What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

How can US call itself an industrious super power when it cannot compete with Siemens, Alstom, Toshiba, ZTE, Huawei, TSMC and need to use unfair practices to punish them, throwing executives in jail, forcing them to admit crimes they did not commit and forcing Alstom to sell to US. Since this is about stealth fighters the only way to belittle China is to call the J-31 a copy of F-35 and China lacking the capability to develop a true 6th gen fighters and advanced weapons, sensors and indigenous engine . The nonsense gets more intensified as China is an opponent the US cannot militarily defeat or contain.
Talking about the hilarious case of `forcedʼ acquisition of Alstom (biz unit of energy, 70% of the company's total biz) by its main rival, General Electric, one must read the book “The American Trap” authored by Frédéric Pierucci.
https://www.newstatesman.com/the-american-trap-federic-pierucci-reivew

Frédéric Pierucci, the former Vice President of the Alstom International Sales:
IMG_20200609_004714.png

The American Trap, authored by Frederic Pierucci 01.jpg



The American Trap, authored by Frederic Pierucci - Back Cover.jpg


And the original edition in French language:
The American Trap, authored by Frederic Pierucci (FRENCH).jpg
 
.
So I actually took the time to read this report (obviously not all of it but the main parts) & here is a summary:-
He says the Argentian & Egyptian projects (called Pulqui-II & Ha-300 respectively) failed because they had poor management, there were constant disagreements between the foreign designers that they hired & their own local engineers , they did not have clear mission requirements, they were mainly status symbols to give legitimacy to the government & they did not have enough funding & also they failed to export those fighters which exacerbated the cost overruns even more.

For the Indian project the HF-24, it failed because of poor management, over dependence of foreign made parts to the point were the aircraft can barely be said to be indigenous, cost overruns & delays, constant redesign of the aircraft, and finally the aircraft couldn't fulfill it's mission requirements.

Finnaly he talks about China's own fighters & draws parallels between China's own program & those of the aforementioned three countries, he says China is developing those fighters to serve as a status symbol, & he says all of China's operational frontline fighters exclusively use Russian engines, he says both the J-31 & J-20 use only Russian engines which means China is still not self-sufficient and thus the aircraft's capability will be limited & it's export potential will be reduced (I presume he means not exporting it will lead to cost overruns), then he says the design & technologies of China's stealth fighters are not integrated with each other well enough for them to be compared to the F-22, F-35.
And finally he says by the time the J-20 , J-31 are produced in large enough numbers after 8-10 years from now, the technologies they are using may become obsolete because aircraft technology is a time sensitive matter.

At the very end he says something that is somewhat contradictory just so that his argument sounds less stupid, he says China will eventually join the elite club of countries that can design & produce their own aircrafts (I assume by "elite club" he means the US ,Russia, France, UK) due to it's financial technological technical expertise, but there will be a lot of obstacles, in other words I assume he means China will only enter the elite club of the US, Russia, France, UK in the far future (not any where near say 15 years from now).

Well done. Someone who actually bothered to read the pertinent portions of the article to understand what the author was actually saying instead of just seeing the 3 countries mentioned and then ignorantly laughing. And coming from someone who's supposedly a teacher somewhere is even more surprising. But actually not after witnessing the way the discussion is controlled on this thread, it doesn't surprise me at all. It's actually much more disappointing than anything else.

At least you had the wherewithal to do what was supposed to be done. Good job. I'm not familiar with the Argentinian project as much but certainly am of the Egyptian one, Helwan-300 and you would think that this would be well known to that individual considering Willie Messerschmitt was involved with it as well LOL!!!! My goodness!

What's also interesting in what that author from the USAF mentions is that there is a connection between the Egyptian-built fighter and the Indian HF-24. So a lot of relevance to what he said and I'm pretty sure that had Egypt not gotten itself mired in countless wars after the development of this fighter, it would've had a much better chance to evolve and keep producing newer aircraft and who knows where things would've been by now. Certainly some relevant pertinence to the analogy he was making, even given that China is way way way ahead of that starter stage he was referring to with the 3 examples. But that was part of his eventual point.

The Helwan HA-300 (Arabic: حلوان ٣٠٠‎) was a single-engine, delta-wing, light supersonic interceptor aircraft developed in Egypt during the 1960s. It was designed by the German aircraft designer Willy Messerschmitt.

At various stages, Spain and India were involved in the development program. Spain was financing two projects, the HA-200 and the Hispano HA-300, but cancelled the HA-300 project before a prototype was built due to overruns. Egypt then took over financing, and the program was transferred to Egypt where both it and its engine would be made, and where the aircraft was successfully flown. Near the end of the program, India began financing the development of the E-300 engine for use in the Indian HF-24 Marut jet fighter.

The HA-300 was an ambitious and costly project for Egypt, at a time when it was seeking to expand both its civilian and defense aviation industry. Six aircraft had entered service before the project was terminated in 1969.

National origin Egypt
Manufacturer Egyptian General Aero Organisation
Designer Willy Messerschmitt
First flight 7 March 1964

HA-300_side.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helwan_HA-300
 
.
Well done. Someone who actually bothered to read the pertinent portions of the article to understand what the author was actually saying instead of just seeing the 3 countries mentioned and then ignorantly laughing. And coming from someone who's supposedly a teacher somewhere is even more surprising. But actually not after witnessing the way the discussion is controlled on this thread, it doesn't surprise me at all. It's actually much more disappointing than anything else.
...


Indeed interesting that you bash me for not having read that report - a plain wrong assumption - and not that reporg , which is based more on political bias than on facts.

To assume the J-20 was developed alone as a polotical prestige project and must therefore fail is wrong since it completely ignores certain important facts. Why does he ignore China's industrial base and its experience in developing other types before like the J-10 for example? And exactly this is where this reports fails: it equals the J-20 as China's first attempt to develop a fighter with these other ones.

And also to say the J-20 is in prototype phase only ignores all operational ones delivered to now already three units and the fact that several are using the WS-10.

As such your conclusion my post as a teacher would be a disappointed is nothing against your pathetic failure to notice what the author realy wanted and where he failed.

But anyone is entitled to have its own opinion.
 
.
Drawing conclusions based on what happened to these few countries very much related to China's development of stealth fighters is a misrepresentation of the actual reality. There is no misinterpretation to what the author and the US Naval College are trying to say, both are just underestimating or belittle China.
 
. .
Indeed interesting that you bash me for not having read that report - a plain wrong assumption - and not that reporg , which is based more on political bias than on facts.

To assume the J-20 was developed alone as a polotical prestige project and must therefore fail is wrong since it completely ignores certain important facts. Why does he ignore China's industrial base and its experience in developing other types before like the J-10 for example? And exactly this is where this reports fails: it equals the J-20 as China's first attempt to develop a fighter with these other ones.

It actually does mention China's successful productions and not by specifically mentioning the J-10, but this is what it said which essentially means the J-10.

Second: China’s development of jet fighters has been uneven. It has made tremendous strides in indigenous aviation design in recent years; yet, to date, its frontline operational fighters still rely exclusively on Russian-built jet engines.123


The whole point of that article was to show that a full, indigenous capability to produce a completely indigenous fighter much include the engines as well as lack the issues that cause the failure of the 3 examples of Argentina, Egypt and India (the latter actually was more of a success, really, rather than a failure but eventually was to be considered a failed project unfortunately despite the Indian Merut going into production and lasting 2 decades! It just fell short of mission assigned designs. And that's it, really. It wasn't comparing those 3 failures with China's success whatsoever and that's where you went with it.

Out of the 3, the Indian project was the most successful and so there is a correlation with the Chinese aviation industry despite China's inarguable success to date.

In reality, the content of that essay shows more of an inclination that China is more or less much closer to the big dogs, i.e. the US, Russia, France & the UK, all of whom have successfully built their own engines to go with their own jets. So the article has a lot of merit.

And also to say the J-20 is in prototype phase only ignores all operational ones delivered to now already three units and the fact that several are using the WS-10.

All militarily advanced countries would consider what China has produced so far as prototypes simply because it hasn't produced an indigenous engine to complete the entire package. That's it! Whether it's fair or not, that's the way it is. To be called a successful, indigenously built fighter jet in the eyes of US military analyst (in this case), if the ENTIRE package is not complete, then it's simply a prototype. That might sound unfair or whatever (and I personally don't agree with it) but it is what it is. And the fact that two are flying with WS-10 engines means they're still in the early phases of testing.

