China's fifth-generation fighter to fly 'soon'

[lockh33d]

Mr. elder, you know very well whats i am referring to, but as i said

before, your hatred blinded your mind. No point for further discussing,

To you, anything from China=crap, happy now, my dear elder.

A little friendly advice, have a good sleep if you can.

Persistently calling him "Mr. Elder" is going to piss him off in the long run lol... He's going to rage on you soon, be careful... lol. Don't you know we have to respect our elders buddy lol? Besides, he's not THAT old if he hasn't seen active service in the war.

 

[grey boy 2]

Persistently calling him "Mr. Elder" is going to piss him off in the long run lol... He's going to rage on you soon, be careful... lol. Don't you know we have to respect our elders buddy lol? Besides, he's not THAT old if he hasn't seen active service in the war.

No, brother, i have a lot of respect to elders, i was told by one of his

post he is an elder, and i am a kid, I even invite him to be my PS-3

play mate since we both live in US.

We only have a little different when he Poke Fun at us, nothing

personal for my part, but not sure about him...?

 

[gambit]

Persistently calling him "Mr. Elder" is going to piss him off in the long run lol... He's going to rage on you soon, be careful... lol. Don't you know we have to respect our elders buddy lol? Besides, he's not THAT old if he hasn't seen active service in the war.

You betcha...But watch how it is done properly.

Let us take a look at this claim...

Shaping is the easiest part of low observability tech.

Now the claimant offered not a shred of credibly technical support for his claim but expect the readers to accept his claim blindly.

I propose to the readers that it is not so easy.

The above is a full size F-22 under EM anechoic chamber testing.

Here is a brief explanation of what is anechoic chamber...

Anechoic chamber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An anechoic chamber is a shielded room designed to attenuate sound or electromagnetic energy. Anechoic chambers were originally used in the context of acoustic (sound) to trap the reflections of a room, but more recently, anechoic chambers have also been used to provide a shielded environment for radio frequency (RF) and microwaves.

The main reason for an anechoic chamber is to absorb reflections, audio or EM. Absorb = attenuate. To properly test the fidelity of a speaker, we must eliminate other audio sources. But if we enclose the speaker in a chamber, then we are faced with echoes off the chamber walls when the speaker is active. So we line the walls of the chamber with absorbant to radically reduce any reflections, leaving any audio that we hear or measure to be as true coming from the speaker as possible, usually %99.999 true.

Radiation absorbent material

The RAM is designed and shaped to absorb incident RF radiation (also known as non-ionising radiation), as effectively as possible, from as many incident directions as possible. The more effective the RAM is the less will be the level of reflected RF radiation. Many measurements in electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) and antenna radiation patterns require that spurious signals arising from the test setup, including reflections, are negligible to avoid the risk of causing measurement errors and ambiguities.

Same idea for testing the RCS figure of the F-22. If we transmit a radar pulse at the body, any reflections off the walls will be statistically insignificant, combine those statistically insignificant signals with the one that actually came off the aircraft and we have as true an RCS figure as currently possible.

The Benefield anechoic facility at Edwards AFB in California is the world's largest EM anechoic testing facility.

Edwards Air Force Base - Media Search

Benefield Anechoic Facility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The largest platforms tested at the BAF have been the B-52 and C-17 aircraft. The BAF supports testing of other types of systems such as spacecraft, tanks, satellites, air defense systems, drones and armored vehicles.

In 2003, BMW tested levels of electromagnetic interference on then-upcoming 2004 models of the 530i, 545i and debut model, 645i.

From the above sources the readers can see the many types of bodies that can be tested, from small ground vehicles to fighters to bombers.

It is not enough to simply test individual parts of an aircraft in a small EM anechoic chamber, add up the figures and call it good. An aircraft is a complex body and a radar pulse is a wave that will exhibit different behaviors on different surfaces, planar and curves. To know the true RCS of a body, a full body EM test must be performed and because an aircraft is a complex body, it must be tested at different angles. The transmitters (threat sites) can be moved to any location inside the chamber but with the turntable it is unnecessary to move them.

The turntable is about 80ft, or 25 meters, in diameter. Enough to support the wheelbase of any aircraft, even large bombers and cargo. Remember, we are testing a complex body. The turntable can rotate AIR SUSPENDED bodies at 0.8 deg/sec and platform support bodies at 0.1-0.6 deg/sec, allowing us to change target aspect angle with respect to the transmitters, with 0.1 deg positioning accuracy.

The threat generators can generate surface, sea or airborne type threat signals. At the same time if desired. Like the SR-71 whose true capabilities are still secret, these threat generators can create SEVERAL HUNDREDS threat signals SIMULTANEOUSLY. These signals can be stable or modulated, as amplitude or frequency, aka 'agility'. Other forms of signal agility are pulse repetition intervals (PRI) and pulse widths (PW). The more complex the threats the better understanding we have about the body. The threat generators can use all known scan patterns such as raster, conical or circular.

Conical scanning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Conical scanning is a system used in early radar units to improve their accuracy, as well as making it easier to properly steer the antenna to point at a target.

The above source is an example of conical scanning which is often used by missiles in their terminal chase mode. Benefield can simulate very complex EM threat scenarios that a US 'stealth' aircraft can face that can affect its RCS. The chamber can be used to test an aircraft's threat warning receiver set (RWR) as to its accuracy in estimating threat angle-of-arrival (AoA).

But wait...There is more...

Once the body has been tested in isolation, it should (not must) be tested with full environmental influences. The above image is of a full size A-12/SR-71 under radar range testing. Notice it is upside down and missing the vertical stabs. There can be many reasons as to why but that is beside the point.

Now the readers can judge for themselves as to whose claim is more credible, the Chinese claim with no supporting evidences that...

Shaping is the easiest part of low observability tech.

Or the American claim that it is not so easy and that we invested a lot of money to create our F-22s and F-35s. Of course, the Chinese participants of this forum would say that it is easy but it is a Chinese secret.

 

[lockh33d]

You betcha...But watch how it is done properly.

Let us take a look at this claim...Now the claimant offered not a shred of credibly technical support for his claim but expect the readers to accept his claim blindly.

I propose to the readers that it is not so easy.

The above is a full size F-22 under EM anechoic chamber testing.

Here is a brief explanation of what is anechoic chamber...

Anechoic chamber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The main reason for an anechoic chamber is to absorb reflections, audio or EM. Absorb = attenuate. To properly test the fidelity of a speaker, we must eliminate other audio sources. But if we enclose the speaker in a chamber, then we are faced with echoes off the chamber walls when the speaker is active. So we line the walls of the chamber with absorbant to radically reduce any reflections, leaving any audio that we hear or measure to be as true coming from the speaker as possible, usually %99.999 true.


Same idea for testing the RCS figure of the F-22. If we transmit a radar pulse at the body, any reflections off the walls will be statistically insignificant, combine those statistically insignificant signals with the one that actually came off the aircraft and we have as true an RCS figure as currently possible.

The Benefield anechoic facility at Edwards AFB in California is the world's largest EM anechoic testing facility.

Edwards Air Force Base - Media Search

Benefield Anechoic Facility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


From the above sources the readers can see the many types of bodies that can be tested, from small ground vehicles to fighters to bombers.

It is not enough to simply test individual parts of an aircraft in a small EM anechoic chamber, add up the figures and call it good. An aircraft is a complex body and a radar pulse is a wave that will exhibit different behaviors on different surfaces, planar and curves. To know the true RCS of a body, a full body EM test must be performed and because an aircraft is a complex body, it must be tested at different angles. The transmitters (threat sites) can be moved to any location inside the chamber but with the turntable it is unnecessary to move them.

The turntable is about 80ft, or 25 meters, in diameter. Enough to support the wheelbase of any aircraft, even large bombers and cargo. Remember, we are testing a complex body. The turntable can rotate AIR SUSPENDED bodies at 0.8 deg/sec and platform support bodies at 0.1-0.6 deg/sec, allowing us to change target aspect angle with respect to the transmitters, with 0.1 deg positioning accuracy.

The threat generators can generate surface, sea or airborne type threat signals. At the same time if desired. Like the SR-71 whose true capabilities are still secret, these threat generators can create SEVERAL HUNDREDS threat signals SIMULTANEOUSLY. These signals can be stable or modulated, as amplitude or frequency, aka 'agility'. Other forms of signal agility are pulse repetition intervals (PRI) and pulse widths (PW). The more complex the threats the better understanding we have about the body. The threat generators can use all known scan patterns such as raster, conical or circular.

