FGFA vs J-XX

[xuwei]

http://lt.cjdby.net/thread-1046751-1-1.html


Canopy

座舱盖

The F-22's canopy is approximately 140 inches long, 45 inches wide, 27 inches tall, and weighs approximately 360 pounds. It is a rotate/translate design, which means that it comes down, slides forward, and locks in place with pins. It is a much more complex piece of equipment than it would appear to be.

F-22整体座舱盖长140英寸，宽45英寸，27英寸高。它是一种旋转/平移式设计，意思是它先向下然后向前滑移，最后 用销子上锁。它的复杂性远比表面看起来高。

The F-22 canopy's transparency (made by Sierracin) features the largest piece of monolithic polycarbonate material being formed today. It has no canopy bow and offers the pilot superior optics (Zone 1 quality) throughout (not just in the area near the HUD) and it offers the requisite stealth features.

F-22座舱盖是Sierracin（现PPG公司兼并）公司制造，是当今最大的单片聚碳酸酯材料成型部件。整体式，没有弓形框，整个视野1区（不仅是HUD（Head Up Display）附近）的光学性能极佳。具备隐身标准要求。


The canopy is resistant to chemical/biological and environmental agents, and has been successfully tested to withstand the impact of a four-pound bird at 350 knots. It also protects the pilot from lightning strikes.

座舱盖可抗化学/生物和环境介质，4磅/350节鸟击试验成功。座舱盖能保护飞行员免收雷击。

The 3/4" polycarbonate transparency is actually made of two 3/8" thick sheets that are heated and fusion bonded (the sheets actually meld to become a single-piece article) and then drape forged. The F-16's canopy, for comparison, is made up of laminated sheets. A laminated canopy generally offers better birdstrike protection, and because of the lower altitude where the F-16 operates, this is an advantage. However, lamination also adds weight as well as reduced optics.

F-22的整体座舱盖，是3/4英寸厚的聚碳酸酯板，实际上是两块3/8英寸加热熔焊在一起，然后锻造成型的。而F-16的整体座舱盖，作为比较，是鸟击防御方面性能更好些的层板结构（多层）。这是适合低空域行动的F-16的。层板结构重量相对较大，光学性能相对较差。

There is no chance of a post-ejection canopy-seat-pilot collision as the canopy (with frame) weighs slightly more on one side than the other. When the canopy is jettisoned, the weight differential is enough to make it slice nearly ninety degrees to the right as it clears the aircraft.

飞行员弹（喷）射逃生后，几乎不可能发生与座舱盖的空中碰撞。因为整体座舱盖（连同边上的框架），被设计成一边略轻，一边略重。座舱盖弹（喷）射离开飞机后，因为自身两边的重量差，会成几乎90度，从而为飞行员闪开一条生路。

In testing so far, the cockpit canopy has fallen far short of its service life requirement according to DOT&E.

时至今日的测试，整体座舱盖的实际寿命比DOT&E的标准要求短。

 

[xuwei]

xuwei..I said T-50 is a prototype, it will go through tests and trials during its phase of development.
Now that J-20 has come to the scene, I believe Russians are going to bring in considerable many changes to T-50. The only thing I am thinking about is the Airframe finishing even the prototype of J-20 has sort of single piece frame somewhat similar to F-35/F-22 while T-50 has a crude finish.

Parts even better than F22/F35.
For example pneumatic-layout,cabin layout......

 

[Roybot]

Less input less fruits.
Russia remains only energy and Soviet military industrial heritage(Almost depleted).

Make a T50 which many problems and at a far distant date cheat India's money.
The same rise in price for carriers,and test TVC of immature technology in Su30MKI.

Too bad all your fighter aircrafts are still using Russian Engines, given the "almost depleted" quality of Russian tech as per your claim, them fighter planes must be "almost depleted" quality i guess

 

[xuwei]

Too bad all your fighter aircrafts are still using Russian Engines, given the "almost depleted" quality of Russian tech as per your claim, them fighter planes must be "almost depleted" quality i guess

What's this J20's engine?

 

[xuwei]

Too bad all your fighter aircrafts are still using Russian Engines, given the "almost depleted" quality of Russian tech as per your claim, them fighter planes must be "almost depleted" quality i guess

What's this?

 

[xuwei]

Too bad all your fighter aircrafts are still using Russian Engines, given the "almost depleted" quality of Russian tech as per your claim, them fighter planes must be "almost depleted" quality i guess

Have some Common sense please,guy.

 

[Roybot]

What's this J20's engine?

j-20 is a prototype still and so is ws-15 engine, and if thats whats you think it is being powered by well then good luck to the people testing prototype fighter planes with prototype engines.

And as far as the rest of the PLAAF inventory is concerned its still running on Russian engines, heck even the airframes are derived from Russian designs if not directly copied.

You cant just take Russian technology, improve a thing or two on it and at the end call the Russian Technology shyte and yours better than the best.

Just my 2 cents don't let nationalistic pride take over your sanity. Give credit where its due. Russian technology has been one of the worlds best and will be for decades to come. Its not just about money, its also about experience Russia has in this field. No matter how much money China or any other country pumps into research, it would still be catching up with the Russian tech. Technology can not be good or bad, either you have it or you don't.

 

[kursed]

Hi-Res, highspeed taxi test.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

j-20 is a prototype still and so is ws-15 engine, and if thats whats you think it is being powered by well then good luck to the people testing prototype fighter planes with prototype engines.

And as far as the rest of the PLAAF inventory is concerned its still running on Russian engines, heck even the airframes are derived from Russian designs if not directly copied.

You cant just take Russian technology, improve a thing or two on it and at the end call the Russian Technology shyte and yours better than the best.

Just my 2 cents don't let nationalistic pride take over your sanity. Give credit where its due. Russian technology has been one of the worlds best and will be for decades to come. Its not just about money, its also about experience Russia has in this field. No matter how much money China or any other country pumps into research, it would still be catching up with the Russian tech. Technology can not be good or bad, either you have it or you don't.

It is WS-10G with 155kn of thrust and 2500 hours of lifespan.

 

[S10]

j-20 is a prototype still and so is ws-15 engine, and if thats whats you think it is being powered by well then good luck to the people testing prototype fighter planes with prototype engines.

And as far as the rest of the PLAAF inventory is concerned its still running on Russian engines, heck even the airframes are derived from Russian designs if not directly copied.

You cant just take Russian technology, improve a thing or two on it and at the end call the Russian Technology shyte and yours better than the best.

Just my 2 cents don't let nationalistic pride take over your sanity. Give credit where its due. Russian technology has been one of the worlds best and will be for decades to come. Its not just about money, its also about experience Russia has in this field. No matter how much money China or any other country pumps into research, it would still be catching up with the Russian tech. Technology can not be good or bad, either you have it or you don't.

First, the engine on the plane is WS-10A, not WS-15. WS-10A was finalized in 2006 has been in service with PLAAF since 2008 in small numbers. Second, if you had bothered to do a little research, you would know that the core design of WS-10 was based on American GE F100, not AL-31F. To say that it is simply "improved" upon "Russian technology" is ignorant on your part.

One would assume your ignorance would end there, but you have to dig yourself in further with this blanket statement all fighter jets use Russian engines. I like to know since when do Russians manufacture WS-9, WP-13 or WP-5 just to name a few. Really, please enlighten me. You speak of "copying" others, but where are the Indian copies?

Oh right, you don't have the technical expertise to even "copy" let alone improve.

Now as to your statement that Russian will lead for years. Where is the money coming from? Since the breakup of Soviet Union, Russian economy has tanked. Its high-end industries cannot compete with that of United States/Japan/Europe while its small manufacturing could not compete with the labour advantages of emerging economy. It has survived by selling raw resources (timber, natural gas, oil) to others. The country defaulted on their loans in 1999 and could not find its footing. They barely have any money to keep their current forces operation and cut one weapon program after the other. In short, its economic structure is royally screwed.

Now before you go around saying Putin has got Russia back on track, remember that he did nothing of the sort. What he did was consolidated power back from the oligarches that had risen after the collapse of USSR. He has not/could not change the cold reality that the country is surviving on raw resource export.

 

[WARBIRD]

First, the engine on the plane is WS-10A, not WS-15. WS-10A was finalized in 2006 has been in service with PLAAF since 2008 in small numbers. Second, if you had bothered to do a little research, you would know that the core design of WS-10 was based on American GE F100, not AL-31F. To say that it is simply "improved" upon "Russian technology" is ignorant on your part.

One would assume your ignorance would end there, but you have to dig yourself in further with this blanket statement all fighter jets use Russian engines. I like to know since when do Russians manufacture WS-9, WP-13 or WP-5 just to name a few. Really, please enlighten me. You speak of "copying" others, but where are the Indian copies?

Oh right, you don't have the technical expertise to even "copy" let alone improve.

Now as to your statement that Russian will lead for years. Where is the money coming from? Since the breakup of Soviet Union, Russian economy has tanked. Its high-end industries cannot compete with that of United States/Japan/Europe while its small manufacturing could not compete with the labour advantages of emerging economy. It has survived by selling raw resources (timber, natural gas, oil) to others. The country defaulted on their loans in 1999 and could not find its footing. They barely have any money to keep their current forces operation and cut one weapon program after the other. In short, its economic structure is royally screwed.

Now before you go around saying Putin has got Russia back on track, remember that he did nothing of the sort. What he did was consolidated power back from the oligarches that had risen after the collapse of USSR. He has not/could not change the cold reality that the country is surviving on raw resource export.

Well, every component in a Chinese jet engine is Russian or french copies except turbofans and some other subsystems.Besides as US def secretary pointed out China is years away from a stealth fighter

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Well, every component in a Chinese jet engine is Russian or french copies except turbofans and some other subsystems.Besides as US def secretary pointed out China is years away from a stealth fighter

Taihang engine shares more concept of design (not copy) with Pratt & Whitney, not Russian or French.

Same as China's rocket technology which is more close to American than Russian.

 

[conworldus]

Well, every component in a Chinese jet engine is Russian or french copies except turbofans and some other subsystems.Besides as US def secretary pointed out China is years away from a stealth fighter

Yeah I am sure you learned that by reading an expert article from "Hindustantimes". Unless you are an aerospace PhD and a metallurgist with years of engine building experience and has access to China's engine lab and Russian and French engine lab to prove the copying act, shvt up and get out.

 

[S10]

Well, every component in a Chinese jet engine is Russian or french copies except turbofans and some other subsystems.Besides as US def secretary pointed out China is years away from a stealth fighter

Really? From which source did you get the information that they are exact replicas now? For such easy task as copying, certain countries seem to be failing even at that.

As for induction of LO platform, I guess you could say 2018 is "years" away. Same thing could even be said of F-35, with its 2016 induction date.

 

[malikkhawar]

China's new fighter, the stealthy J-20 has now completed its first flight after several weeks of preparations.

Posted by David A. Fulghum at 1/6/2011 10:41 AM CST

Seeing the J-20 stealth fighter with its nose wheel off the ground in a high-speed taxi test in Dec. was a shock to everyone except the Chinese, apparently.

The immediate impact of the new fighter’s pre-flight tests and the development of other advanced conventional weapons was downplayed by Vice Admiral David J. Dorsett, deputy Chief of Naval Operations for information dominance and director of naval intelligence (N2/N6).

“I’m more worried about Chinese game-changing capabilities in non-kinetic [areas such as information dominance, network invasion and electronic warfare],” he says. “I am most concerned about China’s focus on trying to develop [the ability] to dominate the electromagnetic spectrum, to counter space capabilities and to conduct cyberactivities.

“The other concern I have is China’s ability to become operationally efficient in a sophisticated, complex, joint war-fighting environment,” Dorsett says. “I don’t see China with those capabilities now. I do see them delivering individual components and weapons systems [like J-20 and DF-21D], but until they acquire proficiency [with them] how competent are they really going to be?”

The Chinese military’s self-proclaimed timeline is mid-century, Dorsett says. In that context, he denies that the Pentagon is overestimating its threat.

“I’m not alarmed,” Dorsett says. “I am intrigued by developments and am quite interested in the quantities and different types of technologies that we didn’t expect or overestimated.”

There is a marked relationship between China’s booming economy and its military buildup, he points out. But there are obvious shortfalls.

“The Chinese don’t have a great integrated ISR capability or an anti-submarine capability at all,” Dorsett says. “They don’t demonstrate a sophisticated level in joint warfighting. They are at the early stages of operational proficiency across the board. What would be dangerous is underestimating the timeline of synchronizing these various element.”

Other Washington-based intelligence officials say they are watching the J-20’s testing with interest.

“They have done several high-speed taxis [with the nosewheel off the ground,” says another veteran analyst. “They could still be working out some kinks before they try an actual first flight.”

There also are a lot of unknowns about the aircraft’s real importance.

“Operational impact is a tough call to make at this point, given that this plane, even if it flies, is not going to be full-up 5th gen [aircraft],” the analyst says. “In essence, this is going to be a novelty for the next decade before it starts to roll off the series production lines and gets to the line units in any numbers that would impact any of our mission planning. A lot of things can happen, good and bad, between now and then to either speed this up or severely put the brakes on things. As far as radar cross-section goes, this is not an F-22, nor should we be thinking that they are going for low RCS right out of the chute,” the analyst says.

An Achilles' Heel of Chinese high performance aircraft has been engines. The Chinese have failed so far to produce an indigenous engine that has the performance they need for a world-class fighter. Under earlier Chinese military doctrine, which favored mass over advanced technology, the People's Liberation Army Air Force was equipped with adapted versions of 1950s Soviet designs with old-technology engines. Analysts differ in their assessments of China’s first high-performance engine, the Shenyang WS-10, but recent images of the J-11B fighter—China’s bootleg version of the Sukhoi Su-30—appears to show a nozzle design that differs visibly from the Russian AL-31F and resembles that of WS-10 engines displayed at air shows.

Dorsett says the J-20 program’s existence was known, but “One of the things that is … true is that we have been pretty consistent in underestimating the delivery and initial operational capability of Chinese technology weapons systems.” Two recent examples of misanalyses have been the J-20 fighter, the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile, a high-performance fighter engine design and advanced air combat missile.

“How far along are they?,” he says. “I don’t know. They clearly have an initial [J-20] prototype. Is it advanced and how many trials, tests and demos do they have to go through before it becomes operational? That’s not clear to me.”

However, the evidence of the design’s sophistication is mounting.

The J-20 is designed to carry new weaponry with some of it tucked away internally. China is continuing an effort to expand the military’s air-to-air missile inventory. Although Avic officials so far have refused to discuss what comes after the PL-12A radar-guided medium-range missile, new information suggests work is progressing on several enhanced versions. These include a combined solid-motor, ramjet-powered missile, the PL-21. The missile, with a single inlet for the ramjet, may have undergone ground tests last year.

Work may be slightly more advanced on the PL-12D, a ramjet-upgrade of the basic PL-12 with more modest changes to the airframe and less end-game maneuverability than the PL-21 would feature. Chinese industry also appears to be working on the PL-12C with smaller after control fins for internal carriage on the J-20. The mid-body fins are believed to be similar to the basic PL-12 and PL-12B with improved electronic counter-countermeasures.

The close-in battle would use the PL-10, whose design may resemble South Africa’s Denel A-Darter.

China’s ability to increasingly use standoff weapons, also in air-to-ground and anti-ship missile roles, is already affecting planning among potential adversaries. Japanese defense officials, for example, are showing interest in missiles with greater ranges for engaging Chinese threats earlier, and there are also discussion in the U.S. about the need for weapons with greater engagement capability.