The J-20 SUCCESSFULLY conducts first flight!!

[siegecrossbow]

^^ Dude just chill out and let it go.

 

[gambit]

I give up. You're just going to keep claiming "suspected this," "alleged that," and other nonsense. It is still standard FUD practice. You're trying to create Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. A very nasty tactic.

Versus you boys' fantastic claims about this aircraft even before its debut recently? I see it as bringing the entire issue more down to Earth.

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

我支持！

日本、印度、美国都不愿意跟中华民族共享这个世界。他们对中华民族的敌意太明显了！这是他们文化的核心部分，跟古时代的蛮人没有两样。如同汉朝与匈奴，我们需要灭掉周边的野蛮人才能有个光荣的未来。

中国人想要追求和平，追求共存，其实都是欺骗自己，阿Q精神而已。抛弃掉一切的幻想，准备战争！

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

I agree 60%. Disagree 40%

1. I agree get ready for war.
2. I agree the Han Chinese vs. Mongo part 100%.

3. I disagree to fight American, Japanese, Indian at the same time. The current US-indian alliance is WEAK. Both side is only using each other but fighting any one of them will arlam them all and strengthen their alliance, even forge a Japan-America-india alliance. If we want to fight, we must be fully prepared and FIGHT THE WEAKEST one with the loudest talking mouth. Crush him and then move on to the next.

 

[Beskar]

Now that's an awesome news! Go China Go!

Historic event for sure. Balance of power ... It's happening!

 

[dbc]

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

I agree 60%. Disagree 40%

1. I agree get ready for war.
2. I agree the Han Chinese vs. Mongo part 100%.

3. I disagree to fight American, Japanese, Indian at the same time. The current US-indian alliance is WEAK. Both side is only using each other but fighting any one of them will arlam them all and strengthen their alliance, even forge a Japan-America-india alliance. If we want to fight, we must be fully prepared and FIGHT THE WEAKEST one with the loudest talking mouth. Crush him and then move on to the next.

Why don't you and HongWu get a room? And leave the rest of us to discuss the thread topic

 

[Kompromat]

Now that's an awesome news! Go China Go!

Historic event for sure. Balance of power ... It's happening!

Shift of power

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

Why don't you and HongWu get a room? And leave the rest of us to discuss the thread topic

Oh, sorry got off topic. HongWu is very knowledgeble and I got carried away talking to him.

Let's get back to topic.

 

[Beskar]

 

[koolio]

Fantastic news, great going China, Im sure this will send shivers down for the US but nothing to be alarmed off obviously F22 raptor is operational whereas the J20 is in testing stages but nevertheless great achievement.

 

[ares]

This is an obvious Photoshop considering 2001 is spelt backwards.

 

[GareebNawaz]

i love it.. well done China

 

[Speeder 2]

Your argument is based upon ignorance and I do not use the word 'ignorance' in an insulting manner. It is the truth.

In a fly-by-wire flight control system, the FLCS computer cannot be switched on/off at will. The FLCS computer sits between the pilot and the rest of the aircraft. Prior to fbw, flight control laws are governed by hard mechanical connections. With fbw, we have to write those laws. We can write them via electronic engineering as in the analog F-16A/B generation. Later we wrote them in software in the C/D digital generation and this standard continues to this day.

You may not like my argument about a potential software bug, which is properly called a 'Byzantine' failure in the avionics industry, but here is a tragic example of such a 'bug'...

Nagoya A300 Accident Report


The Airbus A300 is a fly-by-wire FLCS system. The accident above is an example of where the FLCS was unable to cope with a conflict in modes of operations. The avionics industry call this an 'incompetence' fault. The word 'incompetence' is not meant for the aircrew for certainly they are well trained and experienced. The word 'incompetence' is meant to attribute to the inability of the FLCS to cope with the conflict created by the accidental activation of the 'go around' lever.


The proposed changed was to have the lever redesigned to remove this potentiality. Coping with conflicting modes that could be demanded by the pilot versus the current environment is something that the flight controls laws must be able to either resolve or alert the pilot to the conflict. The sophistication of these laws depends on the education and experience of their designers.

You may not like these facts I presented but the cheap personal attacks you boys threw up at me in response to a legitimate query reveals more about you than it is about me.

NO, you are confusing about several things:

FBW means Fly by Wire, not Move by Wire. Since when the first button that a pilot presses after he sits into a cockpit must automatically activate FBW software as if he were at 30,000 feet?

And since when all FBW software around the world must be exactly the same, specifying in the first line of codes that all major parts, rudders especially, must move in perfect sync rejecting any manuel orders of pilots at all times even at "Mode 0" before and after in-flight, whithout some clear cut-off lines to seperate different operating staue modes amongst the codes?

No, it is NOT a LAW, aka Physical Laws etc, as you wrongly asserted, but merely a RULE, the in-fight and off-flight control RULE which includes FBW software; both RULE and FBW are set and written by MEN, and MEN are different, at least very different at Mode 0. This renders your above lengthy reasoning obsolete .


By "Mode 0 " I meant Still Statue before takeoff or after it, not in-flight.

In an analogy one can legitimately find it odd if one 100m sprinter moves both his arms in the same direction while his is running in the final cuz it’s against intuition, norm and most importantly a natural law. But he is perfectly OK ( not illegitimate) to do so before the running or after running while he’s warming up his arms and legs, flirting with a beautiful chic reporter - "Mode 0", which logically has little to do with violating any physical law, intuition, or norm - in-flight fbw software control in this case, particularly when the pilot was obviously busy at posturing the major body parts of J-REX for a photo-op as the picture showed.

 

[GareebNawaz]

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

I agree 60%. Disagree 40%

1. I agree get ready for war.
2. I agree the Han Chinese vs. Mongo part 100%.

3. I disagree to fight American, Japanese, Indian at the same time. The current US-indian alliance is WEAK. Both side is only using each other but fighting any one of them will arlam them all and strengthen their alliance, even forge a Japan-America-india alliance. If we want to fight, we must be fully prepared and FIGHT THE WEAKEST one with the loudest talking mouth. Crush him and then move on to the next.

by loudest talking mouth you imply Indians.... i love chinese people and their willingness to destroy India. Always gets a good laugh out of me. Supreme ruler of the universe.. All Hail PRC...

 

[siegecrossbow]

This is an obvious Photoshop considering 2001 is spelt backwards.

No. The photo is just flipped horizontally.

 

[gambit]

NO, you are confusing about several things:

FTW means Fly by Wire, not Move by Wire.

Good Avionics God In Heaven...!!! In all my years of serving You, my Lord, in and out of the military, never have I heard such nonsense and from a civilian at that.

Speedy, pal. You are way out of your league. Fly by wire IS move by wire. There are NO mechanical linkages between the pilot and the rest of the aircraft. All commands MUST be routed through the flight control computer. There are no on/off switch for this. The only mechanical actuators in the system are by the surfaces themselves and they are hydraulics.

Since when the first button that a pilot presses after he sits into a cockpit must automatically activate FBW software as if he were at 30,000 feet?

There are no such 'button'. If there is such a 'button' and if it is in 'off' position, pray tell how are the actuators going to move?

No, it is NOT a LAW, aka Physical Laws etc, as you wrongly asserted, but merely a RULE, the in-fight and off-flight control RULE which includes FBW software; both RULE and FBW are set and written by MEN, and MEN are different, at least very different at Mode 0. This renders your above lengthy reasoning obsolete .


By "Mode 0 " I meant Still Statue before takeoff or after it, not in-flight.

In an analogy one can legitimately find it odd if one 100m sprinter moves both his arms in the same direction while his is running in the final cuz it’s against intuition, norm and most importantly a natural law. But he is perfectly OK ( not illegitimate) to do so before the running or after running while he’s warming his arms and legs, flirting with a beautiful chic reporter - "Mode 0", which logically has little to do with violating any physical law, intuition, or norm - in-flight fbw software control in this case, particularly when the pilot was obviously busy at posturing for a photo-op as the picture showed.

No such thing as 'flight controls laws' you say?

Airbus Flight Control Laws

Read and see how foolish you look.