China Military Watch

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 28 Dec 2010 19:00

Guys , The J-20 pics that we are seeing might be a diversion to fool the foreign agencies.While Chinese do have a Fifth gen program , it might not resemble anything like the pics that we are seeing.Ask yourselves why every picture that we are seeing is blurred.

The same tactic was used by Americans too.When they decided to publicize the existence of F-117(I think it was 1988) , the pictures they floated around were tampered.The proportions were completely different.For eg. size of the cockpit in relation to rest of the aircraft.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Dec 2010 19:41

The "eyewitness reports" of "W" shaped wings is interesting. That shape was a good idea in 1st gen stealth and was used in the F-117 and B-2 and was certainly effective. But I recall reading that such shapes are not necessarily the best shapes for a great performance in the air. That is why the US came up with radical redesigns and a more conventional layout with the F-22 and F-35. The F-22 of course has those TV engines.

The J-20 - if that is indeed what this is called has ventral and dorsal fins in addition to the canard and mainwing. Conventional looking exhaust which should provide the usual, expected IR signature. I am cerain this design can be "puffed up" in due course to add fuel and avionics. There is a bay seen on the port side which could possibly be an internal weapons bay. Or maybe just engine access. Difficult to tell. There should be a gap for that between the engines though. An LCA-like half-oval thingummy is seen under the (port) wing in the latest frontal photo.

Don · Post by **Don** » 28 Dec 2010 19:57

wrdos · Post by **wrdos** » 28 Dec 2010 19:58

Two more pics available now.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Dec 2010 20:13

shiv wrote: An LCA-like half-oval thingummy is seen under the (port) wing in the latest frontal photo.

Two of them actually

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Dec 2010 20:28

What is that thing?

James B · Post by **James B** » 28 Dec 2010 20:29

shiv wrote:
Two of them actually

It seems somebody forgot to properly photoshop the rear leg tires.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Dec 2010 20:39

What is that thing?

Lighter ................... to start the engines.

All kidding aside, looks nice. Big ............. like "The Hulk".

That is what we shall name it - The Hulk.

Seems to have movable fins to boot.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 28 Dec 2010 20:48

few pics i found

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 28 Dec 2010 20:51

What is that thing?

Most likely neon signage adorning the maintenance or signals area.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Dec 2010 20:55

Also looks like that Chicom has moved to a large red star with a thick yellow border for the roundels on the fins. Looks nice, better that the earlier ones.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Dec 2010 20:58

the overall wings, canards, tails, ventral fins looks similar to Mig 1.42 here
http://media.moddb.com/images/groups/1/ ... .44_02.jpg

structural diff is the F22 style 'boat hull nose' (since adopted by pakfa & jsf also) and ofcourse the stealthy DSI using side inlets...

so like Rubin helping out with the Yuan pgm, and Lavi etc maybe Mikoyan quietly sold its unused Mig 1.42 design for PRC to use as a somewhat proven starting point and work from there...or maybe the PRC just decided to get inspired by the 1.42 shape rather than the F22 shape.

its a big plane and will certainly need a AL41 class engine to be competitive in A2a ... over next 10 yrs as it goes to IOC, I am expecting to see ventral fins and canards deleted (!) and a 2d TVC nozzles....and ofcourse the WS15 or whatever its named needs to come online and prosper.

I would not expect real warfighting FOC before 2020....if all goes well....perhaps 2022-25 to be more realistic.

so the cards are on the table from US (X-plane ucav + jsf + f22), Russia (pakfa), china (J-20).....UK & France have no money or plans for a 5th gen but UK claims its Taranis will solve that problem (probably just a H&D tactic to get X-plane concessions from big brother and buy JSF-A for RAF) .. france has nothing

Its upto India to come up with something and kick these two pretenders out of the tree

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Dec 2010 21:09

Its a big aircraft and it does have a menacing looks , PAK-FA and F-22 looks more sober in front of Chinese goonda one sees in Jackie Chan movie.

This is a Chinese design with some borrowed ideas but nothing Mig-1.42 or other design about it.

There are some stealth hindrance like ventral fins and close couple canards ,but probably at a later stage they would do away with it , A lot will depend on the requirement spelled by PLAAF and the kind of solutions their designer could come up with.

On a cautious note , Stealth is much more about menacing looks , Calculating shape of Stealth needs lot of mathematical modeling and precise engineering of fine tolerance ...something difficult to make out by just looks of it.

From J-10 to J-20 at least my first impression makes it a "Capability Surprise" , considering it just came a year after first PAK-FA flight.

I was expecting a chinese FGFA post 2015 and something by 2018 but this is almost 5 - 7 years earlier.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Dec 2010 21:16

it has been made to look more menacing by painting it all black before its 1st official flight.

usually metal sections would be yellow primer and composites grey (as seen on Pakfa). but now with all black, hard to guess how much is composite unless close up high res shots are handed out (which wont happen). more Sun tzu tactics!

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 28 Dec 2010 21:21

Doing high speed taxi trials I'm told.

http://twitpic.com/3kkeri/full

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 28 Dec 2010 21:28

but nothing Mig-1.42 or other design about it

Incorrect. Very incorrect.

The Planform is pretty much like the Mig 1.44. There is no point denying it.Period.

More so, its got mini tail booms hanging opposite to the vertical tail fins just like the Mig 1.44.

The similarities are much more than superficial. Every aircraft *incorporates design elements from the past* and this one has done more than its fare share from the Mikoyan stealth demonstartor.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Dec 2010 21:30

I agree, Austin pls refer to my prior post with the 1.42 3-view drawings

the location of the tailfins and ventral fins which is placed well outboard of the engines is also closely matched with Mig 1.42....if you check my post above.

note the SDRE prominent Tejas style actuators underwing

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Dec 2010 21:31

Dmurphy wrote:Doing high speed taxi trials I'm told.

http://twitpic.com/3kkeri/full

Smoky engine?

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 28 Dec 2010 21:36

and I betcha the engine is from the Al-31 family. either the M1 as I mentioned earlier or the FN.

Merry christmas for sugar daddy russia. 30 billion from SDREs and probably the same or more from Chicom.

Yo ho ho and a bottle of vodka.

Of course seeing the kind of "stealth" money China is spending plum cake Yamrika wants G-2...

EU meanwhile is offering its own G-2 to us with claims of the EF approaching the Raptor..
Welcome to the brave new world of "industrial partnerships".

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Dec 2010 21:53

D Roy wrote:Incorrect. Very incorrect.

The Planform is pretty much like the Mig 1.44. There is no point denying it.Period.

More so, its got mini tail booms hanging opposite to the vertical tail fins just like the Mig 1.44.

They would have studied the Mig-1.44 ,F-22 ,JSF and other design ( certainly not PAK-FA since it got declassified recently ) and borrowed ideas from all.

There is nothing to suggest Mig has secretly helped them much like there is nothing to suggest lockheed has helped them with this , they just borrowed what they thought best of what is out there and then did it on their own.

I think that is also due to the fact they do not have many experimental prototypes ( like US or Russia ) to depend on to refine their design skills and come with innovative ideas or solutions based on requirenment put forth by PLAAF , so they just took what is out there and made it their own.

added later: I would not understimate vast Chinese espionage activity in US and else where would would have helped them to achieve this so quickly , heck if they could steal the most advanced weapons design W81 from US as agency in US claim but couldnt prove then they do have a very effective espionage web in US.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 28 Dec 2010 22:16

China's Stealth Striker

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 28 Dec 2010 22:31

Not a single clean picture yet!

Added:
OK, forced to find some on my own. Let us see.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 29 Dec 2010 02:10

This is a decent shot

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 29 Dec 2010 02:26

Austin wrote: I was expecting a chinese FGFA post 2015 and something by 2018 but this is almost 5 - 7 years earlier.

Same here. I am totally zapped. Either PRC is way advanced than we think they are or this is one more half baked product pre-mauturely released due to the pressures of the system there to show advances. Which way does one wager? Every time we look, the information chain is incomplete, leaving even a novice like me at a loss on what their real capability is.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 29 Dec 2010 02:54

shiv wrote:The "eyewitness reports" of "W" shaped wings is interesting. That shape was a good idea in 1st gen stealth and was used in the F-117 and B-2 and was certainly effective. But I recall reading that such shapes are not necessarily the best shapes for a great performance in the air. That is why the US came up with radical redesigns and a more conventional layout with the F-22 and F-35. The F-22 of course has those TV engines.

The J-20 - if that is indeed what this is called has ventral and dorsal fins in addition to the canard and mainwing. Conventional looking exhaust which should provide the usual, expected IR signature. I am cerain this design can be "puffed up" in due course to add fuel and avionics. There is a bay seen on the port side which could possibly be an internal weapons bay. Or maybe just engine access. Difficult to tell. There should be a gap for that between the engines though. An LCA-like half-oval thingummy is seen under the (port) wing in the latest frontal photo.

I haven't read much about the pros and cons of W-shaped wings, do you think perhaps canards are added to address its weaknesses? Or do canards' advantages not match up with the W-shaped wings' weaknesses?

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 29 Dec 2010 03:13

D Roy wrote:The starting point for Chengdu could have well been the good old MiG 1.42/1.44 tech demonstrator program.

The general layout is similar of course.

Lot of refinements put in, naturally - DSI, frameless canopy, I am guessing panel alignment though we need better pics for that.

The canard design is different also.

Anyway Hurrah for the Russkis, they have clearly got back their numero uno customer.

The PLAAF also has a single engined fifth gen under development with Shenyang probably taking the lead in that program and looking to power it with the WS-13 taishan.

Anyway it might just turn out to be like the Mikoyan LFI/LFS proposals and then we'll know for sure that old russki daddy has happily hived off Mikoyan's 90's work to Chicom.

Great so Chicom gets mig's work and saturn's engines for its "indigenous Program" whereas we help Sukhoi .

Of course Chicom must have paid a hell of a lot for this plane .. to both Russkis as well as the khans on the stealth side.

Only silver lining - This plane in many ways shows how the FGFA can be an improvement over the baseline T-50.

here's what we might get :

1. Panel alignment
2. Frameless canopy
3. Recessed IRST instead of that terrible ball sticking out
4. Cowlings over the engines maybe even fully recessed

According to this pretty reliable poster on SDF, there is no single engine 5th gen program in China. The SAC 5th(4.5th?) gen program is a twin-engined stealth striker, which could start taxi trials as early as mid next year.

Note that I'm just passing on what I've heard, even the poster himself has doubts on whether this program will actually go through.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 29 Dec 2010 03:57

and meanwhile.....
China Radio wants India to tune in

BEIJING: The state-run China Radio International is trying to buy frequencies to launch services in India in a move to widen its influence in the country. It currently broadcasts in four Indian languages - Hindi, Bengali, Urdu and Tamil - from Beijing.

..............
We've been trying to buy frequencies in India and are talking to some Indian companies who would like to work with us," CRI's deputy editor-in-chief Weigong Ma told TOI.

"We help build bridges, open up new windows and tell the world about the real China, the true China. We attract tourists to China and also tell Chinese about the places they can visit abroad. We recently launched a special service to promote Chinese tourism."
..........

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 29 Dec 2010 04:56

X-posting from CDF. please pardon their bigger image size.

a very clear pic of tail.

clear version of already posted pics.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 29 Dec 2010 05:16

The tail pic's color looks a lil off, but maybe it's just that the material used looks different from different angles and under different lighting conditions or something. Anyhow, based on that tail and other existing photos, someone made a drawing of the plane's possible profile:

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2010 06:37

DavidD wrote:
I haven't read much about the pros and cons of W-shaped wings, do you think perhaps canards are added to address its weaknesses? Or do canards' advantages not match up with the W-shaped wings' weaknesses?

I have no idea. The only impression I have gained is that when you shape an airframe for great flying characteristics it is not necessarily one that is the best for stealth. So if you optimize an airframe for stealth you are making some compromises on flying characteristics. Having said that I believe that "super stealth" of the American type probably gives diminishing returns in terms of value for money. Certainly stealth must be incorporated where possible - but the more time and money one spends on creating super stealth the less money one has left over for numbers and other things that may require investment. One has to draw the line at some compromise. Ultimately an aircraft is a complex piece of technology and its effectiveness is a function of multiple variables. Degree of stealth is only one of them. relatively low cost, ruggedness, reliability and low maintenance with some stealth is probably the way to go IMHO.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 29 Dec 2010 06:42

Wow, a decent picture of the tail, but not the craft! We are going to have a full 3 more days of this strip tease business till new year's and find out, it is all a ???

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2010 06:44

DavidD wrote:The tail pic's color looks a lil off, but maybe it's just that the material used looks different from different angles and under different lighting conditions or something. Anyhow, based on that tail and other existing photos, someone made a drawing of the plane's possible profile:

The picture looks reasonably accurate to me except for the angle which the trailing edge of the mainwing forms with the fuselage - which appears to be orthogonal in the original rather than the fancy angle shown in the diagram - see this photo. The mainwing may be an unabashed cropped delta.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2010 06:56

One can technically claim that any aircraft with canard foreplanes is a copy of the Wright brothers intellectual property

but that is a joke. This aircraft seems to me to have taken elements from the J-10, the Su-27 and the JSF.

The J-10 sits very high on long undercarriage - especially the nosewheel because the intakes are below the fuselage. If you move the intakes under the wings, put two engines instead of one and optimise the external shape for stealth - you get an aircraft not dissimilar to this one.

But the Chinese appear to have achieved a full bubble canopy here. The "bump" with the orange flash on the dorsal surface of the rear fuselage is seen in most photos. I wonder what that is. It remains unexplained.

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 29 Dec 2010 06:58

It is not a contender until it has a proven Chinese (not a Russian copy) high performance engine

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 29 Dec 2010 07:00

There is nothing to suggest Mig has secretly helped them much like there is nothing to suggest lockheed has helped them with this , they just borrowed what they thought best of what is out there and then did it on their own.

Thank you. but no thank you.

It is not inconceivable that Mig would have sold them them the wind tunnel studies for the Mig 1.44. And nothing has to be very "secret" about that given the state Mikoyan was in..

Yes and just for those who came late this planform has been experimented by Mikoyan for a long time... It actually dates back to the eighties when certain "strategic interceptor" projects were being tried out.

And by the way about your point of "stealing secrets", of course chicom would do that, but even besides that it is not "inconceivable" either that the Yamrikhans sold them some tech on the side as well.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 29 Dec 2010 07:02

J-10, the Su-27 and the JSF

It takes much more from the Su-47 berkut actually .. especially the centroplane.

Nevertheless it does borrow from a wide variety of designs as does any plane but the planform is pretty much Mikoyan MFI including the *layout of the canards*.

Yes yes and the wing is not a lambda. It is a bloody delta.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2010 07:13

D Roy wrote:
There is nothing to suggest Mig has secretly helped them much like there is nothing to suggest lockheed has helped them with this , they just borrowed what they thought best of what is out there and then did it on their own.
Thank you. but no thank you.

It is not inconceivable that Mig would have sold them them the wind tunnel studies for the Mig 1.44. And nothing has to be very "secret" about that given the state Mikoyan was in..

Yes and just for those who came late this planform has been experimented by Mikoyan for a long time... It actually dates back to the eighties when certain "strategic interceptor" projects were being tried out.

And by the way about your point of "stealing secrets", of course chicom would do that, but even besides that it is not "inconceivable" either that the Yamrikhans sold them some tech on the side as well.

Apart from the intakes the J-20 is certainly similar to the MiG 1-42 and 1-44.

Here is the Musharraf of the MiG 1-44

MiG 1-42

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 29 Dec 2010 07:28

The canards look very different as well in both shape and placement. The wings are also cropped on the sides. Looking at it from the front to the back, the front fuselage resembles the F-22, the intakes resemble the F-35, the wings resemble the F-22, the rear control surfaces resemble the Mig 1.42/44, and the rear fuselage resemble the Su-47. The middle fuselage looks like an original design with dihedral, trapezoidal canards whose center of gravity is in-line with the main wings.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 29 Dec 2010 07:40

Oh and for more clarity here is some artwork on what Mig intended the 1.44 to become.

http://paralay.com/142/2003.jpg

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 29 Dec 2010 07:54

I think meaningful discussion should be on what Chinese might already have (based on their current industrial base and knowledge), instead of where they got it from.

That's how amrikies used to discredit Soviet design, calling every Su/Mig a copy of their own fighters. But only now we know that how different they were after their commi gov broke down.

What we know, which J-XX might have is -

- Super-cruise
- AESA
- IRST
- Limited stealth (maybe not on par with what Amrikies have), expect it to have low frontal RCS.
- Sensor fusion
- we do not expect PLAAF to install Cray supercomputers on J-XX, but we can assume it might have considerable processing power.
- TVC engine. this is bit of a gray area where we can expect some problems. Don't don't have any reliable engine as of know, not for 5th Gen fighter for sure.

Its winning factor will be range, payload (by its size it looks like it can carry a lot of internal load), and sensor package which will give it greater survivability deep within enemy territory.

Releasing internal weapon load at super-cruise speed is also tricky, only time will tell how much they will master it.