What's new

Top 10 future weapons of CHINA

.
Indians talk big about foreign weapons they have.

China actually has its own defense industry.
China can build its own weapons.


india cannot keep up.
that is hurting the huge indian ego.

J20
rp6Vp.jpg
 
.
Indians talk big about foreign weapons they have.

China actually has its own defense industry.
China can build its own weapons.


india cannot keep up.
that is hurting the huge indian ego.

J20
rp6Vp.jpg

As far as Chinese industry is concerned we know it manufactures foreign metals... We do the same... the only difference is we do it with an Agreement, and you do it without one...
 
.
I.STEALTH

1. Canards
j20canards.jpg

canards are forewings close to the nose of the aircraft that provide maneuverability. According to Mr. Aboulafia, “There’s no better way of guaranteeing a radar reflection and compromise of stealth” than adding canards to the aircraft.canards are generally indicative of a less-than-harmonious design requiring ‘bolt-on’ fixes. And as they add radar-reflecting edges, they’re usually not stealthy.

T-50_YF-23_F-22_F-35_Air_Force_Aircraft_Comparison.jpg

Now compare it all other 5th gwn fighters they dont have canards or may be the chinese are the 1 step ahead to US & russia in stealth designing
smiley-laughing024.gif


2.engine nozzles
J20enginenozzles.jpg

The same goes for the engine nozzles, which were clearly not designed to be stealthy, as well the large overall size of the aircraft.But in a close air combat, thought it has a higher manoeuvrability, it is still vulnerable to heat seeking missiles as the aircraft lacks a stealth design in the nozzle section.

Though, the aft section stealth design doesn’t look satisfactory, the tail boom, fins and the engine with a conventional nozzle compromises further the overall stealth characteristics of the aircraft.
F22NOZZLE.jpg

The F-22, B-2 stealth bomber and now-retired F-117 stealth fighter-bomber all have carefully shaped, angular nozzles meant to scatter radar waves. In the F-22, these nozzles can move, ‘vectoring’ the engine thrust to boost manoeuvrability. The apparent absence of stealthy nozzles and thrust-vectoring places a hard limit on the J-20’s ability to evade radar detection from behind.

The design has only two apparent weaknesses, which are the curvature in the slab side shaping, which provides broader reflection lobes than necessary, and the circular exhaust nozzle, a weakness common to the F-35 and T-50.
 
.
As far as Chinese industry is concerned we know it manufactures foreign metals... We do the same... the only difference is we do it with an Agreement, and you do it without one...

Don't reply back to this retard sirjee I think he's a person behind wrong flag whose just trying to bring India in this thread so that ones again both Indo and Sino soldiers can fight with each other for no reason.:smokin:
 
.
These two planes look about the same to me.

Weak. :no:

pakfa39.jpg





su27radom2009.jpg

Stupid is what stupid does and you have clearly shown us this.

Tell me are you guys so arrogant that you can't even see that your own air force is using these weak planes????

Get rid of your state of deniyal.
 
.
lol, Martian is a middle-aged man, and his archnemesis in this forum is Gambit.

Better stay away from him in a challenging debate.

Otherwise, you will get bullied again. :lol:

I really doubt that.

---------- Post added at 04:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:29 PM ----------

I do generally support China's path to its own stealth fighter. But some guys here are seriously way over their heads :cheesy:
 
.
The J-20 is an inferior rip-off of the MiG 1.44 technology demonstrator. Inferior because, the J-20 isn't stealthy at all. This is the reason why the Chinese refuse to show their prototype to the world; unlike the Russians, who have no qualms in letting prospective clients examine the PAK-FA, T-50 even at its development stage.
 
.
I.STEALTH

1. Canards
canards are forewings close to the nose of the aircraft that provide maneuverability. According to Mr. Aboulafia, “There’s no better way of guaranteeing a radar reflection and compromise of stealth” than adding canards to the aircraft.canards are generally indicative of a less-than-harmonious design requiring ‘bolt-on’ fixes. And as they add radar-reflecting edges, they’re usually not stealthy.

Now compare it all other 5th gwn fighters they dont have canards or may be the chinese are the 1 step ahead to US & russia in stealth designing

2.engine nozzles
The same goes for the engine nozzles, which were clearly not designed to be stealthy, as well the large overall size of the aircraft.But in a close air combat, thought it has a higher manoeuvrability, it is still vulnerable to heat seeking missiles as the aircraft lacks a stealth design in the nozzle section.

Though, the aft section stealth design doesn’t look satisfactory, the tail boom, fins and the engine with a conventional nozzle compromises further the overall stealth characteristics of the aircraft.

