Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[lmjiao]

Science is neutral. The laws of nature transcends borders. At least with real science. But apparently, with you, we now have a claimed Ph.D that says the laws of nature are different for China and if we want to understand Chinese military weaponry, the only path is to learn Chinese.

Note to the admin staff: From now on, do not construe the phrase 'Chinese physics' as anything racially derogatory because this forum now have a Ph.D that says the laws of physics are different for China.


A squadron of F-22 is the equivalent of 1/2 of the PLAAF in terms of technology, training, and combat experience.


You do not know anything about the J-20 any more than the average forum member.


Not possible because the US is an immigrant country. We CONTINUOUSLY consider new ideas and assimilate them when appropriate.

Science is not related to countries. But scientific papers is written in languages. Read the paper before you say anything about chinese science development.

I do believe that I know more about J-20 than you. Because appearently you refused to learn anything.

Thank God I am living in the decade that US is becoming both lazy and arogant. Weak, just weak.

 

[gambit]

Science is not related to countries. But scientific papers is written in languages. Read the paper before you say anything about chinese science development.

Languages are also translatable.

The reason why you are scared shitless -- practically terrified -- of providing that translation is because this American may correct you on certain scientific principles when applied to military affairs.

Am a USAF veteran of two jets: F-111 ( Cold War ) and F-16 ( Desert Storm ). And I learned to fly in high school before the Air Force. That means when I entered the Air Force, I already have a solid background in flight theories and basic flying. That is far more than any of you Chinese on this forum, for starter. On the F-111, I know what it is like flying terrain following ( TF ) at hill top altitudes. On the F-16, I know what 9gs does to the body. After the Air Force, I worked for a company, which shall remain unnamed, as a sensor specialist. I designed radar field tests for drones. I engineered and built the test equipment if necessary.

Here are a few examples of my technical contribution to this forum that so far NONE of you have matched...

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/fund...ts-of-rcs-reduction.73549/page-5#post-7108323

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/fund...ts-of-rcs-reduction.73549/page-4#post-6409899

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/fund...ts-of-rcs-reduction.73549/page-4#post-6412178

What your fellow Chinese on this forum learned about 'stealth' came from ME. And I have no problems saying that.

I do believe that I know more about J-20 than you.

See above. What I said about 'stealth' is applicable to the J-20 as well.

Here is the kicker: For what we are capable of data processing and radar technology, the J-20 is Dead-On-Arrival ( DOA ).

Thank God I am living in the decade that US is becoming both lazy and arogant. Weak, just weak.

Have you looked at the news lately ? We are anything but weak and lazy.

 

[帅的一匹]

Science is neutral. The laws of nature transcends borders. At least with real science. But apparently, with you, we now have a claimed Ph.D that says the laws of nature are different for China and if we want to understand Chinese military weaponry, the only path is to learn Chinese.

Note to the admin staff: From now on, do not construe the phrase 'Chinese physics' as anything racially derogatory because this forum now have a Ph.D that says the laws of physics are different for China.


A squadron of F-22 is the equivalent of 1/2 of the PLAAF in terms of technology, training, and combat experience.


You do not know anything about the J-20 any more than the average forum member.


Not possible because the US is an immigrant country. We CONTINUOUSLY consider new ideas and assimilate them when appropriate.

 

[Deino]

Guys, You all should calm down and relax - in the same way I'm just enjoying my Cappuccino here in Italy - since no obe will persuade anyone in that engine and technical specification issue since we are with fishing in the same muddy water without internal data available.

As such enjoy this magnificent aircraft and keep the discussion civilised. I will not tolerate any personal insults and name-callings.

By the way, do we know the serials of the J-20s flown yesterday?

... Oh... and my next Cappuccino has arrived.

Take care and greetings from Italy,
Deino

 

[Glass]

j20 looks better then su 57

 

[Asoka]

An Interview with the Pilots of the J-20. Here are some excerpts:

1.) “静如处子，动如脱兔。”

"Still as a virgin, move like a jack rabbit."

2.) “加减速性能优越，中性速度稳定，正向速度稳定。无论是超音速还是亚音速，歼—２０的飞行品质都可以说做到了完美。”

"Acceleration and deceleration is outstanding, medium speed is stable, forward directional speed is stable. Regardless whether it is subsonic speed or supersonic speed, it can be said, the flight quality of J-20 is perfect."

3.) "起飞不用压杆，靠“意念”, “新手如果按过去的习惯压杆，极其敏感灵活的战机会以难以置信的角度猛升上昂。”

"When take off, don't pull back the control stick too hard, just use your "mind". If a newbie, pull back the control, like the old way, the extremely sensitive and agile fighter will rise up, with unbelievable quickness."

“静如处子，动如脱兔。”空军某部部队长张昊，用这８个字来形容歼—２０战机的驾驶体验。在３０日举行的庆祝中国人民解放军建军９０周年沙场阅兵中，他与战友驾驶的３架歼—２０战机，成为阅兵场上空的亮点。

作为这款第四代超音速隐身战斗机的首支接装部队，张昊与战友们对歼—２０的飞行品质赞不绝口。

“加减速性能优越，中性速度稳定，正向速度稳定。无论是超音速还是亚音速，歼—２０的飞行品质都可以说做到了完美。”张昊说。

技术研究会上，他总会提醒新来的飞行员们：起飞不用压杆，靠“意念”就可以了。

“新手如果按过去的习惯压杆，极其敏感灵活的战机会以难以置信的角度猛升上昂。”张昊说。

而平台的操纵性只是最基本的。作为第四代全候中远程重型战斗机，它更大的亮点在于其强大的任务系统——

第四代战机的隐身性能优异。充满高科技的机身涂层和“诡异”的气动外形，能最大限度地吸收及散射电磁波，从而极大压缩对手雷达的发现距离，在对手雷达屏幕上实现“隐身”。

第四代战机还具有强大的信息采纳和集成能力。雷达、光雷、数据链、机械链、电子对抗……歼—２０“浑身都是鼻子眼睛”，能综合接收各种信息，再以优越的信息集成能力，用简洁、高效、友好的人机界面反馈给飞行员。

“信息在眼前，操纵在指尖。”该部某站站长汤海宁说，所有的信息、电抗、武器控制全在手上，飞行员要熟练掌握每一个按钮的操控逻辑，“玩转装备”。

这样一款战机，已经突破了传统飞机的概念，它是一部集信息交汇、信息传输、信息处理于一体的智能化平台——更要由信息化的头脑来驾驭。

２８岁的白龙是这支部队里最年轻的飞行员。“刚来这里时，见每个人桌上都是山一样高的书籍资料，感觉不像飞行员，倒像老学究。”他说。

对于已经能够熟练驾驭三代机的白龙，“能飞”歼—２０并不困难，“能打”才是关键。

“要学的东西太多了，雷达系统、电抗系统、武器系统，还有数据链中其他结点的工作逻辑……”白龙说。

作为整个作战体系中强大的信息结点，歼—２０要求飞行员不但是单架飞机的驾驭者，还要是一名具备全局掌控能力、处置决策能力的指挥员与战术家。

“因此，我们挑选飞行员，最看重他的学习能力。”张昊说。这支飞行员队伍中，有“软件通”，有“编程高手”，有“金头盔”获得者，有“电子战专家”……

他们的部队地处大西北戈壁滩，一批批“最优秀的空战精英”义无反顾来到这里，为的就是让国家最先进的武器装备在自己手中发挥最彻底的作战效能。

当初决定来这里，白龙“没有一秒钟的犹豫”——从他穿上“空军蓝”的那天起，“飞最好的飞机，当最棒的飞行员”就是他一直以来的梦想。

如今，他的梦想“实现了一半”。“另一半，要靠今后的努力。”他说，“这里不光有最先进的飞机，还有最先进的理念、平台和流程。未来，我们不仅要‘飞出去’，更要把先进的理念‘撒出去’。”

“梦想还是要有的，万一实现了呢？”白龙笑着说。

 

[gambit]

From your language, it doesn't look that you are either educated or professional. You behavior is just like childish and bragging.

Then I suggest you look up my postings here, young man. But ultimately, your opinion of me is meaningless to me.

What have you contributed to the science and art of aerial warfare?
Or did you merely participated in it.
Many Chinese or of Chinese descent did contribute..

The issue is not individual efforts, although that is commendable, but rather of the country.

The argument from the PDF Chinese is that the J-20 can challenge the F-22, which is laughable to start, and that the PLAAF is the equal of the American air forces, which composes of the USAF, USN, and USMC.

So my question is how have China contributed to the science and art of aerial warfare ?

Did the ejection seat came from China ?

WW II era fighters have multiple machine guns with over 1,000 rounds of ammunition. The P-51 flew with 1,840 rounds. But why do modern fighters have a single cannon with only a few hundreds rounds ? Did China contribute to that evolution ?

Did airborne radar came from China ?

Did aerial refueling came from China ?

Did ANYTHING that flies within the last couple hundred yrs came from China ?

The argument that the J-20 can achieve air superiority against the F-22 or even F-35 evokes polite doubts or impolite derisive laughter from those who actually had to fly and conduct such operations.

 

[UKBengali]

The argument from the PDF Chinese is that the J-20 can challenge the F-22, which is laughable to start,

The argument that the J-20 can achieve air superiority against the F-22 or even F-35 evokes polite doubts or impolite derisive laughter from those who actually had to fly and conduct such operations.

Why should this be?
Has anyone inspected and flown both F-22 and J-20?
Please leave the useless F-35 out of this.

 

[gambit]

Why should this be?
Has anyone inspected and flown both F-22 and J-20?
Please leave the useless F-35 out of this.

I have no problems with that argument.

But the issue is not about flying the jets, but about achieving air superiority with them.

The PLAAF have never been in a situation where its fighters had to fight for real estates. The US had.

Do YOU know what is involved in the planning and execution of such a mission ?

 

[Olli Ranta]

The argument from the PDF Chinese is that the J-20 can challenge the F-22, which is laughable to start, and that the PLAAF is the equal of the American air forces, which composes of the USAF, USN, and USMC.

This is a public forum on sensitive military matters and there are interested hostile parties around. Some discussants know more than they are allowed to tell. There are approaches to encourage them to slip out things:
* Negative provocation: Tell that their stuff is valueless rubbish and wait for an angry rebuttal with details.
* Positive provocation:Tell that their stuff is superb and wait for an eager confirmation with details.

 

[sinait]

The issue is not individual efforts, although that is commendable, but rather of the country.

Which part of your country's efforts came from you?
If the answer is none, then you can be proud or celebrate your country's achievements but not for you to boast about it since you took no part in it.

If you want, you can boast and brag about how you can fly your plane upside down or inside out into the sea for all I care but don't put down others on the science and art of aerial warfare where you did not contribute or achieved anything of significance.
Not that I am saying you do not have knowledge, but that knowledge came from others who may have been foreigners in the US and you merely read and learned from it.

As is evident from the example I gave earlier, many unknowns from many other nations have also contributed the the technology advancement in the US, who being rich and able to have the facilities to conduct such research and properly remunerate such talents.

I am not trying to put you down, like I said you are knowlegable, but your post is boastful and repulsive.
.

 

[gambit]

This is a public forum on sensitive military matters and there are interested hostile parties around. Some discussants know more than they are allowed to tell. There are approaches to encourage them to slip out things:
* Negative provocation: Tell that their stuff is valueless rubbish and wait for an angry rebuttal with details.
* Positive provocation:Tell that their stuff is superb and wait for an eager confirmation with details.

In order for you to be 'allowed' to tell stuff, you must be involved in that stuff in the first place. I doubt that any of the PDF Chinese are involved in top secret stuff.

Which part of your country's efforts came from you?
If the answer is none, then you can be proud or celebrate your country's achievements but not for you to boast about it since you took no part in it.

Actually, at the personal level, I contributed to the current US lead in UAVs. Did you missed what I said about my post USAF experience ?

I am not trying to put you down, like I said you are knowlegable, but your post is boastful and repulsive..

Of course you are trying to put me down. Who are you trying to fool ? And Chinese postings are not boastful and repulsive ? Of course not. You are in their camp, right ?

 

[sinait]

Actually, at the personal level, I contributed to the current US lead in UAVs. Did you missed what I said about my post USAF experience ?
Of course you are trying to put me down. Who are you trying to fool ? And Chinese postings are not boastful and repulsive ? Of course not. You are in their camp, right ?

We are all unknown to each other and we have no means to verify what you claim. I am glad for you that you have some achievements to be proud of. But we are not into UAVs in this thread. Interesting.

And no, I did not try hard to embarrass you when I found you lacking in certain aspects which may not have been your forte as even a genius cannot be numero uno in everything.You may not have noticed but I let you have the last word.

Singapore can also have differences with China, and try to be friendly with US and China, but I do support China generally.
.

 

[gambit]

We are all unknown to each other and we have no means to verify what you claim. I am glad for you that you have some achievements to be proud of. But we are not into UAVs in this thread. Interesting.

And no, I did not try hard to embarrass you when I found you lacking in certain aspects which may not have been your forte as even a genius cannot be numero uno in everything.

Singapore can also have differences with China, and try to be friendly with US and China, but I do support China generally.
.

The question remains that in order to support the Chinese claim that the PLAAF is the equivalent of the American air forces, what have China contributed to military aviation in all perspectives: technology, doctrines, tactics, training, etc.

Making this issue about me is nothing but a distraction. We all contribute one way or another. The electronics industry contributed to the avionics industry. The chemical engineer contributed to the use of hydrazine as an emergency fuel for the F-16. And so on.

So at the national level, what have China contributed to military aviation ? Nothing. The PLA is struggling to reform itself using the US as THE model. Not 'a' model. But THE model. And all of a sudden, China is ready to be a peer in the sky with US ?

 

[Deino]

J-20 s/n 78274, 78275, 78276

By the way guys ... Please stay on topic