Conical scanning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The above source is an example of conical scanning which is often used by missiles in their terminal chase mode. Benefield can simulate very complex EM threat scenarios that a US 'stealth' aircraft can face that can affect its RCS. The chamber can be used to test an aircraft's threat warning receiver set (RWR) as to its accuracy in estimating threat angle-of-arrival (AoA).

But wait...There is more...

Once the body has been tested in isolation, it should (not must) be tested with full environmental influences. The above image is of a full size A-12/SR-71 under radar range testing. Notice it is upside down and missing the vertical stabs. There can be many reasons as to why but that is beside the point.

Now the readers can judge for themselves as to whose claim is more credible, the Chinese claim with no supporting evidences that...Or the American claim that it is not so easy and that we invested a lot of money to create our F-22s and F-35s. Of course, the Chinese participants of this forum would say that it is easy but it is a Chinese secret.

I'm sorry but I'm not, and I can't, contend your point. If I had the know how, of course I'd enjoy having this debate with you. Too bad I haven't started college yet so I'm missing many vital basics in understanding. On the other hand however, when you say "to attenuate a signal," that means to reduce signal power, the radar signal strength in this case, with more background "noise." That has nothing to do with the shape of the aircraft, absorption is more to do with chemistry of the aircraft, rather than the angling. I believe the shape of the aircraft is more to do with the reflection, rather than the attenuation of incoming waves which hit the body.

 

[gambit]

I'm sorry but I'm not, and I can't, contend your point. If I had the know how, of course I'd enjoy having this debate with you. Too bad I haven't started college yet so I'm missing many vital basics in understanding. On the other hand however, when you say "to attenuate a signal," that means to reduce signal power, the radar signal strength in this case, with more background "noise." That has nothing to do with the shape of the aircraft, absorption is more to do with chemistry of the aircraft, rather than the angling. I believe the shape of the aircraft is more to do with the reflection, rather than the attenuation of incoming waves which hit the body.

You did not even bother to read the PUBLIC sources that I presented...

Anechoic chamber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pyramidal RAM attenuates signal by two effects: scattering and absorption. Scattering can occur both coherently, when reflected waves are in-phase but directed away from the receiver, or incoherently where waves are picked up by the receiver but are out of phase and thus have lower signal strength. This incoherent scattering also occurs within the foam structure, with the suspended carbon particles promoting destructive interference. Internal scattering can result in as much as 10dB of attenuation. Meanwhile, the pyramid shapes are cut at angles that maximize the number of bounces a wave makes within the structure. With each bounce, the wave loses energy to the foam material and thus exits with lower signal strength. [4]

An alternative type of RAM comprises flat plates of ferrite material, in the form of flat tiles fixed to all interior surfaces of the chamber. This type has a smaller effective frequency range than the pyramidal RAM and is designed to be fixed to good conductive surfaces. It is generally easier to fit and more durable than the pyramidal type RAM but is less effective at higher frequencies. Its performance might however be quite adequate if tests are limited to lower frequencies (ferrite plates have a damping curve that makes them most effective between 30-1000MHz)

The goal of body shaping is to reduce (or eliminate) any off-body, not off-chamber-walls, reflections back to THE DIRECTION OF THE TRANSMISSION, which is any of the three main antennas, aka 'threat generators', inside the chamber. The RAM inside the chamber is designed to affect only signals that reflected off the chamber walls, not off the body itself. The reasoning here is that we want to determine, as true as possible, the signal strength that reflect off the body and the chamber itself can contribute to a false measurement.

If the body shaping is theoretically perfect, then we should have absolutely off-body zero signals, as far as the source transmitter is concerned, because the body shaping is designed to reflect away from source direction. But the other two antennas would pick up those reflections and each would constitute a bi-static triangle, which is another issue.

This is applicable to audio signals as well and that is why there are...er...audio anechoic chamber?

But hey...Did you not say this from the previous page...??

...everything you wrote from your so called "many years of experience" turned out to be bollox,...

So may be you could consult with your sources...who are as highlighted below...

Yes I get my info from the CCP but NO I don't get it through the State media nor its propaganda. OK, just to stop your jibber jabber after this, members of my family were employed by the govt through out the decades, and know people well from different ministries throughout. Hence, some light has been shed on some military projects, but in very small detail.

As to why would the Americans spend so much money investing in something so 'bollox' as Benefield. After all, it is from a Chinese perspective that...

The difficulty for China is not the stealth, super sonic cruising design, but the engine still.

Shaping is the easiest part of low observability tech.

We have two Chinese members who, without credible technical support, claim that body shaping to reduce RCS is 'easy', when challenged, we have another Chinese member call that challenge 'bollox'. The readers can judge for themselves.

 

[lockh33d]

You did not even bother to read the PUBLIC sources that I presented...

Anechoic chamber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The goal of body shaping is to reduce (or eliminate) any off-body, not off-chamber-walls, reflections back to THE DIRECTION OF THE TRANSMISSION, which is any of the three main antennas, aka 'threat generators', inside the chamber. The RAM inside the chamber is designed to affect only signals that reflected off the chamber walls, not off the body itself. The reasoning here is that we want to determine, as true as possible, the signal strength that reflect off the body and the chamber itself can contribute to a false measurement.

If the body shaping is theoretically perfect, then we should have absolutely off-body zero signals, as far as the source transmitter is concerned, because the body shaping is designed to reflect away from source direction. But the other two antennas would pick up those reflections and each would constitute a bi-static triangle, which is another issue.

This is applicable to audio signals as well and that is why there are...er...audio anechoic chamber?

But hey...Did you not say this from the previous page...??


So may be you could consult with your sources...who are as highlighted below...

As to why would the Americans spend so much money investing in something so 'bollox' as Benefield. After all, it is from a Chinese perspective that...

We have two Chinese members who, without credible technical support, claim that body shaping to reduce RCS is 'easy', when challenged, we have another Chinese member call that challenge 'bollox'. The readers can judge for themselves.

Ahhh, you've mistaken me. I'm saying a lot of your speculation based on Western tech and reports are rather bollox, not the tech itself because it's been proven in existing aircraft. What I mean is, "How do you know that the Chinese have incorporated THESE measures, are there not alternative routes? If not, how can you prove so? As in the case with the DF-21, sir, the issues you addressed were correct, but thinking outside the context helps and would have resolved all of your understanding incapability. Lastly, like I said, I'm not a fan on quoting on the large scale so I'm just going to re-type, I don't get in depth details, only the so called "on the surface info." As for the DF-21, I know very well myself how the system operates overall and I know its capabilities. Challenge me with as many sources to prove me wrong as you like, Captain, but I'll leave my words here.

 

[gambit]

Ahhh, you've mistaken me. I'm saying a lot of your speculation based on Western tech and reports are rather bollox, not the tech itself because it's been proven in existing aircraft. What I mean is, "How do you know that the Chinese have incorporated THESE measures, are there not alternative routes? If not, how can you prove so? As in the case with the DF-21, sir, the issues you addressed were correct, but thinking outside the context helps and would have resolved all of your understanding incapability. Lastly, like I said, I'm not a fan on quoting on the large scale so I'm just going to re-type, I don't get in depth details, only the so called "on the surface info." As for the DF-21, I know very well myself how the system operates overall and I know its capabilities. Challenge me with as many sources to prove me wrong as you like, Captain, but I'll leave my words here.

Translation: "Trust me. I know 'people' and I have 'connections'."

 

[grey boy 2]

You did not even bother to read the PUBLIC sources that I presented...

Anechoic chamber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The goal of body shaping is to reduce (or eliminate) any off-body, not off-chamber-walls, reflections back to THE DIRECTION OF THE TRANSMISSION, which is any of the three main antennas, aka 'threat generators', inside the chamber. The RAM inside the chamber is designed to affect only signals that reflected off the chamber walls, not off the body itself. The reasoning here is that we want to determine, as true as possible, the signal strength that reflect off the body and the chamber itself can contribute to a false measurement.

If the body shaping is theoretically perfect, then we should have absolutely off-body zero signals, as far as the source transmitter is concerned, because the body shaping is designed to reflect away from source direction. But the other two antennas would pick up those reflections and each would constitute a bi-static triangle, which is another issue.

This is applicable to audio signals as well and that is why there are...er...audio anechoic chamber?

But hey...Did you not say this from the previous page...??


So may be you could consult with your sources...who are as highlighted below...

As to why would the Americans spend so much money investing in something so 'bollox' as Benefield. After all, it is from a Chinese perspective that...

We have two Chinese members who, without credible technical support, claim that body shaping to reduce RCS is 'easy', when challenged, we have another Chinese member call that challenge 'bollox'. The readers can judge for themselves.

Mr. dear elder professional, so after all your professional lectures,

Some questions, i like to know from your humble opinions;

As China had officially announced our Stealth fighter will be ready in ten years, true or fiction ?

China expects fifth generation fighter in 10 years

Or may be you think China had the records of reveal some weapons

which we are not sure can be done ?

Points taken, not easy to make a 5 gen. stealth fighter, but are you

indicating China don't has the ability to make one ?

Whats the points for your argument ? you think you know more

about our ability than our government ?

Anyway, I already know you are on a mission to "Poke fun" more

than logical discussing, Good day, my dear senior professional.

 

[lockh33d]

Translation: "Trust me. I know 'people' and I have 'connections'."

Hmm, let me further translate it for people who don't live in the new age of English, as I incorporate slang on a regular basis.

Translation: Take my work if you want, I know "people" who have "connections."

Sir, you're not far off but you need to get back in touch with the new age, you can start off by getting off the pc and going outside to say a few "hello's" to people to regain your "touch."

I assure you, ghetto's have decreased exponentially and it's a much safer world than you'd expect compared to the 70-80's. People there are much more "amalgamated."

-Over and out

 

[Kuuba]

We have two Chinese members who, without credible technical support, claim that body shaping to reduce RCS is 'easy', when challenged, we have another Chinese member call that challenge 'bollox'. The readers can judge for themselves.

sorry for your reading. "easiest" doesn't equal to "easy". as far as know-how is not a problem (even we two know the principle method), it's not a problem.

is anechoic chamber a top secret that only almighty US knows? sorry, no. however, i do appreciate your effort and time.

old pics - chinese chamber:

 

[gambit]

sorry for your reading. "easiest" doesn't equal to "easy". as far as know-how is not a problem (even we two know the principle method), it's not a problem.

is anechoic chamber a top secret that only almighty US knows? sorry, no. however, i do appreciate your effort and time.

Buddy...I am willing to bet that you did not know something like an anechoic chamber exist before you make this absurd claim...

Shaping is the easiest part of low observability tech.

No...RF anechoic testing is not something unique to the US. Many countries know about the process and have testing facilities for them. However, because of the nature of EM radiation and how a radar signal behave on a surface, planar or curve, not every anechoic chamber is suitable for RCS measurement.

Here is a non-US example...

http://www.ursi.org/Proceedings/ProcGA02/papers/p0090.pdf

A MULTIPURPOSE WIDEBAND ANECHOIC CHAMBER
Chung Boon-Kuan(1), Prof. Dr. Chuah Hean-Teik(2)
(1) Multimedia University, Faculty of Engineering, 63100 Cyberjaya, MALAYSIA

MALAYSIA, got that?

Now what does the good professors has to say...

An increasing number of low-frequency (30 - 1000 MHz) anechoic and semi-anechoic test chambers have been designed and manufactured in recent years due to the rapid growth in multimedia and telecommunication industries. Products must meet both emission and immunity requirements of electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) regulations before they can be marketed. A fully anechoic chamber is commonly used to determine the immunity of products to impinging electromagnetic field. As for the emission limit, RF emissions from electronic products are referenced to measurements performed on an ideal open area test site (OATS) having a perfectly conducting infinite ground-plane. Thus, a semi-anechoic chamber in which the floor is not covered with wave absorbing materials is commonly used.

Anechoic chambers that are built specifically for EMC tests are usually not suitable for radar cross-section (RCS) and antenna measurements. Similarly a microwave anechoic chamber using pyramidal foam absorbers with thickness less than a meter is usually not suitable for EMC tests. In this project, an innovative technique has been used in the design of a multipurpose anechoic chamber to operate over a very wide frequency range from 30-MHz through 18-GHz. It can be used for EMC tests, antenna measurements, radar cross-section measurements, RF transceivers testing, calibration of scatterometer, and other electromagnetic research experiments. It is suitable for both industrial use and basic research.

Note the highlighted, clearly the professors are saying that just because one is capable of designing an EM anechoic chamber, one cannot just simply throw any object in there, let alone a full size aircraft, and blast away.

Pyramidal shape absorber is usually used for frequency range from 1-GHz to 40-GHz. Optimum performance of the electrically-thick foam absorber, with less than -60 dB reflectivity at normal incidence, is obtained by adjusting the carbon loading of the foam. For frequencies below 1-GHz, the required taper length of the pyramid will become too bulky and difficult to be installed in an anechoic chamber. To achieve small reflectivity using electrically-thin absorber, a different carbon loading for the foam pyramids must be used. This may give an optimum reflectivity of -20 dB for the 200 - 1000 MHz range [1], but it may not be optimum for higher frequencies where the typical applications are for antenna and radar cross-section measurements (which require much better quietness). On the other hand, ferrite tile or grid with a thickness of about 6-mm performs very well from 30 to 600 MHz but the reflectivity deteriorates rapidly as the frequency goes higher. In order to obtain an extremely wide operating frequency range from 30-MHz to 1-GHz, combination of pyramidal foam absorber on ferrite tile is necessary. This configuration is called a hybrid absorber. The matching of the material properties is very critical. For example, the taper length and the carbon loading of the pyramidal absorber must not be too low or too high.

The above paragraph explains the complex issues of interior RAM alone, from composition to physical dimension of each unit. In trying to calculate the true RCS of a body, the principle that support these items cannot be compromised. Saying anything else and you are basically saying the Chinese can alter the laws of the universe, which I would not be surprised if in the interests of taking jabs at the US, some Chinese members will not hesitate to make such outrageous claims.

Does the Chinese government have a Benefield equivalent? Who knows? But if the answer is no, then any Chinese member here will have to resort to making the claim that China can manipulate the laws of the universe in order to say that China can deploy an F-22 equivalent in a few years.

BTW, the so-called stealth is not invisible to all width radar. Don't be cheated by Hollywood.

If 'stealth' is largely a product of Hollywood, then why is China intending to make an F-22 equivalent? Or are you saying that there is a Chinese version of Hollywood to assist Chinese propaganda? The US have never claimed that our 'stealth' aircrafts are 'invisible' to radar. If you had actually look for my postings here about this subject, you would have found that I repeated many times that nothing is really 'invisible' to radar, especially at 1ghz and below. It has to do with the ratio of wavelength versus target dimensions. In the HF and UHF bands, there are meters long freqs and they will illuminate an F-22 better than shorter wavelengths. This is common knowledge and I have no problems saying so. But ask why did it cost the US so much money and time to exploit these physical laws? And if it is so 'easy' as you and your friend claimed, why no one else is doing the same but rather they are either struggling or gave up trying to keep up with US?

The answer regarding long wavelengths is that these bands have so poor target resolutions such as speed, altitude and aspect angle that they are no good at other than volume search. Higher freqs are required for high rate target data update and the ghz bands are what targeting radars uses and these freqs are what US 'stealth' aircrafts are design to counter. It has been known that a person can see an F-22 but his X-band radar cannot. That is why the B-2, F-117, F-22 and F-35 flies with radar enhancers to assist air traffic controllers. Without a facility like Benefield, any aircraft purportedly to be 'stealth' will be targeted by the F-22 -- easily.

Looky here...You are treading into territories that obviously you know next to nothing about and you are making claims you cannot support out of nationalistic pride.

 

[Kuuba]

gambit, even I showed something, you still refuse (afraid?) to accept even remote possibility that China could have mastered such technology. May arrogance and ignorance blind you and your people forever. End.

 

[Speeder]

Is that so hard to comprehend , gambit ?


Issue 1 : what's the 5th gen

As the 4th gen, 5th gen has its own definition for fighters to be qualified in this category. That said, even amongst the fifth gen fighters, there'll be differences in quality, the same as the 4th gen, surprise?

Chinese's definition is the same as international one, even though China never has officially claimed that the coming one will be at least equal or surpass that of F-22A in every measures. At least we have established now a common understanding on eaxctly what criteria/ what stuffs we are talking about, right?


Issue 2 Deputy Commander of PLAAF said it'll been inducted in 2017-2019

Well, it's not India-style tabloid news. The Deputy Commander said in a formal interview with the main Chinese TV channel, with millions watching, including both Chinese and non-Chinese ( all the military entities interested in the matter around the world, particularly the Pentagon).


So PLAAF general said yes, we can; while you say no, you can't.

Regardless what funny stuffs you have posted here (some are useful knowledge I admit; others are just wacko copy-paste job and absurd conlusions, sorry), it's basically your words - a Pakistan Defence Website fanboy's words against PLAAF commander's words. Anyone with a half a brain knows whose words has more credibility, carry more weight and has more scientific backup.

Well, if you annouced you were Deputy Director of the Pentagon or Chief Designer of F-22A , then it could be 50:50 chance though, but... Enough said?


Far more than the US military which has numerous classified info of it own, PLA is famous for its conservative attitude on annoucing the timing of its tech induction (e.g. J 10 was declassified 4 years after it's serviced in the force) and secretiveness, particularly in guarding the tech breakthoughs on key military technologies.

In reality, China's ability to refuse joining Russia's fifth project is already a clear sign, based on China's advance in basic science research in the area VS. the US, Russia, and the fanboy wannabe India.

So, Gambit, are you saying you know more than what Chinese military commander knows on Chinese military ?

On most basic research in hard science, which is the foundation of F-22A, and future generations fighter planes to come, China is right up there amongst several top ones of the world alongside the US, if still lacking on some key areas. In fact, countries have such an overall strenghth in the whole world can be counted with no more than one hand.

Don't take my words for this, just google worldwide patent filings and basic research papers written/cited in respected scientific journals on all fields of hard sciences, to see where China stands vis-a-vis the US and the rest of the world, then you could probably understand more about the reality on the planet earth.

 

[bigmoneymaker]

Buddy...I am willing to bet that you did not know something like an anechoic chamber exist before you make this absurd claim...
No...RF anechoic testing is not something unique to the US. Many countries know about the process and have testing facilities for them. However, because of the nature of EM radiation and how a radar signal behave on a surface, planar or curve, not every anechoic chamber is suitable for RCS measurement.

Here is a non-US example...

http://www.ursi.org/Proceedings/ProcGA02/papers/p0090.pdf

MALAYSIA, got that?

Now what does the good professors has to say...
Note the highlighted, clearly the professors are saying that just because one is capable of designing an EM anechoic chamber, one cannot just simply throw any object in there, let alone a full size aircraft, and blast away.

The above paragraph explains the complex issues of interior RAM alone, from composition to physical dimension of each unit. In trying to calculate the true RCS of a body, the principle that support these items cannot be compromised. Saying anything else and you are basically saying the Chinese can alter the laws of the universe, which I would not be surprised if in the interests of taking jabs at the US, some Chinese members will not hesitate to make such outrageous claims.

Does the Chinese government have a Benefield equivalent? Who knows? But if the answer is no, then any Chinese member here will have to resort to making the claim that China can manipulate the laws of the universe in order to say that China can deploy an F-22 equivalent in a few years.


If 'stealth' is largely a product of Hollywood, then why is China intending to make an F-22 equivalent? Or are you saying that there is a Chinese version of Hollywood to assist Chinese propaganda? The US have never claimed that our 'stealth' aircrafts are 'invisible' to radar. If you had actually look for my postings here about this subject, you would have found that I repeated many times that nothing is really 'invisible' to radar, especially at 1ghz and below. It has to do with the ratio of wavelength versus target dimensions. In the HF and UHF bands, there are meters long freqs and they will illuminate an F-22 better than shorter wavelengths. This is common knowledge and I have no problems saying so. But ask why did it cost the US so much money and time to exploit these physical laws? And if it is so 'easy' as you and your friend claimed, why no one else is doing the same but rather they are either struggling or gave up trying to keep up with US?

The answer regarding long wavelengths is that these bands have so poor target resolutions such as speed, altitude and aspect angle that they are no good at other than volume search. Higher freqs are required for high rate target data update and the ghz bands are what targeting radars uses and these freqs are what US 'stealth' aircrafts are design to counter. It has been known that a person can see an F-22 but his X-band radar cannot. That is why the B-2, F-117, F-22 and F-35 flies with radar enhancers to assist air traffic controllers. Without a facility like Benefield, any aircraft purportedly to be 'stealth' will be targeted by the F-22 -- easily.

Looky here...You are treading into territories that obviously you know next to nothing about and you are making claims you cannot support out of nationalistic pride.

i am very very very regret to tell you about that malaysian part, that the professor who participated in the work are all chinese descendant and able to speak mandarin, one of them has been transfered to utar( one of malaysian chinese supported local university), considering the deep interaction between utar and chinese universities, i think their research results are somehow related, it is no surprise that china has mastered some world class tech through her worldwide connections. unlike you vietnamese hiding behind big uncle sam and pointing finger your fellow asians, especially the one share the sinoculture similar to yours. we should unite together to kick the butt of white supremacists and interests groups that had been inflicting hurt to us all since their prevailing birth in this world.

 

[gambit]

Is that so hard to comprehend , gambit ?


Issue 1 : what's the 5th gen

As the 4th gen, 5th gen has its own definition for fighters to be qualified in this category. That said, even amongst the fifth gen fighters, there'll be differences in quality, the same as the 4th gen, surprise?

There is no committee sitting around creating criteria for each supposedly 'generation' of aircraft. Still...The official unofficial criteria for what is 'fifth generation' fighter aircraft should have:

- RCS figure of less than one meter square at 200km distance. The one meter square figure is from a clean F-16. The 200km radar detection distance is an average from many fighter aircraft radar systems and even this is not set in stone.

- Supercruise capable.

- An AESA radar system.

- A GPS assisted INS.

- Secured data link.

- Internal weapons bay. External stores must be an option.

- Fly-by-wire flight control system. The F-16 is the de facto standard in this.

Notice no thrust vectored engine, no helmet cue targeting system, or no 'glass cockpit' instrumentation. These are considered enhancements although all of them do make the aircraft better.

Chinese's definition is the same as international one, even though China never has officially claimed that the coming one will be at least equal or surpass that of F-22A in every measures. At least we have established now a common understanding on eaxctly what criteria/ what stuffs we are talking about, right?

Then the Chinese should not make the claim that China will deploy a 'fifth generation' aircraft.

Issue 2 Deputy Commander of PLAAF said it'll been inducted in 2017-2019

Well, it's not India-style tabloid news. The Deputy Commander said in a formal interview with the main Chinese TV channel, with millions watching, including both Chinese and non-Chinese ( all the military entities interested in the matter around the world, particularly the Pentagon).

Just because US generals are interested, that does not mean they believe everything the Chinese said. We read what the Chinese said and correlate what was said with what we know is technically feasible. At least outside of Photochop.

So PLAAF general said yes, we can; while you say no, you can't.

Did I say that?

Regardless what funny stuffs you have posted here (some are useful knowledge I admit; others are just wacko copy-paste job and absurd conlusions, sorry), it's basically your words - a Pakistan Defence Website fanboy's words against PLAAF commander's words. Anyone with a half a brain knows whose words has more credibility, carry more weight and has more scientific backup.

If you assert that what I presented as 'absurd' then why have you not produce what is not absurd for the readers' benefit?

Well, if you annouced you were Deputy Director of the Pentagon or Chief Designer of F-22A , then it could be 50:50 chance though, but... Enough said?

Irrelevant whatever I could claim to be. What I presented are based upon physical laws.

Far more than the US military which has numerous classified info of it own, PLA is famous for its conservative attitude on annoucing the timing of its tech induction (e.g. J 10 was declassified 4 years after it's serviced in the force) and secretiveness, particularly in guarding the tech breakthoughs on key military technologies.

And yet the J-10 is only on a par with the F-16.

In reality, China's ability to refuse joining Russia's fifth project is already a clear sign, based on China's advance in basic science research in the area VS. the US, Russia, and the fanboy wannabe India.

So, Gambit, are you saying you know more than what Chinese military commander knows on Chinese military ?

I am saying that if any Chinese fanboy make a claim, support said claim with publicly available information. A couple of Chinese members here claimed that it is 'easy' for body shaping. I presented arguments that it is not so 'easy'.

On most basic research in hard science, which is the foundation of F-22A, and future generations fighter planes to come, China is right up there amongst several top ones of the world alongside the US, if still lacking on some key areas. In fact, countries have such an overall strenghth in the whole world can be counted with no more than one hand.

Don't take my words for this, just google worldwide patent filings and basic research papers written/cited in respected scientific journals on all fields of hard sciences, to see where China stands vis-a-vis the US and the rest of the world, then you could probably understand more about the reality on the planet earth.

Sure...Just produce an F-117 equivalent...For now.