Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[C130]

The J-20 engine is not related to any AL-31 family member at all.

what engine are you talking about then

 

[Beast]

what engine are you talking about then

Chinese made engine.

 

[C130]

Chinese made engine.

is J-20 using Chinese made engines?? or is it still using Russian engines

 

[Asoka]

The ignorant China hater can believe whatever he wants to believe, just like MacArthur believed 60 years ago



China just invented gunpowder, so you don't have to drive your F-22 or Star Destroyer like a Kamikaze



Of course Chinese engines made by Liming. We are just not sure if it's WS-15 or WS-10X.
If you believe it's a Russian engine, just show your proof.

"Of course Chinese engines made by Liming. We are just not sure if it's WS-15 or WS-10X."

To answer that question, let me repose my answer, I have posted earlier.

"On point number 2), they did not say that the WS-15 is made there but the engine for the J-20 is made there."

Please read this page again, for the original pictures from the TV show.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chengdu-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-news-discussions.111471/page-550
and this webpage https://kknews.cc/zh-hk/military/682paam.html

The English translation of the Chinese caption said

“. . . From the third generation "Taihang" aircraft engine, to the [domestically produced] fifth generation "Emei" (WS-15) aircraft engine, . . . The J-20 stealth fighter’s engine's part, tooling and final assembly, were all completed, in the assembly factory of AECC Shenyang Liming Group Co. Ltd. China's aircraft engine industry, has achieved a historic leap, which has astounded the entire world.”

The Chinese code name for WS-15, 「峨眉」is "Emei", a famous mountain in China.

Some people have interpreted this program's caption as "yes, it did confirmed WS-15 is J-20'e engine, but it didn't say the J-20's current engine is WS-15. J-20 is still using either WS-10 or AL-31FN-M2. "

I don't know what else to say to those people. The whole Chinese and English caption of the sentences are in the present tense, not the future tense.

 

[帅的一匹]

Have you heard of the latest in Chinese Physics? Its called natural frequency emitter to move the tectonic plate in the Himalayas. There is actually a thread where it is being discussed.

 

[Deino]

Guys... Final attempt: Either you come back to the topic and leave out all politics, physic-ethnic and off-topics out or I close this thread until all are relaxed again.

 

[Han Patriot]

Guys... Final attempt: Either you come back to the topic and leave out all politics, physic-ethnic and off-topics out or I close this thread until all are relaxed again.

Deino,

Can you just ban those trolls? This thread is only for J-20 news and discussion.

 

[Asoka]

Deino,

Can you just ban those trolls? This thread is only for J-20 news and discussion.

I second this motion. Ban the trolls, who has added nothing, into the discussions, which increases our knowledge of J-20.

 

[Deino]

Agreed ... My problem is only that I have only very unstable and internet access right now. Therefore only my constant applys for peace.

Maybe you can call another mod for help.

Sorry guys.

 

[Ultima Thule]

"You have your hyper ws-15 theory - with imo not a single proof "

What???!!!

Not a single proof?

1.) The pilot confirmed that J-20 has outstanding supersonic maneuverability. Not a proof, you said.
2.) The Liming engine factory confirmed J-20's WS-15 engine is made there. Not a proof, you said.
3.) J-20 could do sustained vertical climb, w/o AB, in front of thousands of airshow spectators. Not a proof, you said.
4.) J-20's TVC engines could tilt differentially. Not a proof, you said.
5.) Absolutely, no report of sales and delivery of Russian made AL-31FN-M2 to China. But this is not a problem to your theory.

These are not prove that J-20 using WS-15
1.) The pilot confirmed that J-20 has outstanding supersonic maneuverability. Not a proof, you said.
pilot didn't specify the engine, may be its a hybrid version of WS-10X

2.) The Liming engine factory confirmed J-20's WS-15 engine is made there. Not a proof, you said.
yes but they not telling when the development of WS-15 will be completed
3.) J-20 could do sustained vertical climb, w/o AB, in front of thousands of airshow spectators. Not a proof, you said.
this not a prove even our F-16 can do vertical climb without afterburner
4.) J-20's TVC engines could tilt differentially. Not a proof, you said.
currently J-20 is not using TVC engine but its like in the photos

 

[Asoka]

These are not prove that J-20 using WS-15
1.) The pilot confirmed that J-20 has outstanding supersonic maneuverability. Not a proof, you said.
pilot didn't specify the engine, may be its a hybrid version of WS-10X

2.) The Liming engine factory confirmed J-20's WS-15 engine is made there. Not a proof, you said.
yes but they not telling when the development of WS-15 will be completed
3.) J-20 could do sustained vertical climb, w/o AB, in front of thousands of airshow spectators. Not a proof, you said.
this not a prove even our F-16 can do vertical climb without afterburner
4.) J-20's TVC engines could tilt differentially. Not a proof, you said.
currently J-20 is not using TVC engine but its like in the photos

1.) J-10 and J-11D have used both WS-10 and AL-31-FN-M1 engines, none of these planes has much of Supersonic Maneuverability to talk about. At least their pilots haven't bragged about it. Fighter pilots are not known to be shy to brag about their planes.

The j-10 and Flankers, like F-15, F-16, and F-18 do have excellent subsonic Maneuverability, but not known to have superior Supersonic Maneuverability .

In fact, i don't know any pilot or designer has boost that their fighter has excellent Supersonic Maneuverability, before F-22 came along.

When F-22 was conceived, Supersonic Maneuverability was a relatively new concept. That's why F-22's 4S performance requirements was so revolutionary, that China and Russia were eager to follow up with their own 5th generation fighter.

One big reason that F-22 able to achieve Supersonic Cruise w/o AB, and superior Supersonic Maneuverability is its powerful Pratt & Whitney F119 engine. It's published maximum thrust is listed as 35,000lbf or 175kN. Some people believe its actually as high as 39,000 lbf or 19.5 tons.

So the claim that J-20 is able to achieve outstanding Supersonic Maneuverability with just WS-10X or AL-31-FN-M1, is not convincing to me.

2.) "Taihang" aircraft engine, to the [domestically produced] fifth generation "Emei" (WS-15) aircraft engine, . . . The J-20 stealth fighter’s engine's part, tooling and final assembly, were all completed, in the assembly factory of AECC Shenyang Liming Group Co. Ltd. China's aircraft engine industry, has achieved a historic leap, which has astounded the entire world.”

If this caption of the video, doesn't convinced anyone, I have nothing more to say.

3.) "this not a prove even our F-16 can do vertical climb without afterburner"

I don't know this is true. Please show me a video clip. If that's is true, that F-16 could do a "sustained" vertical climb without AB, that mean the dry thrust of F-16, alone, is greater than its flying weight.

This is my point.

However, I don't claim if J-20 or F-16 could do that, that doesn't mean no one else could do that.

And I have shown repeatedly, that to lift J-20 vertically, w/o AB, it's maximum thrust, must be greater than 210kN, for an estimated empty weight of 22 tons plus 4 tons of fuel.

(I admitted this is 26 tons flying weight is just my estimate. I have no proof, whatsoever, that is true. I think this is most reasonable estimate, that's all. Feel free to offer your estimate. Then we can discuss from there.)

This estimated maximum thrust of 210kN, is completely out of the known reported range (125kN-145kN) of the WS-10x and AL-31-FN-M1.

That's why I am convinced that J-20 is not flying with either one of them.

4.) "Currently J-20 is not using TVC engine but its like in the photos."

I don't know how do you know or why you are so sure that "Currently J-20 is not using TVC engine". Please share your thought on how you arrived at your conclusion.

I have drawn my conclusions from several published pictures.

4.) If someone said those pictures means nothing or they doesn't prove anything. It could be an optical illusions due to the angle of the plane in the picture. Then he need to prove to me, that the same optical illusions could be happen to other plane nozzles. There are dozen of fighter planes with expandable nozzles, and thousands of their pictures on the Internet.

You need to shown me a several example of those illusions, and you have proved your case.

5.) Thrust Vector Nozzles have demonstrated that they are highly effective in controlling the directions of the plane at both low altitude and post-stall low speed, where the control surface has lost their effectiveness. And at high altitude, and high speed, where the air is thin, and the controls surfaces are much less effective.

Both US and Russia have developed and successfully used TVC nozzles on their fighters such as F-22, Su-30-MKI, Su-35 and T-50, since the 1980's and 1990's.

I can not see one single reason, why China would not use such amazingly effective technology, on their premier, 5th generation fighter to increase its subsonic maneuverability and supersonic maneuverability. Especially, China's CCTV has shown that it has such 3-D TVC nozzles in 2003.

Can you give me one reason why not?

I believe TVC nozzles is one of the key to achieve subsonic, post-install maneuverability and supersonic maneuverability. It is one of the major reason why F-22, T-50, and Su-35 are so marvelous.

I believe, not only J-20's 3-D TVC nozzle is better than F-22's 2-D, it could also turn differentially left and right, up and down. This will make a big difference in turning, and rolling.

It's also lower in weight and complexity, I believe. The stealth aspect of the round nozzle could be fixed with non-radar reflecting ceramic-based nozzle and radar absorbing coating, or with saw-tooth edges on the rim, like the F-35.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

1.) J-10 and J-11D have used both WS-10 and AL-31-FN-M1 engines, none of these planes has much of Supersonic Maneuverability to talk about. At least their pilots haven't bragged about it. Fighter pilots are not known to be shy to brag about their planes.

The j-10 and Flankers, like F-15, F-16, and F-18 do have excellent subsonic Maneuverability, but not known to have superior Supersonic Maneuverability .

In fact, i don't know any pilot or designer has boost that their fighter has excellent Supersonic Maneuverability, before F-22 came along.

When F-22 was conceived, Supersonic Maneuverability was a relatively new concept. That's why F-22's 4S performance requirements was so revolutionary, that China and Russia were eager to follow up with their own 5th generation fighter.

One big reason that F-22 able to achieve Supersonic Cruise w/o AB, and superior Supersonic Maneuverability is its powerful Pratt & Whitney F119 engine. It's published maximum thrust is listed as 35,000lbf or 175kN. Some people believe its actually as high as 39,000 lbf or 19.5 tons.

So the claim that J-20 is able to achieve outstanding Supersonic Maneuverability with just WS-10X or AL-31-FN-M1, is not convincing to me.

2.) "Taihang" aircraft engine, to the [domestically produced] fifth generation "Emei" (WS-15) aircraft engine, . . . The J-20 stealth fighter’s engine's part, tooling and final assembly, were all completed, in the assembly factory of AECC Shenyang Liming Group Co. Ltd. China's aircraft engine industry, has achieved a historic leap, which has astounded the entire world.”

If this caption of the video, doesn't convinced anyone, I have nothing more to say.

3.) "this not a prove even our F-16 can do vertical climb without afterburner"

I don't know this is true. Please show me a video clip. If that's is true, that F-16 could do a "sustained" vertical climb without AB, that mean the dry thrust of F-16, alone, is greater than its flying weight.

This is my point.

However, I don't claim if J-20 or F-16 could do that, that doesn't mean no one else could do that.

And I have shown repeatedly, that to lift J-20 vertically, w/o AB, it's maximum thrust, must be greater than 210kN, for an estimated empty weight of 22 tons plus 4 tons of fuel.

(I admitted this is 26 tons flying weight is just my estimate. I have no proof, whatsoever, that is true. I think this is most reasonable estimate, that's all. Feel free to offer your estimate. Then we can discuss from there.)

This estimated maximum thrust of 210kN, is completely out of the known reported range (125kN-145kN) of the WS-10x and AL-31-FN-M1.

That's why I am convinced that J-20 is not flying with either one of them.

4.) "Currently J-20 is not using TVC engine but its like in the photos."

I don't know how do you know or why you are so sure that "Currently J-20 is not using TVC engine". Please share your thought on how you arrived at your conclusion.

I have drawn my conclusions from several published pictures.
View attachment 415557


View attachment 415555

View attachment 415556

4.) If someone said those pictures means nothing or they doesn't prove anything. It could be an optical illusions due to the angle of the plane in the picture. Then he need to prove to me, that the same optical illusions could be happen to other plane nozzles. There are dozen of fighter planes with expandable nozzles, and thousands of their pictures on the Internet.

You need to shown me a several example of those illusions, and you have proved your case.

5.) Thrust Vector Nozzles have demonstrated that they are highly effective in controlling the directions of the plane at both low altitude and post-stall low speed, where the control surface has lost their effectiveness. And at high altitude, and high speed, where the air is thin, and the controls surfaces are much less effective.

Both US and Russia have developed and successfully used TVC nozzles on their fighters such as F-22, Su-30-MKI, Su-35 and T-50, since the 1980's and 1990's.

I can not see one single reason, why China would not use such amazingly effective technology, on their premier, 5th generation fighter to increase its subsonic maneuverability and supersonic maneuverability. Especially, China's CCTV has shown that it has such 3-D TVC nozzles in 2003.

Can you give me one reason why not?

I believe TVC nozzles is one of the key to achieve subsonic, post-install maneuverability and supersonic maneuverability. It is one of the major reason why F-22, T-50, and Su-35 are so marvelous.

I believe, not only J-20's 3-D TVC nozzle is better than F-22's 2-D, it could also turn differentially left and right, up and down. This will make a big difference in turning, and rolling.

It's also lower in weight and complexity, I believe. The stealth aspect of the round nozzle could be fixed with non-radar reflecting ceramic-based nozzle and radar absorbing coating, or with saw-tooth edges on the rim, like the F-35.

The F119 was listed as over 156KN in the afterburner, but some people speculate the actual figure is around 175KN.

The J-20 is a larger and heavier aircraft than the F-22, so it needs to use a jet engine with higher thrust than the F119. Otherwise, it will still be considered underpowered, not enough to meet the benchmark. And if its pilots have implied that the J-20 is outstanding in the supercruise capability, then the chance with the WS-15 could be quite likely.

 

[Ultima Thule]

1.) J-10 and J-11D have used both WS-10 and AL-31-FN-M1 engines, none of these planes has much of Supersonic Maneuverability to talk about. At least their pilots haven't bragged about it. Fighter pilots are not known to be shy to brag about their planes.

The j-10 and Flankers, like F-15, F-16, and F-18 do have excellent subsonic Maneuverability, but not known to have superior Supersonic Maneuverability .

In fact, i don't know any pilot or designer has boost that their fighter has excellent Supersonic Maneuverability, before F-22 came along.

When F-22 was conceived, Supersonic Maneuverability was a relatively new concept. That's why F-22's 4S performance requirements was so revolutionary, that China and Russia were eager to follow up with their own 5th generation fighter.

One big reason that F-22 able to achieve Supersonic Cruise w/o AB, and superior Supersonic Maneuverability is its powerful Pratt & Whitney F119 engine. It's published maximum thrust is listed as 35,000lbf or 175kN. Some people believe its actually as high as 39,000 lbf or 19.5 tons.

So the claim that J-20 is able to achieve outstanding Supersonic Maneuverability with just WS-10X or AL-31-FN-M1, is not convincing to me.

2.) "Taihang" aircraft engine, to the [domestically produced] fifth generation "Emei" (WS-15) aircraft engine, . . . The J-20 stealth fighter’s engine's part, tooling and final assembly, were all completed, in the assembly factory of AECC Shenyang Liming Group Co. Ltd. China's aircraft engine industry, has achieved a historic leap, which has astounded the entire world.”

If this caption of the video, doesn't convinced anyone, I have nothing more to say.

3.) "this not a prove even our F-16 can do vertical climb without afterburner"

I don't know this is true. Please show me a video clip. If that's is true, that F-16 could do a "sustained" vertical climb without AB, that mean the dry thrust of F-16, alone, is greater than its flying weight.

This is my point.

However, I don't claim if J-20 or F-16 could do that, that doesn't mean no one else could do that.

And I have shown repeatedly, that to lift J-20 vertically, w/o AB, it's maximum thrust, must be greater than 210kN, for an estimated empty weight of 22 tons plus 4 tons of fuel.

(I admitted this is 26 tons flying weight is just my estimate. I have no proof, whatsoever, that is true. I think this is most reasonable estimate, that's all. Feel free to offer your estimate. Then we can discuss from there.)

This estimated maximum thrust of 210kN, is completely out of the known reported range (125kN-145kN) of the WS-10x and AL-31-FN-M1.

That's why I am convinced that J-20 is not flying with either one of them.

4.) "Currently J-20 is not using TVC engine but its like in the photos."

I don't know how do you know or why you are so sure that "Currently J-20 is not using TVC engine". Please share your thought on how you arrived at your conclusion.

I have drawn my conclusions from several published pictures.
View attachment 415557


View attachment 415555

View attachment 415556

4.) If someone said those pictures means nothing or they doesn't prove anything. It could be an optical illusions due to the angle of the plane in the picture. Then he need to prove to me, that the same optical illusions could be happen to other plane nozzles. There are dozen of fighter planes with expandable nozzles, and thousands of their pictures on the Internet.

You need to shown me a several example of those illusions, and you have proved your case.

5.) Thrust Vector Nozzles have demonstrated that they are highly effective in controlling the directions of the plane at both low altitude and post-stall low speed, where the control surface has lost their effectiveness. And at high altitude, and high speed, where the air is thin, and the controls surfaces are much less effective.

Both US and Russia have developed and successfully used TVC nozzles on their fighters such as F-22, Su-30-MKI, Su-35 and T-50, since the 1980's and 1990's.

I can not see one single reason, why China would not use such amazingly effective technology, on their premier, 5th generation fighter to increase its subsonic maneuverability and supersonic maneuverability. Especially, China's CCTV has shown that it has such 3-D TVC nozzles in 2003.

Can you give me one reason why not?

I believe TVC nozzles is one of the key to achieve subsonic, post-install maneuverability and supersonic maneuverability. It is one of the major reason why F-22, T-50, and Su-35 are so marvelous.

I believe, not only J-20's 3-D TVC nozzle is better than F-22's 2-D, it could also turn differentially left and right, up and down. This will make a big difference in turning, and rolling.

It's also lower in weight and complexity, I believe. The stealth aspect of the round nozzle could be fixed with non-radar reflecting ceramic-based nozzle and radar absorbing coating, or with saw-tooth edges on the rim, like the F-35.

first you need to what is relax stability for jet fighter F-22, F-35, and F-16 have tail cropped delta wing platform which inherently stable at supersonic state but because of TVC engine on F-22 and F-35 they have extreme maneuverability, agility, whereas J-20 inherently unstable at supersonic and trans-sonic flight regime at subsonic J-20 shows slightly positive static stability
Here it is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_stability
http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2009/03/31/f-16/
So the claim that J-20 is able to achieve outstanding Supersonic Maneuverability with just WS-10X or AL-31-FN-M1, is not convincing to me.
you're talking about T/W ratios lots early fighter jets is less T/W ratios is less than
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust-to-weight_ratio
lots of early and modern jets and bombers have a less thrust compare to their weights

2.) "Taihang" aircraft engine, to the [domestically produced] fifth generation "Emei" (WS-15) aircraft engine, . . . The J-20 stealth fighter’s engine's part, tooling and final assembly, were all completed, in the assembly factory of AECC Shenyang Liming Group Co. Ltd. China's aircraft engine industry, has achieved a historic leap, which has astounded the entire world.”

If this caption of the video, doesn't convinced anyone, I have nothing more to say.
this says that WS-15 has achieved a historic leap didn't saying that WS-15 had been installed on J-20
3.) "this not a prove even our F-16 can do vertical climb without afterburner"

I don't know this is true. Please show me a video clip. If that's is true, that F-16 could do a "sustained" vertical climb without AB, that mean the dry thrust of F-16, alone, is greater than its flying weight.

here it is its clearly shows that F-16 can climb vertical without use of A/B at will

The F119 was listed as over 156KN in the afterburner, but some people speculate the actual figure is around 175KN.

The J-20 is a larger and heavier aircraft than the F-22, so it needs to use a jet engine with higher thrust than the F119. Otherwise, it will still be considered underpowered, not enough to meet the benchmark. And if its pilots have implied that the J-20 is outstanding in the supercruise capability, then the chance with the WS-15 could be quite likely.

yes you're absolutely sir i think WS-15 has a thrust of 43000 lbs like F-135 or slightly higher

 

[Asoka]

first you need to what is relax stability for jet fighter F-22, F-35, and F-16 have tail cropped delta wing platform which inherently stable at supersonic state but because of TVC engine on F-22 and F-35 they have extreme maneuverability, agility, whereas J-20 inherently unstable at supersonic and trans-sonic flight regime at subsonic J-20 shows slightly positive static stability
Here it is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_stability
http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2009/03/31/f-16/
So the claim that J-20 is able to achieve outstanding Supersonic Maneuverability with just WS-10X or AL-31-FN-M1, is not convincing to me.
you're talking about T/W ratios lots early fighter jets is less T/W ratios is less than
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrust-to-weight_ratio
lots of early and modern jets and bombers have a less thrust compare to their weights

2.) "Taihang" aircraft engine, to the [domestically produced] fifth generation "Emei" (WS-15) aircraft engine, . . . The J-20 stealth fighter’s engine's part, tooling and final assembly, were all completed, in the assembly factory of AECC Shenyang Liming Group Co. Ltd. China's aircraft engine industry, has achieved a historic leap, which has astounded the entire world.”

If this caption of the video, doesn't convinced anyone, I have nothing more to say.
this says that WS-15 has achieved a historic leap didn't saying that WS-15 had been installed on J-20
3.) "this not a prove even our F-16 can do vertical climb without afterburner"

I don't know this is true. Please show me a video clip. If that's is true, that F-16 could do a "sustained" vertical climb without AB, that mean the dry thrust of F-16, alone, is greater than its flying weight.

here it is its clearly shows that F-16 can climb vertical without use of A/B at will

yes you're absolutely sir i think WS-15 has a thrust of 43000 lbs like F-135 or slightly higher

The Afterburner of the F-16, indicated by its red glowing butt, was ON throughout the video, and I see no sustained vertical climbing at all.

I got a feeling you don't know what is afterburner and what is sustained vertical climbing.

Thanks for this video! Show me another video, please.

The F119 was listed as over 156KN in the afterburner, but some people speculate the actual figure is around 175KN.

The J-20 is a larger and heavier aircraft than the F-22, so it needs to use a jet engine with higher thrust than the F119. Otherwise, it will still be considered underpowered, not enough to meet the benchmark. And if its pilots have implied that the J-20 is outstanding in the supercruise capability, then the chance with the WS-15 could be quite likely.

I agreed with your analysis.

If a plane has Superior supersonic maneuverability, it strongly indicates that, it could so do supersonic cruising, without AB.

And the reverse is true, without a powerful engine to do supersonic cruising, it's unlikely a plane could have superior supersonic maneuverability.

Because it is so much more demanding, on the engine to quickly, replenish the energy and speed lost, during violent supersonic maneuvers, so the plane don't fall back down to subsonic speed, than just cruising in a straight line.

 

[Ultima Thule]

The Afterburner of the F-16, indicated by its red glowing butt, was ON throughout the video, and I see no sustained vertical climbing at all.

I got a feeling you don't know what is afterburner and what is sustained vertical climbing.

Thanks for this video! Show me another video, please.

I am afraid bro you don't know what is afterburner bro it is on a wet or dry thrust can show me clip that fighter jet flying without hot butts its normal engine running not afterburner is applied every 4th can do vertical climbing without use of afterburner including your J series of jets its nothing new

The Afterburner of the F-16, indicated by its red glowing butt, was ON throughout the video, and I see no sustained vertical climbing at all.

I got a feeling you don't know what is afterburner and what is sustained vertical climbing.

Thanks for this video! Show me another video, please.



I agreed with your analysis.

If a plane has Superior supersonic maneuverability, it strongly indicates that, it could so do supersonic cruising, without AB.

And the reverse is true, without a powerful engine to do supersonic cruising, it's unlikely a plane could have superior supersonic maneuverability.

Because it is so much more demanding, on the engine to quickly, replenish the energy and speed lost, during violent supersonic maneuvers, so the plane don't fall back down to subsonic speed, than just cruising in a straight line.

I already state you in my above post its not for engine but relaxed static stability of the fighter jets, first fighter jet shows a capability to super cruise was the British lightning of 60 with relatively weaker engine