface's effectiveness. That's why planes at low speed are sluggish and lose control easily.

It's awesome to watch those acrobatic moves in an airshow, but they are death inducing for anyone who make them in front of an enemy fighter. Remember, even though the enemy might also in a low energy state with you, his wingman might not, he might be watching you in high speed, while you dancing with his friend with those crazy acrobatic moves, he will be waiting for a split second opportunity to shoot you down.

So never go into a low energy state or post stall speed, its going to be your last move. Speed coupled with high manuervability is still the king in air combat.

This is an excellent articles explaining what happens when you use TVC and air combat in general.
https://defenseissues.net/2013/04/13/usefulness-of-thrust-vectoring/

 

[Deino]

Concerning the whole "J-20-did-not-use-AB-at-Zhuhai-discussion" may I refer to this post:

...
The J-20 was using afterburners at Zhuhai 2016.
View attachment 364262

https://defence.pk/threads/chinese-engine-information-thread.300409/page-34#post-9058148

 

[SQ8]

I have heard above 400km/h, TVC nozzles are not effective.

this is not true i think, if this is true all TVC are useless, b/t what is source of your information

Not so much the effectiveness as much as the practicality. You could theoretically use TVC to generate a 13G turn at 900kmh. But whether the airframe or pilot will survive it is another matter. In reality, massive energy loss due to airframe aerodynamic potential being exceeded along with any potential wingman of the enemy finding you an easy meal especially with modern missiles makes TVC an outdated feature.

 

[Asoka]

Not so much the effectiveness as much as the practicality. You could theoretically use TVC to generate a 13G turn at 900kmh. But whether the airframe or pilot will survive it is another matter. In reality, massive energy loss due to airframe aerodynamic potential being exceeded along with any potential wingman of the enemy finding you an easy meal especially with modern missiles makes TVC an outdated feature.

Thanks Oscar! that's what the Eurocanards pilots find. TVC may not be useful at high speed, and you would not want to find yourself in low speed so you can use your TVC effectively.

 

[Ultima Thule]

From F-22 pilots who participated in the Red Flag exercises. Let me find the source for you.
https://theaviationist.com/2013/02/21/raptor-vs-typhoon-us/

Basically, when you use the Thrust Vectoring, you quickly turn or point your nose to the enemy, but that quick turning also turn your plane's body against the wind and you lose energy quickly. Several moves of that, you go into post stall speed. If somebody is waiting for you to make that move, he is going to quickly kill you.

TVC is great if you happen in a low energy state already, you can dance around a ballet dancer using your TVC. At that low speed, planes using only the control surfaces can't do that, the wing don't have enough energy to work the control surface's effectiveness. That's why planes at low speed are sluggish and lose control easily.

It's awesome to watch those acrobatic moves in an airshow, but they are death inducing for anyone who make them in front of an enemy fighter. Remember, even though the enemy might also in a low energy state with you, his wingman might not, he might be watching you in high speed, while you dancing with his friend with those crazy acrobatic moves, he will be waiting for a split second opportunity to shoot you down.

So never go into a low energy state or post stall speed, its going to be your last move. Speed coupled with high manuervability is still the king in air combat.

This is an excellent articles explaining what happens when you use TVC and air combat in general.
https://defenseissues.net/2013/04/13/usefulness-of-thrust-vectoring/

thank you very much bro

 

[Asoka]

thank you very much bro

 

[Asoka]

Here is a size comparison between Mig-25 and J-20. Mig-25 was a 1960's era Soviet high speed, high altitude interceptor, capable of reaching the speed of Mach 3.2 and the incredible atitude of 35,000 metres (115,000 ft).

It's enormous speed and size was very impressive to anyone who saw it. It's length was 19.75M or 67ft, and wingspan of 14.01m or 45ft.

The dimensions are almost identical to J-20, with J-20 being slightly longer, 72ft or 21.9m in length, and smaller wingspan, 44ft or 14m.

No wonder many people were convinced that J-20 was built as a interceptor. This was no mere coincident. J-20 was based on the cancelled, 1970's era, J-9 interceptor designed to the achieve Mach 3, and altitude of 30,000m, the same as Mig-25.