The F-22, B-2 stealth bomber and now-retired F-117 stealth fighter-bomber all have carefully shaped, angular nozzles meant to scatter radar waves. In the F-22, these nozzles can move, ‘vectoring’ the engine thrust to boost manoeuvrability. The apparent absence of stealthy nozzles and thrust-vectoring places a hard limit on the J-20’s ability to evade radar detection from behind.

The design has only two apparent weaknesses, which are the curvature in the slab side shaping, which provides broader reflection lobes than necessary, and the circular exhaust nozzle, a weakness common to the F-35 and T-50.

I've already discussed the stealthiness of the J-20 Mighty Dragon canards on this forum on July 6, 2011. My post (link to post #154 - http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...neration-aircraft-updates-discussions-11.html):

"I said the J-20 canards were irrelevant for four reasons:

1. Composite material composition

2. RAM coating

3. Curved surface to deflect radar waves

4. Small incremental increase in surface area

You and PtldM3 are ridiculous. Your claim will always be: "Well, we can't know with absolute certainty until we put a J-20 in an anechoic chamber." We don't even know the results of a F-22 in an anechoic chamber. Under your ridiculous standard, you will always make whatever ludicrous claims that the two of you like."

----------

Secondly, I recently made a post comparing the J-20 canard winglets to the F-22 horizontal tailplanes. I said the J-20 Mighty Dragon is a superior design, because the placement of winglets in front of the main wings permit both supermaneuverability and stability.

From my post #108 in this thread (link: http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/128212-top-10-future-weapons-china-8.html):

From my August 25, 2011 post:

Tailless J-20 Mighty Dragon is superior to F-22 Raptor canardless design

Cm7Wx.jpg

J-20 Mighty Dragon has canard winglets, but no tailplanes.

IlLPr.jpg

F-22 Raptor has no canards, but it has tailplane winglets.

From a stealth design perspective, there is no effective difference between placing two little winglets (i.e. canards) in front of the main wings or behind them (i.e. tailplanes).

However, from a maneuverability standpoint, the J-20 Mighty Dragon canards provide it with super maneuverability. The F-22 Raptor tailplanes merely provide stability. This is understandable because the F-22 is a much older design. Aerospace engineers have a better understanding of stealth design today than twenty years ago.

In conclusion, the J-20 Mighty Dragon is a superior evolutionary design of its chronological F-22 predecessor.

[Note: Thank you to HouShanghai and Feiyang for the J-20 picture.]

----------

Regarding the J-20 LOAN (i.e. Low Observable Asymmetric Nozzle) engine nozzles, I have already discussed its comparable stealthiness to the F-35 and inferiority to the F-22.

In my subsequent posts, I freely acknowledged the J-20 round engine nozzles are inferior to the F-22 flat nozzles. The technical reason is that the F-22 flat nozzles are a wide-band stealth design. The current J-20 and F-35 LOAN (Low-Observable Asymmetric Nozzle) technology is only narrow-band stealth (in two bands, X and Ku).

From my January 14, 2011 post:

J-20's Low Observable Axisymmetrical Nozzle (i.e. LOAN) technology

10ypahj.jpg

China's J-20 stealth fighter engine nozzles

2it50ew.jpg

China's J-20 stealth fighter engine nozzles (another view)

Sr8d7.jpg

F-35 Lightning II engine nozzle

Those are refined Low Observable Axisymmetrical Nozzles and first tested on a F-16 for the JSF programme. The LOAN was developed after the F-22 and that's why the Raptor doesn't have them.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article20.html

Stealth Aircraft - Infra-Red Signature Reduction

One type of two dimensional nozzle is a single expansion ramp nozzle referred to as a SERN nozzle. SERN was developed as a variable area non-axisymmetric nozzle with a unique installed performance characteristic of low weight and frictional drag because there is no or a smaller lower cowl. Low observable (LO) exhaust nozzle technology is being developed for current and future fighter/attack aircraft. LO nozzles should be integrated cleanly with the aircraft airframe and not degrade the aircraft's performance due to weight and drag penalties. Exhaust systems for combat aircraft should possess characteristics to enhance aircraft survivability, including high internal performance, reduced radar cross section (RCS), low infrared (IR) signatures, low installed weight, low installation drag and, in some cases, thrust-vectoring capabilities.

[Note: Thank you to Shabi1 for the post.]

----------

There is a reasonable expectation that China will ultimately install F-22 type 2D flat nozzles on the J-20 Mighty Dragon. Chinese research into 2D flat engine nozzles has been ongoing since the 1990s.

4zyut1.jpg

Since the 1990s, China has been researching its own version of F-22 type 2D flat engine nozzles.

[Note: Thank you to Aimarraul for the picture.]

(Continued in the following post. I have reached my maximum image limit.)
 
.
In your picture, you claim the "tail fins and booms" are an inferior design. I disagree. The tiny ventral fins follow planform alignment with the large vertical stabilizers and add virtually nothing to RCS. To the contrary, the "tail fins and booms" dramatically increase the J-20 Mighty Dragon's side infrared-stealth.

From my August 23, 2011 post:

J-20 Mighty Dragon ventral fin blends cleanly into the fuselage side-profile

WtZUE.jpg

J-20 Mighty Dragon ventral fin blends cleanly into the fuselage side-profile and there is no increase in surface area for radar reflection.

[Note: Thank you to HouShanghai for the picture.]

----------

From my August 12, 2011 post:

J-20 ventral fins contribute to lateral radar and infrared stealth

srhm6.jpg

The J-20 DSI intake is prominent from a rear port-side view of the stealth fighter.

I just noticed the J-20 ventral fins shield the jet engines' radar and infrared signatures from a lateral scan.

[Note: Thank you to HouShanghai and "HK299792458" for the picture.]

----------

The RAM-coated ventral fins will either absorb or reflect the incoming radar wave. Looking at the picture, an incoming radar wave will be reflected into the sky. The hottest part of a plane is the jet engine. The jet exhaust is noticeably cooler. Hence, the ventral fins shield the jet engines from lateral view and contribute to lateral infrared stealth.

5ikw6.jpg

Infrared signature of aircraft showing jet exhaust fumes
(Credit: BAE Systems. Link: Infrared Signature Modelling and Measurement - BAE Systems)

----------

I understand that the ventral fins, if applied with RAM, aligned and shaped correctly will have a lower RCS than one having ventral fins that is not.
But clearly a J-20 with ventral wings will have a larger or at least equal RCS than J-20 without, from all aspects. Again, an aircraft with more exposed surfaces (like wings, for example) will have a larger RCS than an aircraft with fewer exposed surfaces.

As for IR... here's an excellent video of last years faranborough air show, taken by both a normal and IR camera. You can see that almost all aircraft have pretty large exhausts trailing behind them (including F-22, typhoon, A400m, and a variety of other commercial airliners). The F-22 minimizes its own a little likely due to its special nozzles, but even that can be quite detectable.
Of course I'm not sure how applicable that would be for a 5th gen SRAAM (AIM-9X, ASRAAM, IRIS-T, PL-10 etc) but I think we can safely say the ventral fins are there primarily for aerodynamics and the slight benefit for IR hiding is more incidental.


Two points:

1. Your picture of a commercial airliner is not a good analogy. I provided a picture of a jet fighter from BAE Systems. Commercial jets have gigantic engines and are not comparable to small fighter high-performance jets.

For example, a fighter jet carries one (or two) occupant. A commercial jet carries hundreds of passengers. You should not use a commercial jet engine to make a point about a fighter jet. Look at the BAE Systems picture of a fighter jet. If you can shield the hot engines themselves, the infrared detectability of the fighter plane drops dramatically. If this thread were about civilian passenger jets, I would agree with you. With regard to the J-20 stealth fighter, I am pretty sure that you're incorrect.

I have never heard of a commercial jet liner being designed to minimize its jet engine infrared signature. However, it is well-known among fighter-jet designers that IR-seeking missiles pose a serious threat and fighter-jet engines are designed to minimize their IR signatures.

Also, it is inappropriate to use a picture taken at sea level. Fighter jets fly at 60,000 feet and the air is considerably colder. Furthermore, as the jet flies at hundreds of miles per hour, the exhaust is quickly left behind and disperses. Your picture of the commercial jet liner is not analogous for three reasons: gigantic engine to carry hundreds of passengers, not at altitude for the exhaust to blend with really cold air, and not moving to disperse the exhaust.

2. The general rule is "more surfaces tend to reflect more radar waves." However, there is an exception to the general rule. If a fighter jet is designed to follow planform alignment, the increased RCS is minimal. Hence, the extensive use of planform alignment design on the J-20 and F-22.

-----

4Hz5U.jpg

jet engine plume profile (Source: Thermal Infrared Imaging and Night Vision Cameras)

I'm going to guess this is a commercial jet plane sitting on a tarmac. Anyway, the infrared photo shows that the hottest part is the jet engine itself at approximately 150 degrees F or more. If ventral fins were in place, it would shield the hottest part of the airplane from lateral infrared detection.

Remember, I am only claiming the J-20 ventral fins contribute to its lateral infrared stealth. Everything that I have said is common sense. Basically, the oven/jet engine is the hottest part of the plane. If ventral fins block your view of the oven then the oven's infrared signature has been reduced. While the air surrounding the oven is warmer than ambient air, it is much lower in temperature compared to the oven. Voila, we have reduced IR. It is only straightforward physics.

[Note: My exchange on another forum.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Am I looking at two PAK FAs or two Su-27s?

I can't tell.

Neither of them looks very stealthy. Look at those completely conventional nozzles. So sad. :cheers:

fngxhy.jpg
 
. .
IMO
The design of indian AMCA have more better stealth ability than russian T50.indian should place enough confidence in your ability .
mca1.jpg

DSC07358.JPG
 
.
I've already discussed the stealthiness of the J-20 Mighty Dragon canards on this forum on July 6, 2011. My post (link to post #154 - http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-...neration-aircraft-updates-discussions-11.html):

"I said the J-20 canards were irrelevant for four reasons:

1. Composite material composition

2. RAM coating

3. Curved surface to deflect radar waves

4. Small incremental increase in surface area

You and PtldM3 are ridiculous. Your claim will always be: "Well, we can't know with absolute certainty until we put a J-20 in an anechoic chamber." We don't even know the results of a F-22 in an anechoic chamber. Under your ridiculous standard, you will always make whatever ludicrous claims that the two of you like."
First...Composite materials does not guarantee absorbance. So the composite materials can be tossed.

Second...Absorbers are not %100 effective. There are always trace EM reflections from the surface. And it is their behaviors that are unpredictable.

Third...but these prototype is showing large canards .Curvature on the canards is a given but altering them for RCS reduction purposes would affect their airfoil shapes, reducing aerodynamic effectiveness.but these prototype is showing large canards

And the fourth is totally absurd
.
no 5th gen fighter has canards as it is needless because thrust vectoring nozzles can compensate the manuverability for it .Thats why even Russia also which dont want canards in pakfa.It would be surely detected by anti stealth very low frequency radar most probably ground based radars (X band 8 to 12 GHz)

so plz stop posting craps .
A big lol for u
0034.gif


----------

Secondly, I recently made a post comparing the J-20 canard winglets to the F-22 horizontal tailplanes. I said the J-20 Mighty Dragon is a superior design, because the placement of winglets in front of the main wings permit both supermaneuverability and stability.



From my August 25, 2011 post:

Tailless J-20 Mighty Dragon is superior to F-22 Raptor canardless design


J-20 Mighty Dragon has canard winglets, but no tailplanes.


F-22 Raptor has no canards, but it has tailplane winglets.



In conclusion, the J-20 Mighty Dragon is a superior evolutionary design of its chronological F-22 predecessor.:
what!! J20 superior to f22
smiley-laughing024.gif

i think thats why robert gates cancelled it's production
smiley-laughing025.gif




----------

Regarding the J-20 LOAN (i.e. Low Observable Asymmetric Nozzle) engine nozzles, I have already discussed its comparable stealthiness to the F-35 and inferiority to the F-22.

In my subsequent posts, I freely acknowledged the J-20 round engine nozzles are inferior to the F-22 flat nozzles. The technical reason is that the F-22 flat nozzles are a wide-band stealth design. The current J-20 and F-35 LOAN (Low-Observable Asymmetric Nozzle) technology is only narrow-band stealth (in two bands, X and Ku).

From my January 14, 2011 post:

J-20's Low Observable Axisymmetrical Nozzle (i.e. LOAN) technology


Those are refined Low Observable Axisymmetrical Nozzles and first tested on a F-16 for the JSF programme. The LOAN was developed after the F-22 and that's why the Raptor doesn't have them.






[

----------

There is a reasonable expectation that China will ultimately install F-22 type 2D flat nozzles on the J-20 Mighty Dragon. Chinese research into 2D flat engine nozzles has been ongoing since the 1990s.


Since the 1990s, China has been researching its own version of F-22 type 2D flat engine nozzles.
ok lets see that in future ,whether they would develop it or not F-22 type 2D flat engine nozzles.
 
.
Am I looking at two PAK FAs or two Su-27s?

I can't tell.

Neither of them looks very stealthy. Look at those completely conventional nozzles. So sad. :cheers:

fngxhy.jpg

Yes, look at those conventional nozzles because the J-20's nozzles are not conventional :rolleyes:

I don't think you need to worry about the nozzles, a flat design is currently in the works. You bring nothing to the table.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom