Russian media:J20's stealth capability is far better than F-35 and pakfa

[scobydoo]

This is also assumption? or any evidence?

Why didn't the chinese took the basic planform from Eurofighter or Rafale or J-10?

Am I wrong if I assume that they took the basic planform from J-10 or the predecessor?





According to your opinion, how is the PAKFA compared with the F-15 SE in term of stealth?

Thanks.

Lu IJKT ya?

Berasa kayak nonton debat lu sama si Danub.

 

[Jayanta]

Gambit,

Any idea on how far you think China is from what you would consider a straight up 5th gen fighter? Is there anyway you gauge where China is from the technological advances of today compared to years past? Where does China stand in technological capability compared to other countries?

Thx

If my questions don't make sense it's because, I'll be the first to admit, that my knowledge in this area is limited but if there is any insight you can provide, it'd be much appreciated.

I feel China's work is appreciable. One cannot compare two fighter until its fully ready...even the so called best fighter F-22 is not flawless, only 190 manufactured, further manufacture stopped, has never been in any combat situation...not used in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria etc. the flights were grounded when pilots complained of hypoxia, even pilots came out in the media. Developing a 5th gen fighter needs technological expertise...the technology demonstrator flown by China proves they are in the race.

 

[j20blackdragon]

The J-20 is a highly refined MIG 1.44. Or what the 1.44 would have been if the Soviets continued that program. The Chinese took that basic planform and incorporated known RCS control methods onto it. Not an easy task because outer re-shaping of any existing planform inevitably affect the original aerodynamics. What they did was very much an engineering leap worthy of any high caliber aviation power aspirant.

Next gambit will tell us that a Ferrari is nothing more than a modified Toyota Corolla because they both have 4 wheels and a windshield.

My opinion -- STRICTLY from a sensor specialist perspective -- is that the J-20 approaches the so called '5th gen' category. May be even a little bit better than the F-15 Silent Eagle variant.

You're being too generous.

The purpose-built J-20 stealth fighter should obviously be inferior to a F-15 (a 1970s aircraft) with conformal weapon bays.

 

[gambit]

Next gambit will tell us that a Ferrari is nothing more than a modified Toyota Corolla because they both have 4 wheels and a windshield.

Actually, that would be how the Chinese members here would argue.

Your man Marty has proven himself intellectually dishonest and inconsistent many times over. When he wanted to push the J-20 away from the PAK-FA and on a par with the F-22, he persistently pushed the 'continuous curvatures' argument. When he wanted to distinguish the J-20 from the F-35, he persistently pushed the angled faceting technique and posted incomplete sources on how curvatures are detrimental to 'stealth'.



The reason why he is inconsistent is because he has no relevant experience, does not study whatever publicly available information there are, and worst, he allowed his ego to get in the way. Now he is laughably an aviation 'expert' over at your playground.

You're being too generous.

The purpose-built J-20 stealth fighter should obviously be inferior to a F-15 (a 1970s aircraft) with conformal weapon bays.

At least no one here can credibly accuse me of being intellectually dishonest and inconsistent, not when I can support my arguments and even encourages people to prove me wrong with my sources and keyword searches. Being intellectually dishonest and inconsistent is the worst anyone can be in any debate, technical or else.

 

[gambit]

I feel China's work is appreciable.

So do I.

One cannot compare two fighter until its fully ready...even the so called best fighter F-22 is not flawless,...

We never said it is. In fact, I have always say that in radar detection, NOTHING is invisible, not even the F-22. And that an aircraft is an exercise in compelled compromises, and that includes the F-22.

...only 190 manufactured, further manufacture stopped,...

Because of financial constraints.

...has never been in any combat situation...not used in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria etc.

Because there is no need to send it there.

Air combat is essentially mano-a-mano affairs. In exercises that we conducted where the only restrictions were altitude limit and live weapons, the F-22 always came out ahead, against any adversary, ours or foreign fighters. You cannot get any more latitude than altitude limits and live weapons.

That argument will be laughed at by professional pilots, civilian and military.

the flights were grounded when pilots complained of hypoxia, even pilots came out in the media.

Any credible technical arguments to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that this problem cannot be solved? I bet that you did no research on it at all.

Developing a 5th gen fighter needs technological expertise...the technology demonstrator flown by China proves they are in the race.

With US at least one lap ahead.

 

[antonius123]

Actually, that would be how the Chinese members here would argue.

Your man Marty has proven himself intellectually dishonest and inconsistent many times over. When he wanted to push the J-20 away from the PAK-FA and on a par with the F-22, he persistently pushed the 'continuous curvatures' argument. When he wanted to distinguish the J-20 from the F-35, he persistently pushed the angled faceting technique and posted incomplete sources on how curvatures are detrimental to 'stealth'.



The reason why he is inconsistent is because he has no relevant experience, does not study whatever publicly available information there are, and worst, he allowed his ego to get in the way. Now he is laughably an aviation 'expert' over at your playground.


At least no one here can credibly accuse me of being intellectually dishonest and inconsistent, not when I can support my arguments and even encourages people to prove me wrong with my sources and keyword searches. Being intellectually dishonest and inconsistent is the worst anyone can be in any debate, technical or else.

In fact His argument is quite SOLID.

Your accusation that J-20 took "basic planform of Mig 1.44 and incorporated known RCS control methods onto it" - is really questionable.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...r-better-than-f-35-pakfa-6.html#ixzz2Kr8ctsks

You need to answer my question about your claim J-20 took basic planform of Mig 1.44, and also respond J20 Blackdragon argument properly to prove your honesty. No offence, but ignoring and evading is sign of dishonesty.

 

[zon95]

Oh fool from sinodefence, J-20 with a supermassive Canard can make it invisible?!

Idiot did not even know that J-20 weapons to wear outside

 

[Beast]

Oh fool from sinodefence, J-20 with a supermassive Canard can make it invisible?!

Idiot did not even know that J-20 weapons to wear outside

Oh! Look who's the fool talking. Its better to listen to expert comment than some viet kid.

Chengdu J-XX [J-20] Stealth Fighter Prototype / A Preliminary Assessment

The J-XX/J-20 is a large fighter, similar in size to an F-111. This first-of-type aircraft presents with a large dihedral canard-delta wing configuration; with a pair of outward/rearward canted all moving combined vertical/horizontal tails; and, similarly large, outward canted ventral fins/strakes which, if all moving like the tails and retained on any production version, will make for some quite advanced capability options in the areas of controllability and manoeuvrability. There is little doubt this configuration is intended to provide good sustained supersonic cruise performance with a suitable engine type, and good manoeuvre performance in transonic and supersonic regimes.
The stealth shaping is without doubt considerably better than that seen in the Russian T-50 PAK-FA prototypes and, even more so, than that seen in the intended production configuration of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
The J-XX/J-20 design appears to be largely built around the stealth shaping design rules employed in the F-22A Raptor:
The chined J-XX/J-20 nose section and canopy are close in appearance to the F-22, yielding similar signature performance in a mature design.
The J-XX/J-20 trapezoidal edge aligned engine inlets are closest to the F-22, though appear to be larger and employ an F-35 style DSI (Diverterless Supersonic Inlet) design, obviously intended to improve on F-22 inlet edge signature.
The J-XX/J-20 wing fuselage join, critical for beam and all aspect stealth, is in shaping and angle very similar to the F-22, and clearly superior to both the Russian T-50 PAK-FA prototypes and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
The J-XX/J-20 flat lower fuselage is optimal for all aspect wideband stealth, and emulates the F-22 design closely.
Planform alignment of the J-XX/J-20 shows exact angular alignment between canard and delta leading edges, and exact crossed (starboard to port, port to starboard) angular edge alignment between canard and delta trailing edges. Leading edge sweep is ~43°, clearly intended for efficient supersonic flight.
The J-XX/J-20 nose and main undercarriage doors employ X-band optimised edge serration technology, based on F-117A and F-22 design rules.
The aft fuselage, tailbooms, fins/strakes and axi-symmetric nozzles are not compatible with high stealth performance, but may only be stop-gap measures to expedite flight testing of a prototype.
The airframe configuration and aft fuselage shape would be compatible with an F-22A style 2D TVC nozzle design, or a non-TVC rectangular nozzle designed for controlled infrared emission patterns and radio-frequency stealth.
The airframe configuration is compatible with ventral and side opening internal weapon bays, and large enough to match or exceed, by some degree, the internal weapons payload of the F-22A Raptor.
Internal fuel fraction is also likely to be high, given the fuselage configuration and large internal volume of the big delta wing. This indicates an intent to provide a sustained supersonic cruise capability, in the manner of the proposed FB-22.
The PLA have not disclosed the engine type. There are claims that the Russians supplied supercruise capable 117S series engines, though, subject to the overall efficiency of the aircraft’s aerodynamics, these would likely not be sufficient to extract the full performance potential of this advanced airframe.
The intended sensor suite remains unknown. China has yet to demonstrate an AESA radar, or an advanced indigenous Emitter Locating System (ELS). However, these could become available by the time this airframe enters production. Suitable Russian hardware is currently in late development and/or test.

Probably F-22 shall also be idiot for hanging the weapon outside..

Conclusion, don't make a fool of yourself by talking thing which you have no idea. I believe most vietnamese are intelligent compare to this smart alec who try to make a fool of most vietnamese.