Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[Rank]

View attachment 561549

Raptor looks sleek and balance

 

[Deino]

 

[siegecrossbow]

View attachment 568663

Where did you get this? First time I've seen a six-plane formation.

 

[Deino]

Where did you get this? First time I've seen a six-plane formation.

Via this Tweet

https://twitter.com/x/status/1148907257368702976

 

[Deino]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1149612476008321024

And reportedly from today:

 

[siegecrossbow]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1149612476008321024

And reportedly from today:

View attachment 568838

Parade training?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Raptor looks sleek and balance

But the big splitter makes a very big radar signature. J-20 is much stealthier to radar due to revolutionary DSI technology.

 

[vi-va]

Raptor looks sleek and balance

Agree, but just looks like so. F-22 design is almost 2 decades ago. J-20 and F-35 benefit the latest technology, RCS is smaller compared with F-22.

 

[gambit]

F-22 design is almost 2 decades ago.

The SR-71 is 53 yrs old. And no one has anything equivalent.

J-20 and F-35 benefit the latest technology, RCS is smaller compared with F-22.

Really...??? You have any hard data to back that up?

 

[055_destroyer]

The SR-71 is 53 yrs old. And no one has anything equivalent.

Current modern warfare need no such dinosaur. Why bother building one?

 

[vi-va]

The SR-71 is 53 yrs old. And no one has anything equivalent.


Really...??? You have any hard data to back that up?

No, no one has F-22 data neither. But it doesn't matter. Because if China can't beat F-22 which was designed 20 years ago, what's the point of J-20 project?

If USA can't design a fighter better than F-22, why not keep producing F-22?

RCS control is all about material technology and shape for now. No magic. You don't even need supercomputing to get a better design than F-22. A supercomputer ranking 500 nowadays is way much faster than ranking 1 20 years ago.

No one will copy SR-71. Satellites can do much better job without any risk, why bother?

 

[ozranger]

No, no one has F-22 data neither. But it doesn't matter. Because if China can't beat F-22 which was designed 20 years ago, what's the point of J-20 project?

If USA can't design a fighter better than F-22, why not keep producing F-22?

RCS control is all about material technology and shape for now. No magic. You don't even need supercomputing to get a better design than F-22. A supercomputer ranking 500 nowadays is way much faster than ranking 1 20 years ago.

No one will copy SR-71. Satellites can do much better job without any risk, why bother?

The so called hack into F-22 or F-35 secret is purely propaganda and cheap excuse for losing a game. No real professionals would believe it, including those Americans.

However the good thing is, average Americans really buy this kind of bullshit, and then comfortably stay in their illusion. The helps other countries overtake.

 

[gambit]

Current modern warfare need no such dinosaur. Why bother building one?

And who really defined 'current modern' warfare? Your China?

No, no one has F-22 data neither.

We do.

But it doesn't matter. Because if China can't beat F-22 which was designed 20 years ago, what's the point of J-20 project?

You have the simplistic notion that newer must be better. History of engineering of any field is filled with examples where that notion is not typical. And aviation is the most dangerous field to experiment. The B-52 is older than many of its pilots and today, there is no equivalent. Same for the venerable C-130.

If USA can't design a fighter better than F-22, why not keep producing F-22?

Who says we cannot?

RCS control is all about material technology and shape for now. No magic.

No one said it is 'magic'. The use of the word 'magic' means you really have no understanding of the idea of 'stealth' in the first place.

You don't even need supercomputing to get a better design than F-22.

Wrong. But in truth, it is technically feasible to design an F-22 equivalent with the slide rule. Just will take you about 50 yrs.

A supercomputer ranking 500 nowadays is way much faster than ranking 1 20 years ago.

Fine. But that still does not negate the need for a supercomputer level capability to produce an F-117 equivalent, let alone the F-22. If what you argued is so casual, we would be seeing the F-22 equivalent flying all over. Yet we do not.

No one will copy SR-71. Satellites can do much better job without any risk, why bother?

There are limitations to satellites. Look them up.

Overall, looks like you really do not know what you are talking about.

 

[Deino]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1150337620867784704

 

[kungfugymnast]

No, no one has F-22 data neither. But it doesn't matter. Because if China can't beat F-22 which was designed 20 years ago, what's the point of J-20 project?

If USA can't design a fighter better than F-22, why not keep producing F-22?

RCS control is all about material technology and shape for now. No magic. You don't even need supercomputing to get a better design than F-22. A supercomputer ranking 500 nowadays is way much faster than ranking 1 20 years ago.

No one will copy SR-71. Satellites can do much better job without any risk, why bother?

Turbofan powered fighter jet technology has already reached its max level, there's no further progress like end of ww2 fighters as the next stage will involve something totally different either drone or hypersonic capable fighters.

In military world, major super powers don't share technology and would rely on reverse engineering done on captured, shot down or bought enemy machines. Export version machines bought by customers such as Japan, UK, Germans will secretly reverse engineer on their newly bought F35s. US itself can't build 5th generation chobm armor fitted on Challenger 2, their Abrams with 3rd generation chobm armor are fitted by British. If British became US enemy, Americans will reverse engineer chobm gen 3 armor and that's all they could do, still inferior to challenger 2 chobm.

US became top mainly because they had hired the most engineers and scientists since ww2 from Britain, Germany, Russia, etc. Also they obtained almost every Russian equipments captured or bought from other countries such as mig29 from East Germany, Moldova and Su30 from Ukraine.

China hired numbers of engineers and scientists that were once working for US military manufacturers that were downsizing or closing down when US no longer has high demand for war machines especially aviation.

When Lockheed Martin.became dominant sole military aircraft manufacturer, they became corrupted building overpriced fighter jets with unreliable parts yet expensive to replace like BMW to milk cash out of US military. That's why the US didn't place high numbers of f22.

And who really defined 'current modern' warfare? Your China?


We do.


You have the simplistic notion that newer must be better. History of engineering of any field is filled with examples where that notion is not typical. And aviation is the most dangerous field to experiment. The B-52 is older than many of its pilots and today, there is no equivalent. Same for the venerable C-130.


Who says we cannot?


No one said it is 'magic'. The use of the word 'magic' means you really have no understanding of the idea of 'stealth' in the first place.


Wrong. But in truth, it is technically feasible to design an F-22 equivalent with the slide rule. Just will take you about 50 yrs.


Fine. But that still does not negate the need for a supercomputer level capability to produce an F-117 equivalent, let alone the F-22. If what you argued is so casual, we would be seeing the F-22 equivalent flying all over. Yet we do not.


There are limitations to satellites. Look them up.

Overall, looks like you really do not know what you are talking about.

F22 is surely the best fighter today despite heavy maintenance. Its stealth is better than F35 of course.

The F35, I don't think US would allow the same stealth materials fitted on the export version F35. Most likely with toned down materials like the avionics fitted in export version F35. NATO despite being US allies, they too are military manufacturers and are direct competitors to US. EF2000, Rafale are answers to US F16. They are more likely to replicate F35 stealth, engine, avionics to come up with their equivalent tomorrow.

As for the J20, it all depends on how well they could steal tech from US to beat the F22. J20 stealth tech derived from F117 stealth materials. There's rumor that B2 engineers were hired to assist in J20 development so it could have somewhere close stealth capability. If war happened, both J20 and F22 will still get into miles just before visual range engagement.