As such your conclusion my post as a teacher would be a disappointed is nothing against your pathetic failure to notice what the author realy wanted and where he failed.

But anyone is entitled to have its own opinion.

You basically mocked it and like someone else said, it's pretty obvious why you do it but I'm not going to repeat it again since it's time to move on. I think you've had enough criticism for now. And "my pathetic failure to notice what the author really wanted and where he failed" is just a jab back from you, lol, it's ok by me. You can attack me but maybe this is why you fail to understand the concept of "discussions" as is in the title of the thread? So it's better to throw out a couple of slap happy emoticons and call it a day? Instead of breaking down the important points of the article, no, that's not permitted as per your rules, right?

Or is it the fact that there can't be any criticism whatsoever? Is that what you're saying? There can't be any challenges from anyone out there and if there is, everyone here must laugh at it and ridicule it and its content because we all must suck up to anything and everything posted about the great Chinese J-20? While many of us actually acknowledge the incredible success of Chinese aviation (especially the J-20,) we also look at the criticisms and try to determine if it is valid or not. We don't just simply sheep along...

The word ‘close coupled‘ implies an interaction between the canard and the wing typically to generate lift. The Rafale and the J20 both are close coupled designs. But weirdly the J20 designers coupled the canard with a high mounted wing, while the Rafale has mid mounted wing. This design choice for the J20 further illustrates my point, the J20 is designed to carry large payload for long range undetected penetration into contested airspace. It wasn’t designed for close combat ..period.

I actually brought up the dihedral positioning of the canards on this thread about a year ago or more. I think we were also talking about whether they were used as speed brakes as well, but we discussed the diherdral position of the canards on the J-20 (not focusing much at the time that the wings were anhedral) and I was actually interested in learning more about why they positioned the canards that way, regardless if it was based on a close-coupled design or not. Perhaps it doesn't matter since we know the Rafale's canards are close-coupled for the specific reason of controlling the airflow over the main wings. But the J-20's wings are anhedral like you mentioned which makes the J-20's delta/canard combination a very interesting and quite unique design. Looking at the EFT and how the canards are pushed much more forward to the nose and act much more as stabilizers than close-coupled canards, but taking a close look at them, they're also anhedral on the EFT, the opposite of the J-20's design. I think it's just all about the complex and ultimate result of aerodynamic testing for each aircraft respectively.
 
.
In my opinion you were trolling with the objective of pandering to your Chinese followers. The author of the feature you posted OWEN L SIRRS is an adjunct professor of cultural and regional studies at the University of Montana. Mr Sirrs has nothing to do with the USAF University - there is no such thing.
Is this really necessary? I thought mods were supposed to set the standards for others ... instead of going around hurling blatant accusations. @Deino is very respected around here.
 
. . . . .
I read somewhere somebody commended her as an attractive reporter… which I concur and also think the pilot is handsome.

Any video of this scene made available in public?

This might be the interview in 2018 when Bai Long finally declared that he could fly J-20.

I think the PLA are probably exploiting Bai Long as a spokes person since he is very good looking for a Chinese pilot.
 
.
This might be the interview in 2018 when Bai Long finally declared that he could fly J-20.

I think the PLA are probably exploiting Bai Long as a spokes person since he is very good looking for a Chinese pilot.


And given his name a very appropriate one since he's a dragon flying a dragon!

Simply an amazing image of a PLAAF J-20.

By the way does anyone have any news concerning the second formed operational frontline unit after the 9th Air Brigade (Anshan with the 1st Air Brigade in the NTC was rumored) and even more where are all these WS-10C-equipped J-20s?
View attachment 643468


Oh come on :mad: ... is there a certain reason why you once again copy&paste one of my own posts which was just posted a few minutes ago without a source or credit given! Not that I would or could demand credit for the image, but isn't that simply stupid? :hitwall: :crazy:

upload_2020-6-21_15-0-48.png
 
.
And given his name a very appropriate one since he's a dragon flying a dragon!




Oh come on :mad: ... is there a certain reason why you once again copy&paste one of my own posts which was just posted a few minutes ago without a source or credit given! Not that I would or could demand credit for the image, but isn't that simply stupid? :hitwall: :crazy:

View attachment 643469
My mistake , removed it
 
. .

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom