Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 4 of 26 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 757

Thread: Chinese air power thread 18

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by foxmulder_ms View Post
    Such a fountain of knowledge!
    Stops by for a cheap shot. Too cowardly to put his own alleged knowledge up for scrutiny.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha Bravo View Post
    In my view, the J-20 appears to be far more agile in the air than its design would otherwise suggest, at least based on the videos so far available, and especially considering the fact that it lacks TVC.
    Although a little smaller they are still delta wings + canard+ Lerx, so I would expect a maneouvreability at least comparable to a JF-17 if not even a J-10, and not like the Mig-31, even without TVC.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha Bravo View Post
    In my view, the J-20 appears to be far more agile in the air than its design would otherwise suggest, at least based on the videos so far available, and especially considering the fact that it lacks TVC.
    Those video seem accelerated to give perception of agility.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by JSR View Post
    Those video seem accelerated to give perception of agility.
    If it had some indigenous engine that we knew nothing about then I wouldn't be skeptical. But damn does it rocket up

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcellogo View Post
    Although a little smaller they are still delta wings + canard+ Lerx, so I would expect a maneouvreability at least comparable to a JF-17 if not even a J-10, and not like the Mig-31, even without TVC.
    tvc is a bandaid solution. that's why rafale, eurofighter, gripen, f-35, j-20, jf-17, j-10 don't need it.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha Bravo View Post
    In my view, the J-20 appears to be far more agile in the air than its design would otherwise suggest, at least based on the videos so far available, and especially considering the fact that it lacks TVC.
    can you link where J-20 show off agility ?

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by Byoin View Post
    tvc is a bandaid solution. that's why rafale, eurofighter, gripen, f-35, j-20, jf-17, j-10 don't need it.
    TVC simply enhances a fighter jet's maneuverability. The jets you mentioned all have different reasons why they don't have it. And it has nothing to do with solutions to other problems.

    I think it is telling that the 2 countries with the most experience and expertise in the business both have TVC variants on their flagship jets. And Russia went the extra mile and went 3D.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    can you link where J-20 show off agility ?
    i think he's talking about this latest video. Watch the jet go off in the distance and then just rocket up into the heavens and does a nifty move
    Last edited by KGB; 20th October 2016 at 03:27.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by KGB View Post
    TVC simply enhances a fighter jet's maneuverability. The jets you mentioned all have different reasons why they don't have it. And it has nothing to do with solutions to other problems.

    I think it is telling that the 2 countries with the most experience and expertise in the business both have TVC variants on their flagship jets. And Russia went the extra mile and went 3D.
    no. the flag ship jet of the us is the f-35. it is their most expensive and important program. they dropped the tvc. the f-22 is a 30 year old design.
    so we have 5 different leading aviation preferring NOT to use tvc. it had its day, and now it is gone.
    Russia is sticking to it because it is part of their philosophy. they know they are at a strong disadvantage to western jets in radar range and missile reliability and range, so they are hoping to win the close in fight.

    if the su-35 rumor is true, then expect to see China make a copy of its engine and improve upon it. no big deal.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,368
    design wise F-22 and F-35 not have more than 10 year difference. its is the old avionics system design of F-22 that make it expensive.
    maker of Rafale/Gripen/Eurofighter are not by any stretch leading aviation countries. just look at Airbus civil how they are managing it from titanium to designing various parts.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by Byoin View Post
    no. the flag ship jet of the us is the f-35. it is their most expensive and important program. they dropped the tvc. the f-22 is a 30 year old design.
    so we have 5 different leading aviation preferring NOT to use tvc. it had its day, and now it is gone.
    Russia is sticking to it because it is part of their philosophy. they know they are at a strong disadvantage to western jets in radar range and missile reliability and range, so they are hoping to win the close in fight.

    if the su-35 rumor is true, then expect to see China make a copy of its engine and improve upon it. no big deal.
    The flagship jet is not the F 35. It is the Raptor.

    There was no way to have VTOL and TVC on the F 35. So it doesn't have it.

    The leaders in the industry are the US and Russia.

  12. #102
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    622
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    can you link where J-20 show off agility ?
    http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTc0NT...s1.8-1-1.2&x=1

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    259
    Even copied the Russian colour scheme.

    http://defense-update.com/20161018_j20new.html


  14. #104
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    259
    404 Error, agility not found.

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by StarfishPrime View Post
    Even copied the Russian colour scheme.

    http://defense-update.com/20161018_j20new.html

    I thought it had a similar style of stealth paint as on the f-22 and f-35, but with these better resolution pics. I am disappointed. they are more like the f-16 type of paint.

  16. #106
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Trident View Post
    thanks, looks like they are not using a bay

  17. #107
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    81
    It is sad to see and difficult to understand some Russian fans coming Chinese topics and poopooing Chinese hardware. I think it shows insecurity that their old pupil might be indeed eclipsing them. You do not see the opposite much. I do not know what urges these people to come and state "haha Chinese copied rear mirror copied the wings, their design sucks, it doesn't even have wheels etc.."

    Just chill and enjoy the picture stream. Chinese are looking at other designs obviously, as all others does; but J-20 is as unique as it gets so please be a little bit more considered and try to be a little bit more objective.

  18. #108
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by foxmulder_ms View Post
    It is sad to see and difficult to understand some Russian fans coming Chinese topics and poopooing Chinese hardware. I think it shows insecurity that their old pupil might be indeed eclipsing them. You do not see the opposite much. I do not know what urges these people to come and state "haha Chinese copied rear mirror copied the wings, their design sucks, it doesn't even have wheels etc.."

    Just chill and enjoy the picture stream. Chinese are looking at other designs obviously, as all others does; but J-20 is as unique as it gets so please be a little bit more considered and try to be a little bit more objective.
    indeed. with allies like these who needs enemies

  19. #109
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    870

  20. #110
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Byoin View Post
    indeed. with allies like these who needs enemies
    China is extremely weak ally. allies are measured by using joint force.

  21. #111
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,441
    Quote Originally Posted by Byoin View Post
    incorrect, they are on the bottom, not top
    Nope.. they are on top

    Here is a shot of the bottom and there are no flare ejectors.

    http://pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/42/980...980x1200-0.jpg
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  22. #112
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,241
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    Nope.. they are on top

    Here is a shot of the bottom and there are no flare ejectors.

    http://pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/42/980...980x1200-0.jpg
    That is assuming the flare ejectors are behind enclosed panels like on other fighter aircraft and thus very difficult to identify.

    Personally I'm not sure if those things on the tail are flare ejectors, and if they are, I'm not sure if that means we should expect any ventral flare ejectors to be easily identifiable or if they may be behind panels.

  23. #113
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by StarfishPrime View Post
    Even copied the Russian colour scheme.

    http://defense-update.com/20161018_j20new.html

    pattern looks Russian but the paint type looks a lot like this


    rather than


  24. #114
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,742
    And?

  25. #115
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzo View Post
    That is assuming the flare ejectors are behind enclosed panels like on other fighter aircraft and thus very difficult to identify.

    Personally I'm not sure if those things on the tail are flare ejectors, and if they are, I'm not sure if that means we should expect any ventral flare ejectors to be easily identifiable or if they may be behind panels.
    I'm fairly certain that they are chaff/flare dispensers - zoom in to about 300% on the photo of the J-20 in primer and you can even barely discern the individual tubes.

    There may be additional dispensers behind doors on the underside of course, but that doesn't change the fact that there's a 90%ish chance Byoin was talking BS when he said I was incorrect.

  26. #116
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Near Colombo, Sri Lanka
    Posts
    1,429
    few more. Zhuhai Airshow (Air Show China) 2016 will be from 01-06 November. Hopefully we will get some official specifications on the J-20 (though I admit its unlikely).

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	J20_125 - Copy.jpg 
Views:	56 
Size:	178.8 KB 
ID:	249180
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	J20_124 - Copy.jpg 
Views:	49 
Size:	222.5 KB 
ID:	249181
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	J20_123 - Copy.jpg 
Views:	78 
Size:	191.5 KB 
ID:	249182

  27. #117
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Y-20 Bacon View Post
    pattern looks Russian but the paint type looks a lot like this


    rather than

    Kisses..

    Last edited by foxmulder_ms; 21st October 2016 at 22:49.

  28. #118
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Trident View Post
    I'm fairly certain that they are chaff/flare dispensers - zoom in to about 300% on the photo of the J-20 in primer and you can even barely discern the individual tubes.

    There may be additional dispensers behind doors on the underside of course, but that doesn't change the fact that there's a 90%ish chance Byoin was talking BS when he said I was incorrect.
    Yes, well I think your mistake was taking Byoin's posts with any sort of seriousness to begin with

  29. #119
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by foxmulder_ms View Post
    Kisses..

    find one that is not overly saturated on photoshop

  30. #120
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzo View Post
    Yes, well I think your mistake was taking Byoin's posts with any sort of seriousness to begin with


    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzo View Post
    That is assuming the flare ejectors are behind enclosed panels like on other fighter aircraft and thus very difficult to identify.

    Personally I'm not sure if those things on the tail are flare ejectors, and if they are, I'm not sure if that means we should expect any ventral flare ejectors to be easily identifiable or if they may be behind panels.
    lol what a flip flopper. first you agree with Mr. Chinabot's post doubting they were flare ejectors, and after a neutral person proved both of you wrong, then you switch your position lol.

    reminds me a lot about the claims of the J-20 not being the same size as the Flanker until Quantum and a bunch of others showed that they were the same, using the same exact sattelite image the naysayers used

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES