Chinese delegation sent to Russia to discuss stealth fighter engine

[UKBengali]

Inlets or intakes whichever word helps you understand. Canards disrupts its stealth so in other words it gets seen first from a far distance. And as I said before it doesn't matter if it has canards for close range. It will be shot down.

You are welcome to believe what you wish.

 

[Oldman1]

You are welcome to believe what you wish.

Good to know you understand.

 

[Esc8781]

Is this the best you can come up with?

J-20 will be have an advanced AESA radar, other cutting edge avionics and is designed for be manoeuvrable due to it's canards and almost certain thrust-vector production engines.

The US will be getting some serious competition from China that it has lacked before.

Nothing but the F-22 can go head-to-head against the J-20. All other aircraft will be wiped out of the sky.

You're always saying the J-20 having a
bigger and a more powerful radar and it'll equate to a better one. The MIG-25's radar was so powerful that it burned through ECM or jamming. Critical thinking can help you figure out what I'm trying to say.

 

[UKBengali]

You're always saying the J-20 having a
bigger and a more powerful radar and it'll equate to a better one. The MIG-25's radar was so powerful that it burned through ECM or jamming. Critical thinking can help you figure out what I'm trying to say.

Critical thinking may help you understand that Chinese radar and avionics technology is much closer to the US than the Soviet Union ever was.

 

[gambit]

Canards will become an issue when the aircraft needs to use them for manoeuvring - i.e at close range so it is not a problem at BVR distances.

This is just another regurgitation of 'Chinese physics' where only when something is moving will it contribute to RCS. That mean under 'Chinese physics'...

...The above illustration so often used to each aspiring aviation engineers are applicable only to Western designed aircrafts, not Chinese ones.

This is exactly the reason why CDF is the intellectual desert it continues to be since the day it was created. 

There is no way that the F-22 will be able to detect the J-20 at 200km away anyway. What you cannot detect, you cannot track, what you cannot track you cannot fire at.

Radar detection is half data processing and we are the world's best at it. We created 'stealth', not the Russians, and you can bet whatever salary you make that we already know how to detect any low observable fighter from any country. Sorry, but this is real physics, not 'Chinese physics'. 

when we see a little action in South China Sea then who knows -- maybe it will be good time to see the contests and fun games

We already have...

Hainan Island incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On April 1, 2001, a mid-air collision between a United States NavyEP-3E ARIES IIsignals intelligence aircraft and a People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) J-8IIinterceptorfighterjet resulted in an international dispute between the United States of America and the People's Republic of China, called the Hainan Island incident.

A smaller and more agile aircraft piloted by a mediocre (at best) pilot collided with a lumbering four engine prop jobber. That does not bode well for the reputation of the air force that owns the smaller and more agile fighter.

 

[zzzz]

Critical thinking may help you understand that Chinese radar and avionics technology is much closer to the US than the Soviet Union ever was.

Soviet Union inducted airborne PESA radars while Americans were still using mechanically scanned arrays. Yep, Chinese are closer.. from other side

 

[gambit]

Soviet Union inducted airborne PESA radars while Americans were still using mechanically scanned arrays. Yep, Chinese are closer.. from other side

A well designed and balanced mechanically scanned system, even using the classical concave dish and not the newer planar antenna, can and WILL outperform a mediocre designed PESA system.

 

[zzzz]

A well designed and balanced mechanically scanned system, even using the classical concave dish and not the newer planar antenna, can and WILL outperform a mediocre designed PESA system.

Sure and well designed PESA radar will smoke mediocre designed mechanically scanned system.

 

[Esc8781]

Critical thinking may help you understand that Chinese radar and avionics technology is much closer to the US than the Soviet Union ever was.

Bigger and more powerful does NOT equate to better. Sheesh.

 

[gambit]

Sure and well designed PESA radar will smoke mediocre designed mechanically scanned system.

From the Russians? Excuse me while I laugh...

From my personal, albeit limited, exposure to Soviet era avionics which I believe still have a strong technical influence to the current Russia, the Russians tends to sway to the extremes precisely due to the inferior electronics industry in the then Soviet to the current Russia. Take the MIG-25's radar as a perfect example of this. That radar was so powerful that it can burn through just about all Western countermeasures thrown at it, but its target resolutions was so sh1tty that the only thing it can do for the pilot was to provide general direction as to where any target might be. That tendency revealed itself after the Soviet Union collapsed and we bought C-5 loads of Soviet goodies, from the former Soviet slave states, to examine.

Avionics have been and for at least the next 20 yrs will be Russia's technical weakness.

 

[zzzz]

From the Russians? Excuse me while I laugh...

From my personal, albeit limited, exposure to Soviet era avionics which I believe still have a strong technical influence to the current Russia, the Russians tends to sway to the extremes precisely due to the inferior electronics industry in the then Soviet to the current Russia. Take the MIG-25's radar as a perfect example of this. That radar was so powerful that it can burn through just about all Western countermeasures thrown at it, but its target resolutions was so sh1tty that the only thing it can do for the pilot was to provide general direction as to where any target might be. That tendency revealed itself after the Soviet Union collapsed and we bought C-5 loads of Soviet goodies, from the former Soviet slave states, to examine.

Avionics have been and for at least the next 20 yrs will be Russia's technical weakness.

A lot of hot air and bold claims from the guy who was flying with archaic mechanical radars while Soviet Union was already 20 years ahead with PESA tech. Sad reality. Deal with it.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

This is just another regurgitation of 'Chinese physics' where only when something is moving will it contribute to RCS. That mean under 'Chinese physics'...

...The above illustration so often used to each aspiring aviation engineers are applicable only to Western designed aircrafts, not Chinese ones.

This is exactly the reason why CDF is the intellectual desert it continues to be since the day it was created. 

Radar detection is half data processing and we are the world's best at it. We created 'stealth', not the Russians, and you can bet whatever salary you make that we already know how to detect any low observable fighter from any country. Sorry, but this is real physics, not 'Chinese physics'. 

We already have...

Hainan Island incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A smaller and more agile aircraft piloted by a mediocre (at best) pilot collided with a lumbering four engine prop jobber. That does not bode well for the reputation of the air force that owns the smaller and more agile fighter.

The plane carried twenty-four officers and enlisted men and women attached to the Naval Security Group Command, a field component of the National Security Agency. They were repatriated after eleven days; the plane stayed behind. The Pentagon told the press that the crew had followed its protocol, which called for the use of a fire axe, and even hot coffee, to disable the plane’s equipment and software. These included an operating system created and controlled by the N.S.A., and the drivers needed to monitor encrypted Chinese radar, voice, and electronic communications. It was more than two years before the Navy acknowledged that things had not gone so well. “Compromise by the People’s Republic of China of undestroyed classified material . . . is highly probable and cannot be ruled out,” a Navy report issued in September, 2003, said.

The Navy’s experts didn’t believe that China was capable of reverse-engineering the plane’s N.S.A.-supplied operating system, estimated at between thirty and fifty million lines of computer code, according to a former senior intelligence official. Mastering it would give China a road map for decrypting the Navy’s classified intelligence and operational data. “If the operating system was controlling what you’d expect on an intelligence aircraft, it would have a bunch of drivers to capture radar and telemetry,” Whitfield Diffie, a pioneer in the field of encryption, said. “The plane was configured for what it wants to snoop, and the Chinese would want to know what we wanted to know about them—what we could intercept and they could not.” And over the next few years the U.S. intelligence community began to “read the tells” that China had access to sensitive traffic.

The U.S. realized the extent of its exposure only in late 2008. A few weeks after Barack Obama’s election, the Chinese began flooding a group of communications links known to be monitored by the N.S.A. with a barrage of intercepts, two Bush Administration national-security officials and the former senior intelligence official told me. The intercepts included details of planned American naval movements. The Chinese were apparently showing the U.S. their hand. (“The N.S.A. would ask, ‘Can the Chinese be that good?’ ” the former official told me. “My response was that they only invented gunpowder in the tenth century and built the bomb in 1965. I’d say, ‘Can you read Chinese?’ We don’t even know the Chinese pictograph for ‘Happy hour.’ ”)

This incident can be considered as the opening event in a series of clashes that have marked increased tensions between the U.S. and the PRC in the South China Sea.


The Hainan Island Incident, Ten Years Later | Facing China

 

[longlong]

This is just another regurgitation of 'Chinese physics' where only when something is moving will it contribute to RCS. That mean under 'Chinese physics'...

...The above illustration so often used to each aspiring aviation engineers are applicable only to Western designed aircrafts, not Chinese ones.

This is exactly the reason why CDF is the intellectual desert it continues to be since the day it was created. 

Radar detection is half data processing and we are the world's best at it. We created 'stealth', not the Russians, and you can bet whatever salary you make that we already know how to detect any low observable fighter from any country. Sorry, but this is real physics, not 'Chinese physics'. 

We already have...

Hainan Island incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A smaller and more agile aircraft piloted by a mediocre (at best) pilot collided with a lumbering four engine prop jobber. That does not bode well for the reputation of the air force that owns the smaller and more agile fighter.

Your proud F-22 is a lame duck. It's just one of the failed projects in USAF history.

Till 19 Nov, 2013, 5 F-22 had crashed, in the sky, on runway, taking off or landing, anywhere, anytime. And, was rumoured shot down in Jordan and China.

Accidents/Flying hours ration is high, only 2nd after F-89 in the F-x range.

Even though they produced 1,029 F-89, a bad stuff. Good stuff like, F-15 @ 1,198, F-16 is uncountable, at least 4,500. They even deployed 223 C-17. But, F-22 only at 180+, and was absent in any real warfield.

And why?

I tell you why: it's the first generation main stealthy fighter, like IPhone 1, heavy, slow, short range.

As the first new generation fighter, nobody had the experience to balance stealth against maneuver. Resulting F-22 is not so steath, easy crashing.

It's just tooooooo old. Your understanding to the stealth is at least one generation obsoleted.

According to Maxwell's physics, electric and magnetic fields will not care it is called J-20 or F-22, canard or main wings.

 

[j20blackdragon]

Canards disrupts its stealth so in other words it gets seen first from a far distance.

Repeating a fallacy again and again doesn't make it true.

Mind giving a detailed explanation to this forum as to why canards disrupt stealth?

I'll get you started if you want.

Canards have a leading edge and a trailing edge.

Main wings have a leading edge and a trailing edge.

Horizontal stabilizers have a leading edge and a trailing edge.

How do they differ from a RCS perspective?

Canards move.

But so can the F-22's stabilators.

How do they differ from a RCS perspective?

 

[longlong]

Repeating a fallacy again and again doesn't make it true.

Mind giving a detailed explanation to this forum as to why canards disrupt stealth?

I'll get you started if you want.

Canards have a leading edge and a trailing edge.

Main wings have a leading edge and a trailing edge.

Horizontal stabilizers have a leading edge and a trailing edge.

How do they differ from a RCS perspective?

Canards move.

But so can the F-22's stabilators.

How do they differ from a RCS perspective?

Wow, its 2nd half is really holly big...

and it will form corner reflector in particular situation which J-20's canard will not.

F-22, you are really old fashion.