J-9 designers must have studied the Mig-25 carefully, in the 1970's, for inspirations to reach those lofty goals.

J-20 and the iconic Mig-25 have the near same length and wingspan.

The long and slender shape of J-20 is optimized for Supersonic speed and the canards are for maneuverability. It is interesting to see if J-20 can match the Mig-25's incredible top speed of Mach 3.2.

Mig-25's engine max thrust is "only" 100kN, while J-20's thrust is reportedly greater than 180kN, possibly > 210kN as I have speculated.

• Powerplant: 2 × Tumansky R-15B-300 afterburning turbojets
  • Dry thrust: 73.5 kN (16,524 lbf) each
  • Thrust with afterburner: 100.1 kN (22,494 lbf) each

The mighty F-15 could reach Mach 2.5 with two max thrust 105kN engines.

Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-100 or −220 afterburning turbofans

• Dry thrust: 14,590 lbf[124] (64.9 kN) each
• Thrust with afterburner: 23,770 lbf for −220[124] (105.7 kN for −220) each

 

[grey boy 2]

2001 an old new picture?

 

[Deino]

2001 an old new picture?

I think yes, but a bit artificially altered ... and this one ??

 

[BoQ77]

Asok, two aircrafts are totally different.
J-20 designed to be stealth, Mig-25 designed to reach the Mach 2.8 at altitude.

Here is a size comparison between Mig-25 and J-20. Mig-25 was a 1960's era Soviet high speed, high altitude interceptor, capable of reaching the speed of Mach 3.2 and the incredible atitude of 35,000 metres (115,000 ft).

View attachment 364417 View attachment 364420

It's enormous speed and size was very impressive to anyone who saw it. It's length was 19.75M or 67ft, and wingspan of 14.01m or 45ft.

The dimensions are almost identical to J-20, with J-20 being slightly longer, 72ft or 21.9m in length, and smaller wingspan, 44ft or 14m.

No wonder many people were convinced that J-20 was built as a interceptor. This was no mere coincident. J-20 was based on the cancelled, 1970's era, J-9 interceptor designed to the achieve Mach 3, and altitude of 30,000m, the same as Mig-25.

J-9 designers must have studied the Mig-25 carefully, in the 1970's, for inspirations to reach those lofty goals.

View attachment 364416

J-20 and the iconic Mig-25 have the near same length and wingspan.

View attachment 364424

The long and slender shape of J-20 is optimized for Supersonic speed and the canards are for maneuverability. It is interesting to see if J-20 can match the Mig-25's incredible top speed of Mach 3.2.

Mig-25's engine max thrust is "only" 100kN, while J-20's thrust is reportedly greater than 180kN, possibly > 210kN as I have speculated.

• Powerplant: 2 × Tumansky R-15B-300 afterburning turbojets
  • Dry thrust: 73.5 kN (16,524 lbf) each
  • Thrust with afterburner: 100.1 kN (22,494 lbf) each

The mighty F-15 could reach Mach 2.5 with two max thrust 105kN engines.

Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-100 or −220 afterburning turbofans

• Dry thrust: 14,590 lbf[124] (64.9 kN) each
• Thrust with afterburner: 23,770 lbf for −220[124] (105.7 kN for −220) each

 

[Asoka]

Asok, two aircrafts are totally different.
J-20 designed to be stealth, Mig-25 designed to reach the Mach 2.8 at altitude.

I know that. Mig-25 was designed to be fast and furious (Mach 3), able to reach very high attitude (30,000m) to intercept the supersonic bomber the North American XB-70 Valkyrie, which got cancelled.

The Mig-25 was awe inspiring for its huge size and speed. The amazing thing about J-20, is that it is even slightly larger the Mig-25, but far more agile. It is designed, with two active canards, to out maneuvers the supreme F-22.

It would be interesting to see how fast and how high could J-20 go. I suspect many world records will fall when J-20 push those monstrous >200kN engines to the max.

Interestingly, when Mig-25, F-15 and Su-27 debuted, they broke many world speed and altitude records. Some of them still stands.