What's new

The clearest J-20 pictures.

Notice that the Russian/Indian trolls constantly disparage the J-20's canards, but have nothing to say about the many gaps and junctions created by the leading edge of the PAK FA's horizontal stabilizers.

EtlpS.jpg


They also have nothing to say about the LEVCONs.

SpD3Z.jpg
 
.
The PAK FA is a joke.

LEVCONS.

i0Qrl.jpg


cSN1P.jpg


Framed canopy.

YFhow.jpg


Fully exposed compressor face.

tLOKT.jpg


1wuPU.jpg


Gaps around the inlets.

Izvkb.jpg


Seams, gaps, protrusions, changes in surface material, sudden changes in shape, and surface

discontinuities all over the lower fuselage.

4WBoL.jpg


Conventional nozzles.

R6Rte.jpg

I hope you don't mind if I make a copy of your insightful and thorough pictorial analysis for posting on other forums.
 
. .
Those are not cylinder. You still not learn the Elementry Math that I have teach you in the other threat.



Right, and how is that so when the chin follows a Circumference of a perfect circle? And you still can’t even spell elementary…ouch, this comming from someone who is claiming i have no education. :lol:

Deny all you want but to proof is in the photo:






If your assumption is true, then why there is none other Expert appear and confront his suggestion that J-20 is stealthier than pakfa?



What ‘experts’? Kopp is not an expert in the field of low observability, he has no experience in that field. I have yet to see one real expert say a word. Real experts, people that know, don’t talk, people who talk don’t know.




Where?? I havent seen it yet.
I just see you are being delusional.



Don’t play stupid, I have had many debates with you where I have provided sources.


Wrong! It is you and amalakas that could not explained the equation and the connection with Kopp's, mine and Martian claim.



Firstly no one ever asked me to explain the equation, nor have I ever claimed I was expert that studied some random field of aviation, you did. Amalakas asked you to answer what the equation was and you never did. So much for your claims of being an expert. Your are a fraud and it’s been evident for some time.






I am still waiting while you are running away.





Things don’t work like that, you were asked what the equation was not me, so the only one running is you, so what is it?









You are idiot.
I have advised you to read the link of the other threat from where I quote my own citation; you will find the citation there.



Wrong, where was your citation when I asked you to provide a source about the B-2? First you claimed the B-2 does not need to bank, and then when you looked like an utter fool you changed it too it does not need to bank HARD, I provided evidence that disproved your claim, yet you never provided a counter claim with proof.






So pathetic that you still have no clue that round shape and corner reflector is detrimental to RCS as you are still asking citation now :lol:



I have a clue to know that the J-20 has plenty of round shaping and massive corner reflectors from the tail fins.





I said: "credible link" that martin post. Dont be too idiot.





And which link would that be?




Your statement confirming that you did not pass elementary math/geometry.



No, it confirms that the J-20 has massive corner reflectors but you have too much petty pride to admit it:














I hope you don't mind if I make a copy of your insightful and thorough pictorial analysis for posting on other forums.


Get a life feeble coward. Since when were random photos insightful? If the pak-fa somehow pays the penalty for gap than the J-20 pays an equal penalty as does the F-22 and if the pak-fa pays the penalty for conventional nozzles as does the mighty drag-queen. The sheer desperation in you is becoming comical.

Why not use this insightful image at your circle jerk Chinese forum where the members have the thinking capacity of a brick:




dont escape from the main point, it is not IQ related. how do you prove J20 has larger surface area than T50 and thus made it a big target?




Any fool can see that the J-20 is a much larger aircraft, that has been estimated to be larger, anyone stating otherwise is just not being honest with themselves.


F22 has large surface area than F16, in your moronic theory is that also true? F22 is an easier target?



Yes the F-22 does have a larger surface area than the F-16 thus it will give off a larger IR signature in terms of heat generated from the fuselage. However, the F-22’s engines are superior in giving off minimal IR signature. The engines are the bigger worry. Get it, or do you need me to go slower, and maybe give you a coloring book with some crayons?










that picture has been proved fake.



No, you and your Chinese chest thumpers have just stooped to new lows.


the "J10" had only one portion of body in the rice field, there were number of doubts.




Yea, and I suppose this is an illusion:




1) the J10 did not have engine.



Really? And how did you come to that conclusion? Were you one of the people in the photo? The concept of nozzles breaking off must be a hard concept to swallow.


2) the J10 did not have head.



Your argument were stupid before but now they are simply desperate. When aircraft crash/crash land the fuselage often breaks into several pieces.




3) the J10 did not have wings.



Sure it did, you just need to put on a pair of classes and also realize that wings break of on impact.



4) the J10 only dropped in a small rice field area, no landing evidence. but how come the body of picture show no much damage.




The idea of a forced landing must be new to you? For starters the aircraft is in multiple pieces, so the damages is extensive. Moreover, there is video of aircraft such as Gripen and F-18 that have crashed yet show less damage.


The aircraft crashed in a soft, muddy, wet, rice field. If there was a fire it was quickly extinguished, And pilots often dump their fuel in emergencies. Than again I didn’t expect you to know that.




5) no burning evidence, no engine oil, no gas, no fuel,,,,,




Like I said pilots often dump their fuel in emergencies, and how do you expect a wet rice field to burn?






6) no parts broke away around.




My picture proves that to be a lie. The J-10 is in multiple pieces and in the real world not the world of Chinese physics, damage and aircraft debris varies based on altitude, airspeed, amount of on board fuel, angle of crash, type of aircraft and where it crashes (ex pavement or rice field). Dududuuuu…


7) the ground of the rice field was very flat, no hole, no bum, no lump.




Of course it’s flat, it is water and water does not burn, and based on the wreckage the aircraft would not have made any hole or crater especial in a wet rice field and a forced landing which this obviously was would definitely not leave any crator. Next time use your head before spouting such nonsense. You’ll save yourself the shame and embarrassment.




you said have at least 5, where do you find 4 more?



Don’t play stupid, everyone of your claims have been disproven, everything you asked me to prove I have. You lost the argument the moment to made your first post. J-10 crashes are no secret we even know the names of some of the pilots involved in the crashes, one of which had a state funeral, and the other awarded a merit, do the names Meng Fansheng or Xie Fengliang ring a bell? If not you can always Google search their names. It’s also no secret that the first prototype J-10 crashed in 1998.

Remember, you were the one pounding your chest claiming that the pak-fa has poor reliability while the J-10 had no crashes, your clam just backfired in your face.



yf22fwd.jpg


the one above is toy, the one below also a toy?




Yes the picture of the F-22 you posted was a plastic toy. It even says so in the [/IMG] description. And what you claim to be a tail fin in that picture is actually a wing flap. I provided a photograph of the actual YF-22 that crashed, serial number N22YZ, and it had no such fins.
 
.
Let me know when BD have something to boast about. In the meantime, we will just take your criticism as a joke in itself and from petty jealousy.


I bet you have no clue as to why these systems uses these high freqs.

Please tell us about it.
 
.
Uh Mr Gambit, why are the two models that you posted, hung upside down on those poles? Any specific reason?

Secondly it is a pleasure to read your posts. Truly informative.
Yes, there is and it is a very important one. But let us see if any practitioners of 'Chinese physics' can answer this one.
 
.
What ‘experts’? Kopp is not an expert in the field of low observability, he has no experience in that field. I have yet to see one real expert say a word. Real experts, people that know, don’t talk, people who talk don’t know.

While some posters from China have an obvious over positive outlook on the J20 during this debate, your statement is equally unconvincing. The above statement for example: by your logic, since we are all talking here, none of us know, so then what is the point of this discussion?

Get a life feeble coward. Since when were random photos insightful? If the pak-fa somehow pays the penalty for gap than the J-20 pays an equal penalty as does the F-22 and if the pak-fa pays the penalty for conventional nozzles as does the mighty drag-queen. The sheer desperation in you is becoming comical.

Are we not all posting 'random' photos? How is a photo determined 'random' or otherwise? I myself find the photo comparison makes a lot of sense. A few posts back, Martian2 and J20BlackDragon have compared ten visual points where the J20 APPEARS to be more advanced. You and Gambit's counter mostly consisted of calling them 'clueless', 'Chinese physics', and now 'Feeble Coward' with no convincing argument.

Why not use this insightful image at your circle jerk Chinese forum where the members have the thinking capacity of a brick:

No, you and your Chinese chest thumpers have just stooped to new lows.

And more often than not, racial remarks that only serves to discredit you even farther. I am aware that some of the Chinese posters are doing the same in kind, but do notice the main posters on this debate in the pro-J20 camp Martian2 have thus far remained civil and logical. There is nothing to be done if you simply hate us, but if you want to make arguments, this is not the way to do it.
 
.
No.. what he is trying to say is that Engineering is a wonderful science.

If that's indeed what he was trying to say, then I couldn't agree with him more. I do suggest you reread his entire post that I was replying to as it sure wasn't just a praise about how wonderful engineering is. Gambit's flat denial of my question directed at him without a word of farther explanation is typical of his approach when challenged and remains unconvincing.

have I ever tested american equipment .. yes! planes ...yes
have i ever tested russian equipment .. yes, planes ...yes

have i ever tested frence equipment, yes, planes yes
have i ever tested german equipment yes, planes , no

have i ever tested chinese equipment, NO, planes, NO..

why would I believe all you guys are saying, simply because a plane is painted black? True, I am very happy that the Chinese now make what appears to be high tech planes. But would I go to war in one? ahhh NO. .

Do you even understand what this is all about?

Yes. We are all here speculating on something no concrete data could be found. Which will be the case for EVERY modern military gear from China, to conceal our own abilities is in-line with our (China's) strategy. You may not want to go to war in a J20, but wouldn't you be curious if you are to FIGHT one?

We are all fan boys of military tech, we are all guessing as far as Chinese equipment are concerned, and let's admit that national pride plays a part in every one of us. I was interested in the anti-J20 arguments, but when it degrades to anti-china and anti-chinese (I could tolerate the former to an extend, but not the latter), it just become annoying and pointless. Note I'm not directing the last remark at you.

Thanks for the reply, cheers.
 
.
While some posters from China have an obvious over positive outlook on the J20 during this debate, your statement is equally unconvincing. The above statement for example: by your logic, since we are all talking here, none of us know, so then what is the point of this discussion?


Of course we are all talking, sharing, and presenting counter argument. However, I am referring to ‘experts’, and real experts don’t reveal much if anything. There are a select few members on this board that at least grasp some of the principles of ‘stealth‘ principles and RCS control. There is no chance that guys like copp can pull random numbers out of thin air without having physically tested aircraft such of the F-35, pak-fa, and J-20 rigorously. Kopp isn’t an expert in the field of low observability nor is any of those clueless magazine editors that make gross mistakes such as calling treated canopies RAM or radar absorbent.



Are we not all posting 'random' photos? How is a photo determined 'random' or otherwise? I myself find the photo comparison makes a lot of sense. A few posts back, Martian2 and J20BlackDragon have compared ten visual points where the J20 APPEARS to be more advanced.


What your boys did was post some random photos without support or explanation. One photo claimed the pak-fa has round nozzles which is true, yet the poster doesn’t seem to realize that the J-20 also has round nozzles. It’s like spiting in the wing where the spit gets blown back in your face. Other argument such as the pak-fa has ‘gaps’ is deceitful because the poster never supported evidence as to why this is detrimental. The so called gap he is referring to is also present in the F-22. The so called gap in question is the gap in-between the intake and fuselage. A cavity can cause EM to scatter but the gap, or tunnel as Gambit calls it, is not a cavity but a channel or tunnel that exists at a 45 degree angle. It is not possible for this gap, vent or tunnel to diffract in a way a traditional cavity would.

Further, the silly argument of a ‘metal’ strip in the canopy is absolutely incorrect or misunderstood. The ill informed stick to their opinions yet have zero evidence to explain as to why a metal strip would be detrimental. Remember the F-117 had no single piece canopy in fact it had many metal strips, the B-2 also has many metal strips. The YF-23 which had a metal framed canopy and exposed compressors had an overall smaller RCS than the YF-22. So metal strips have little to no effects on RCS if done properly and by properly I mean tight fit but equally as important the frame on the canopy is never perpendicular to the front of the aircraft.

Moral of the story, we have some worthless instigators some of which keep getting banned talking their usual nonsense. Even worst they (Martian & Black-dragon ) are always the instigators, they start it yet when I enter the fray to counter them I am always called a troll. Well I could give a rats behind.



You and Gambit's counter mostly consisted of calling them 'clueless', 'Chinese physics', and now 'Feeble Coward' with no convincing argument.


Really? Our side has presented detailed explanations, often backed with sources. The feeble cowards have presented nothing other than tall claims with no supporting sources or credible explanations.


And more often than not, racial remarks that only serves to discredit you even farther.


Point out a single post where I said anything racial. Since when was feeble coward a racial terms or even inappropriate?
 
.
Of course we are all talking, sharing, and presenting counter argument. However, I am referring to ‘experts’, and real experts don’t reveal much if anything.

Indeed you, assuming you are an expert, have not revealed much of anything.

What your boys did was post some random photos without support or explanation. One photo claimed the pak-fa has round nozzles which is true, yet the poster doesn’t seem to realize that the J-20 also has round nozzles.

I still don't know what the difference is between a random and…non-random photo, but from what I could see, the J-20's nose is only more rounded on the top, but quite angular on the sides and bottom. It is more similar to the F-22 than Pak-Fa whose nose is nearly completely rounded.

Now, I don't know what significance is this to an plane's stealth capability, but the dozens of posts you and gambit have posted denying there is a visible difference between the J20 and Pak-Fa's nose is, puzzling to say the least. You rejected a clearly visible difference without going farther for a conclusion, this is the train of thoughts I have problem understanding.


Further, the silly argument of a ‘metal’ strip in the canopy is absolutely incorrect or misunderstood.

I'll accept what you said about real experts will reveal nothing, and I'll accept you know more about stealth than I do. My question is, why would the F-22 and J20 have this feature? Would it not be more expensive / difficult to produce this kind of 'rimless' canopy than traditional metal-stripping. Is it there just to look pretty? (It sure does)

The F22 represents the best and most expensive stealth effort from the US, that alone may justify the reasoning that rimless is better than stripped canopy, and why this feature is only found on the F22, does it not?

Other argument such as the pak-fa has ‘gaps’ is deceitful because the poster never supported evidence as to why this is detrimental. The so called gap he is referring to is also present in the F-22. The so called gap in question is the gap in-between the intake and fuselage. A cavity can cause EM to scatter but the gap, or tunnel as Gambit calls it, is not a cavity but a channel or tunnel that exists at a 45 degree angle. It is not possible for this gap, vent or tunnel to diffract in a way a traditional cavity would.

Their original argument was not limited to gaps, but also rivets, protrusions, bumps. Looking at (random?) photos, the J20 and F22 both have a very clean under belly, the Pak-FA is sort of a mess if you don't mind me saying so. It seems you are claiming all three aircraft are the same (though you only addressed the gap), yet I clearly see a difference?

I skipped some pages on this debate but I recall there was a point raised by Martian that the engine blades aren't visible from the front for both the J20 and F22, yet clearly visible (on my computer I had to adjust the contrast levels to see it) on the PAK. I don't recall you guys had a counter for it, but assume you will say that exposed engine blades won't affect stealth, my question is why would the J20 and F22 go for the effort to hide them?

Really? Our side has presented detailed explanations, often backed with sources. The feeble cowards have presented nothing other than tall claims with no supporting sources or credible explanations.

I don't see any backed source in neither the post I was replying to originally, or your post I am replying to now.

Point out a single post where I said anything racial. Since when was feeble coward a racial terms or even inappropriate?

I don't know how to quote within a quote haha, and without going back farther, here is what you said in your original post that led to my statement:

"Why not use this insightful image at your circle jerk Chinese forum where the members have the thinking capacity of a brick:

No, you and your Chinese chest thumpers have just stooped to new lows."

I'm being accused of having the thinking capacity of a brick and a chest thumpers merely for the fact that I'm Chinese (the remark applied to me as soon as I made a reply to you with my chinese flags on my avatar). I consider that a racial remark, or at least inappropriate indeed.

Cheers.
 
. .
Yes, there is and it is a very important one. But let us see if any practitioners of 'Chinese physics' can answer this one.

Uptil now no answer. So could you help me on this??:D
 
. . .
Google translation

The use of class F22normal distribution is the most secure, but China and Russia are aware of: in the material and the backward situation, the conventional layout is not expected to be able to fight with F22. In 2000, China and Russia in the technology to develop cooperation, but did not reach any agreement of fifth generation fighter. To be sure, in 611 by Song Zong" a small aspect ratio and high lift aircraft aerodynamic layout research" published before, China has been the fifth generation fighter foundation conducted a lot of research, but to use which kind of structure has not been determined.

Today's J-10 pneumatic early many plans more prudent one, followed the j-9program in a large number of existing tunnel information, the more radical double delta wing plan because the risk was too large to give up;" small aspect ratio" in an article strake wing canard layout should be from his unsuccessful the canard double delta wing plan gradually evolved."

Shen also puts forward his own programme, in the competition, Shen Fei601seems to criticize canard defects, clarifies the three wing in the face of trim, motor and lift the benefits. But there are a few problem is unavoidable: three wing in the face of RCS increases than the canard and general layout of complex, for increasing resistance is more unbearable weight of engine. In601, there seems to be a conventional layout as a backup, it is their own uncertainty and the absence of absolute certainty that they lost the heavy machine competition.

In the late 1960's, China in the" lift" layout started the J9 project, China in1960 time begin to hope to be able to lead the world, unconventional" lift" layout that canard has begun a large number of. When J10published in 2005, countless people in it with lion type aircraft articles, but J10really that simple?

601to four wing planform programmes are made model, was tested in a wind tunnel experiment. Mainly consider the swept-wing or delta wing, wing and delta wing leading edge sweep method is adopted to increase the critical Maher number. But if the supersonic flight to Maher number 2, using subsonic swept-wing scheme must make the leading edge sweep angle greater than 60 degrees, but the leading edge sweep angle is too large, and the structure stress will deteriorate, will increase the weight of the structure;

In addition, the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of space will also worsen, lift, drag increases. The big wing is adverse, and the delta wing is more applicable, not only has the advantages of a swept wing, and relatively long wing chord length to ensure root structure stress condition, reduce the structure weight, but also help to ensure that aircraft longitudinal flight stability. So six zero one was eliminated by the top three programs, and to the edge of the wings swept angle to55 degrees, called j9IV scheme. This is a normal form of delta wing layout scheme, starting appearance except for head to both sides of the inlet, the rest were associated with J7, J8, similar to the super 7early type, is also j7CP.

The J9 project, focus on the requirements of supersonic, both good subsonic performance, front canard design is far from mature, not to mention the differential, but still failed, only the layout is statically unstable, is still serious over China and the world at the time of pneumatic control level. The9project, in 1970 time end was abandoned, but it after repeatedly modified,601 for canard has laid the foundation!

If J20, then it can only talk about canard wing, from the overall. This? What about it?

"Solving the trim is another pathway of the thrust vector control ( TVC ) technology. Using TVC, its main advantages are: in the aerodynamic control surfaces were added based on a matching tie

Segment, balancing ability nature greatly enhanced; high-speed aerodynamic flight control surface deflection will produce great resistance, and the TVC can play the same control effect without deflected control surfaces;

TVC is not deflected thrust vector and generates a normal force, powerful engine jet in the rear fuselage to form a jet action, to create a new " lift" increment, while participating in trim

. F-22supersonic maneuverability greatly improved, TVC technical merit

In 1997 611completed the" thrust vector control on the aircraft's stability and controllability of the influence of" using the J-10kinetic model was fit for axisymmetric vectoring thrust nozzle simulation

Research; according to the paper, a canard and thrust vector combination can in post-stall area effective expansion of flight envelope, to get good control and stability of. Be careful

Described in the paper, a noun, the so-called" lateral-directional control system", probably refers to control canard differential system.

From this thesis can be seen, the canard configuration and thrust vector integration research,611 in at least12 years before the start of the. The four generation of the thrust vector integration development although there may not be any work

The history experience, theoretical preparation should be fully."

Similar to the F22diamond head first is a must.

F22diamond head has two effects: first, the stealth irregular radar scattering, this everybody knows, on the other hand is also important: diamond head open air, head sides slope

The air compression effect. That is to say, it is a vortex generator.

Four generation machine from SU27, F16began to have the strake vortex air generator, F18big brother special strake vortex air generator is very beautiful, of course, a canard front canard vortex generator

More effective than the conventional layout, it is said. The F22 is the first to create a production aircraft nose vortices, F22 added 2vortex generator vortex, it is head, small strake vortex as auxiliary

.

As the lifting body and stealth design, almost square accounts in every detail of the J20, diamond head is indispensable, flight control of the complex appears to still solve problem, but fortunately,

But song old in his papers appearing in a worried: as the main vortex generator, the canard vortex will not receive head vortex interference?

It also seems to be a thorny problem. In T50, head of vorticity and similar false duck wing movable strake also seem to have this problem.

According to a number of public information, seems to be validated, this problem is not solved, can be used to control, but it still affected J20 and T50 design. But for J20, it

A good, a bad. Benefits are: coupling trim and vortex lift problem solving and a consideration, harm would immediately said, but also cannot say is a weakness.

Seem to will head vortex on the canard and leading-edge strake effects to a minimum, J20and T50 seem to have adopted for canard and leading-edge strake away from the head of the design. T50 nose from

The wing so far is not without reason.

T50 also uses a multiple vortex generators, but its movable strake is more conventional layout for the compensation of the concessions, strictly speaking, T50is double cavity between the lift

Body is conservative, and combined with the stealth F22, J20 integral lifting body can be said to be almost two times, and J20combined with the overall stealth fusion of multiple vortex generator is integral lifting body

One fighter only.

J20coupling can be said to be from the coupling, but actually, the real wing from the front wing has a considerable distance, large area of the front wing to ensure balancing role, as well as the vortex lift, but if

The main wing really left front wing, the vortex lift it or lose a lot of weight, J20actual away from the front canard wing trim, ensure the absolute strong, supersonic motor performance is very outstanding, but

Is subsonic and lifting body weakened do!

The typhoon will use small almost invisible pneumatic generator retaining a vortex generator, amplifying the wing area, but the J20solution is allergic to the pole, wing area on the

Large! Article edge increases one main vortex generator! This seems to be similar to typhoon false distance coupling world the one and only!

So J20's main vortex generator has been increased to three, the nose vortices, canard vortex vortex, wing, while the strake vortex will serve as an important auxiliary pneumatic measure, used for duck wing

, wing and Fuselage Aerodynamic integration design modification and vortex flow improvement and upgrading!

Two years ago, the closest concept may appear wing cutting edge extending out a sharp narrow edge, duck wing housed in edge design. But we have not thought of, J20

The importance of the strake vortex is beyond imagination. It almost can be counted as a separate main vortex generator!

Just to meet the stealthy airframe design, enough to let Americans proud, J20stealth unconventional multiple vortex generators of integral lifting body, its aerodynamic design need much effort

, flight control system need to be complicated!?

Strake vortex lift increase, and away from the center of gravity balancing ability can achieve large canard vortex lift and balancing ability of the dual strong, not only so, their design

Blended wing body combination of stealth requirements, presenting a planar integral lifting body effect! This benefit is the world knows, but apart from the early 1990's American actual verification

Have no practical use outside! In the J20thrust vector, balancing capacity will be increased further!

Can say, J20technique either canard, strake, DSi inlet are J10, FC1 as the technical accumulation, can say, J20technology does not exceed the world existing technology fan

Wai, but put them together, need to be extremely strong foundation, J20was the first to put into practice.

Another the body length of the reasons are complex, J20more than F22stressed area rate reduce, reduce the resistance," stealth bye" is nonsense, but compared with short thick F22, J20 more fine

Multiple, and the S shaped inlet is undoubtedly in the rear fuselage torsion, it is occupying valuable space, in order to give the internal weapons lattice cabin space, J20body length is no doubt. While T50by

On the two costal engine only slightly turned downwards, the intermediate space, so do not so long, cost is the stealth bad!

F22 stubby, is due to abnormal engine, J20a little longer, due to duck layout and stealth, super cruise to balance the needs of.

In addition, J20canard wing still uses J10ideas, using spanwise along the variable camber of large area is lift design, with obvious anhedral angle; the design of pneumatic and flight control design

The difficulty of cost, risk, income, obtain high lift aerodynamic control surfaces to good control effect. But the drawback is that the stealth ability does not appear to be arranged in parallel, in fact, a parallel arrangement of fly

Control is more demanding, and the eddy current complex worse, may fly after calculation, and without the use of such seemingly advanced layout, although there will be some signal scattering, but not good

To deal with the problem. The problem lies mainly in duck wing and body between joints and the rotating shaft. J20 uses a small strip protrusion block joint practice, it can reduce the RCS, but seems to have brought

A small control surfaces. J20designers to so much control surface, courage and skills terrible!

The main wing, J20 is designed in the regulation distance, using a large swept trapezoidal wing approach, similar to the French Rafale as concise and lively, taking into account and fuselage is not parallel to the lower RCS signal reflection

, to ensure the relatively small area with numerous vortex lift on supersonic and subsonic effect. Many people wish to consider W wing, but it seems like science fiction, but there are many disadvantages:

The 1processing complex, cost increase, while the strength of the defective.

2 W wing itself will have some radar wave reflectivity. While large swept trapezoidal wing appear to be simple, in fact, restrained the stealth effect is absolutely good.

3W wing to enhance strength, will inevitably result in weight lifting. However, it will move along the length of the fuselage, resulting in increased, and if the stretched back out, sharp edge during takeoff

A clean landing risk.

Differential duck wing, canard is few, and the importance, little is known about.

J20hood vents are serrated design, it is invisible, but many pictures show, vents are one large and one small change, to be sure, in the J20 thrust vector before, engine thrust and torque experiment has begun. While the V tail relaxed fighter yaw stability appears to be for this match!

It also seems to be a thorny problem. In T50, head of vorticity and similar false duck wing movable strake also seem to have this problem.

According to a number of public information, seems to be validated, this problem is not solved, can be used to control, but it still affected J20 and T50 design. But for J20, it

A good, a bad. Benefits are: coupling trim and vortex lift problem solving and a consideration, harm would immediately said, but also cannot say is a weakness.

Seem to will head vortex on the canard and leading-edge strake effects to a minimum, J20and T50 seem to have adopted for canard and leading-edge strake away from the head of the design. T50 nose from

The wing so far is not without reason.

T50 also uses a multiple vortex generators, but its movable strake is more conventional layout for the compensation of the concessions, strictly speaking, T50is double cavity between the lift

Body is conservative, and combined with the stealth F22, J20 integral lifting body can be said to be almost two times, and J20combined with the overall stealth fusion of multiple vortex generator is integral lifting body

One fighter only.

J20coupling can be said to be from the coupling, but actually, the real wing from the front wing has a considerable distance, large area of the front wing to ensure balancing role, as well as the vortex lift, but if

The main wing really left front wing, the vortex lift it or lose a lot of weight, J20actual away from the front canard wing trim, ensure the absolute strong, supersonic motor performance is very outstanding, but

Is subsonic and lifting body weakened do!

The typhoon will use small almost invisible pneumatic generator retaining a vortex generator, amplifying the wing area, but the J20solution is allergic to the pole, wing area on the

Large! Article edge increases one main vortex generator! This seems to be similar to typhoon false distance coupling world the one and only!

So J20's main vortex generator has been increased to three, the nose vortices, canard vortex vortex, wing, while the strake vortex will serve as an important auxiliary pneumatic measure, used for duck wing

, wing and Fuselage Aerodynamic integration design modification and vortex flow improvement and upgrading!

Two years ago, the closest concept may appear wing cutting edge extending out a sharp narrow edge, duck wing housed in edge design. But we have not thought of, J20

The importance of the strake vortex is beyond imagination. It almost can be counted as a separate main vortex generator!

Just to meet the stealthy airframe design, enough to let Americans proud, J20stealth unconventional multiple vortex generators of integral lifting body, its aerodynamic design need much effort

, flight control system need to be complicated!?

Strake vortex lift increase, and away from the center of gravity balancing ability can achieve large canard vortex lift and balancing ability of the dual strong, not only so, their design

Blended wing body combination of stealth requirements, presenting a planar integral lifting body effect! This benefit is the world knows, but apart from the early 1990's American actual verification

Have no practical use outside! In the J20thrust vector, balancing capacity will be increased further!

Can say, J20technique either canard, strake, DSi inlet are J10, FC1 as the technical accumulation, can say, J20technology does not exceed the world existing technology fan

Wai, but put them together, need to be extremely strong foundation, J20was the first to put into practice.

Another the body length of the reasons are complex, J20more than F22stressed area rate reduce, reduce the resistance," stealth bye" is nonsense, but compared with short thick F22, J20 more fine

Multiple, and the S shaped inlet is undoubtedly in the rear fuselage torsion, it is occupying valuable space, in order to give the internal weapons lattice cabin space, J20body length is no doubt. While T50by

On the two costal engine only slightly turned downwards, the intermediate space, so do not so long, cost is the stealth bad!

F22 stubby, is due to abnormal engine, J20a little longer, due to duck layout and stealth, super cruise to balance the needs of.

In addition, J20canard wing still uses J10ideas, using spanwise along the variable camber of large area is lift design, with obvious anhedral angle; the design of pneumatic and flight control design

The difficulty of cost, risk, income, obtain high lift aerodynamic control surfaces to good control effect. But the drawback is that the stealth ability does not appear to be arranged in parallel, in fact, a parallel arrangement of fly

Control is more demanding, and the eddy current complex worse, may fly after calculation, and without the use of such seemingly advanced layout, although there will be some signal scattering, but not good

To deal with the problem. The problem lies mainly in duck wing and body between joints and the rotating shaft. J20 uses a small strip protrusion block joint practice, it can reduce the RCS, but seems to have brought

A small control surfaces. J20designers to so much control surface, courage and skills terrible!

The main wing, J20 is designed in the regulation distance, using a large swept trapezoidal wing approach, similar to the French Rafale as concise and lively, taking into account and fuselage is not parallel to the lower RCS signal reflection

, to ensure the relatively small area with numerous vortex lift on supersonic and subsonic effect. Many people wish to consider W wing, but it seems like science fiction, but there are many disadvantages:

The 1processing complex, cost increase, while the strength of the defective.

2 W wing itself will have some radar wave reflectivity. While large swept trapezoidal wing appear to be simple, in fact, restrained the stealth effect is absolutely good.

3W wing to enhance strength, will inevitably result in weight lifting. However, it will move along the length of the fuselage, resulting in increased, and if the stretched back out, sharp edge during takeoff

A clean landing risk.

Differential duck wing, canard is few, and the importance, little is known about.

J20hood vents are serrated design, it is invisible, but many pictures show, vents are one large and one small change, to be sure, in the J20 thrust vector before, engine thrust and torque experiment has begun. While the V tail relaxed fighter yaw stability appears to be for this match!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lateral movement, slip, J20 does not use ready-made similar to F22 as the traditional aerodynamic layout, instead of using the canard aerodynamic layout, is in pursuit of high mobility.

long fuselage design is intended to be useful for high-speed flight, it is in order to make up for the inadequate level of engine technology, with the development of high performance vector engine development, combine the two, mobility increases, but increases the complexity of flight control, flight control programming can produce more complex flight action.J20 flight control programming need the best programming staff,Write the best flight control procedures, can fully play its mobility potential, in theory it can do almost anything can think of complex movements, if equipped with vector engine , human physiological limit
 
.
Back
Top Bottom