What's new

Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

So the issue is not the canards but rather that the J-20 has eight major flight control structures while the F-22 and F-35 has six.
You troll theories are selected and based on your favor.
Flight control, T-50 has 14
38051483056_5a8da8139d_o.jpg


F-22 has 12:
38105007861_bbb81636df_o.jpg


J-20 has 10:
38051483506_d501d5fc2f_h.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
You troll theories are selected and based on your favor.
Flight control, T-50 has 14

F-22 has 12:

J-20 has 10:
Wrong. We are talking about MAJOR structures.

The wing is a major structure. Flaps and ailerons are subordinates and they are already contributors to the wing's RCS measurement.

I doubt that you came up with that on your own. So wherever forum you got that from, tell him/her he/she is wrong.

Finally, for the J-20, missing are the count for the two ventral fins, which would raise the count to 12. :lol:
 
Last edited:
. . . . .
So finally the data is revealed, that J20 is 1.2Meter shorter than an ordinary Su-27 series fighter...

The mystery size of this stealth fighter is showed to the world,
and obviously it's a typical size fighter, just a little longer than the 19Meter F-22
Conclusion is the size of J-20 is between F-22 and Su-27
 
.
Finally no longer an estimation based on a grainy satellite image. But I’m sure @Asoka will again present us a theory why the J-20 is still about 22-23 m long. :-)

Dude, are we sure what plane is behind J-20? And are we sure it's wingspan is 14.7m? From the picture, I know it's wingspan is a lot bigger than J-20. I am doubtful it's wingspan is 14.7m. And I am doubtful it's J-16.

To be absolutely sure, leaving no room for doubt, that this plane's wingspan is 14.7m seems premature to me.

I used Mr. Deino's previous estimate that J-15's wingspan is 14.7m, and from that I estimated J-20's wingspan is 14.05m. And from that I calculated the length of J-20 from Nose to Nozzle is 21.8m and overall length is 22.8m
maxresdefault (8).jpg
.

Using the estimate of J-20's nose to nozzle length of 20.185m, it still leaves J-20's fuselage to be 3.485m longer than F-22.

This was my lower end estimate of their difference.

I had stated before that their nose to nozzle body length difference to be 3.5-4.5m. And then revised the estimate to be 5m, after estimated the J-20's wingspan to be 14.05m and nose to nozzle length of 21.8m.

There are internet references saying J-16's wingspan to be 14.7m. I simply don't know where they got that from, or how they did the calculation. Simply Assume J-16 to be exactly the same dimension in wingspan, as the original Su-27 is one huge assumption.

There is a report saying the wingspan of Su-35 to be 15.3 m (50.2 ft)
http://www.aviatia.net/f-35-lightning-ii-vs-su-35/

The Flankers behind the J-20 might be the new Su-35. From the picture, it seems it's wingspan is substantially wider than J-20. There is little doubt in my mind, that this difference is a lot bigger when J-15's wingspan is compared to J-20, in the previous satellite picture.

de6fcb30340eadcafe42a2e3a8342c89--sukhoi-su--aviation-art.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
@Asoka

Why again riding a dead horse?? Is Your ego so important??

Come on. All Your images You were using for Your calculation were neither in an exact position (aka flat or straight from top), they were distorted and most often heavily blurred. Therefore none were really suitable to estimate an exact dimension.

Now we finally have a decent image. Close to straight from top and again - like my calculation You dismissed so much - side-by-side to a Flanker with a known length.

So I agree with You - and when I'm home will do my own calculation - we need to do that precisely but You were once again proven wrong. Your "22-23m-theory" crashed again similar to Your engine-theories.

Just admit that fact and then back to the topic.

Deino
 
.
@Asoka

Why again riding a dead horse?? Is Your ego so important??

Come on. All Your images You were using for Your calculation were neither in an exact position (aka flat or straight from top), they were distorted and most often heavily blurred. Therefore none were really suitable to estimate an exact dimension.

Now we finally have a decent image. Close to straight from top and again - like my calculation You dismissed so much - side-by-side to a Flanker with a known length.

So I agree with You - and when I'm home will do my own calculation - we need to do that precisely but You were once again proven wrong. Your "22-23m-theory" crashed again similar to Your engine-theories.

Just admit that fact and then back to the topic.

Deino

"side-by-side to a Flanker with a known length."

Not really. It's dimensions are far from proven.

I am simply questioning the identity of the flanker behind the J-20, and the statement that it's wingspan is 14.7m.

Why are you, or anybody else, so sure it's 14.7m?

Don't evade or ignore this simple and honest question, Mr. Deino!

You can go home and do your calculations, but to simply assume that flanker's wingspan to be 14.7m, is not serious.

It's one BIG assumption.

I have accepted J-15's wingspan to be 14.7m, which is the same as the early Su-27, because, J-15 was directly based on the Su-33, which was based on the early Su-27.

There is no reason to believe that dimensions of the J-16 or Su-35 could not have grown or changed, after 40 years of evolution.

I state again that those Flankers behind the J-20s could be the new Su-35.
 
Last edited:
. . .
If you don't know anything about J16, just remember it's a two-seater by observing the length of canopy in the picture.

it does look like, it might be a two seater.
 
.
...
I am simply questioning the identity of the flanker behind the J-20, and the statement that it's wingspan is 14.7m.
Why are you, or anybody else, so sure it's 14.7m?

....


Like I said ! Your EGO is so much on hyper-mode, it even excels Your +210kN theory.

Come on dude: The J-16 is a Flanker from tip to toe including its length, which is well known by all sources including the manufactor's.

YES, I know You surely will claim that SAC changed the size by simply enlarging the Flanker b y say a factor of 1:1.2, so that in fact the span of the J-16 is 17m wide ... that surely would explain everything. :hitwall::crazy:

Honestly, You are such a crazy, stubborn ignorant fan-boy; You would probably sell Your son Amadeus via e-bay if it would help proving Your claims.

Deino
 
.
Assuming that Flanker's wingspan is 14.7m. I used it to find the following. I first resized the picture by 200% so it's easier to work with.

Flanker's Wingspan 14.7m (Assumed)
Nose to Nozzle: 20.5m
Overall length: 22.5m (The tail boom sticks past the engine by 2m)

J-20's wingspan: 13m (Based on this picture and the estimate that this Flanker's wingspan is 14.7m)
Nose to Nozzle: 20.5m
overall length: 21.5m

Previously, I used the estimate that the J-20's wingspan was 14m, which results in the lengths to be 1m longer as well.


1221 (1).jpg


"I know You surely will claim that SAC changed the size by simply enlarging the Flanker b y say a factor of 1:1.2, so that in fact the span of the J-16 is 17m wide"

Show me an authoritative statement from the SAC about J-16's wingspan, or show me some calculations did by someone, that J-16's wingspan is 14.7m, the same as the original Su-27.

This is a fair request.

I did not suggested J-16's wingspan is 17m. I have provided a report, which stated it's wingspan around 15.3m

"Honestly, You are such a crazy, stubborn ignorant fan-boy;"

I would take that as an insult. I insulted that pakistani guy once, and you banned for two weeks. While that guy insulted me dozens of time, and called me all kinds of names, and you did NOTHING.

Show some fairness, for god's sake. You know why many people, here, don't respect you and want to get rid of you as Moderator?

This is one of the reason.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom