David Hingtgen Posted December 30, 2010 Share Posted December 30, 2010 Yup, it definitely has slab fins: http://alert5.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/PLA-J-20132.jpg (cut and paste link) Interesting--the formation strip lighting. It's incredibly "American". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electric indigo Posted December 30, 2010 Share Posted December 30, 2010 Ikuto Yamashita just called and wants his plane back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoveringCheesecake Posted December 30, 2010 Share Posted December 30, 2010 Yup, it definitely has slab fins: http://alert5.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/PLA-J-20132.jpg (cut and paste link) Interesting--the formation strip lighting. It's incredibly "American". I didn't even notice the slime lights until you pointed them out. Has China used them in the past? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JELEINEN Posted December 30, 2010 Share Posted December 30, 2010 Is this thing real or just an elaborate fansite? http://www.stavatti.com/MACHETE_HOME.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 Is this thing real or just an elaborate fansite? http://www.stavatti.com/MACHETE_HOME.html Don't know if this particular case is real, but there have been constant rumors of a resurgence of prop-driven light attack COIN aircraft resurgence. Perhaps marketed for export. They offer a number of benefits making them ideally suited for tasks like close air support, most notably their low speed. Also, I'm guessing the lack of jet exhaust greatly reduces the effectiveness of IR guided missiles. Don't see it working for the US though, unless it's for cost-cutting. The combination of Apaches & Cobras, and A-10's has historically worked very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 (edited) Oh, I do like aviation week articles. Finally, the Chinese version of the Stealth fighter is unveiled. I wonder whether it's a prototype like the T-50 and where this plane is in the development phase. Hopefully, this would eventually lead to China not buying Russian any more. Enough proping up of the Russian aviation industry I say.... let the indigenous designs begin. Here is hoping for more than 183. Edited December 31, 2010 by kalvasflam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted December 31, 2010 Share Posted December 31, 2010 (edited) Oh, I do like aviation week articles. Finally, the Chinese version of the Stealth fighter is unveiled. I wonder whether it's a prototype like the T-50 and where this plane is in the development phase. Hopefully, this would eventually lead to China not buying Russian any more. Enough proping up of the Russian aviation industry I say.... let the indigenous designs begin. Here is hoping for more than 183. Not sure about "proping up" the Russian aviation industry. Given the choice, many countries in the position to procure arms from either the west or Russia have willingly chosen Russian hardware. India (not that great example), Malaysia, and Indonesia have all procured advanced versions of the Flanker to serve alongside their Mirage's and F-16's. When buying from the US, the price you pay is that you need to ask for permission before using your hardware, whereas there are no such strings attached with buying made in Russia. Indigenous are too much of a resource sink of said country does not have its own developed aviation industry, so off-the-shelf is a better bet if the money's there. Edited December 31, 2010 by Ghost Train Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Not sure about "proping up" the Russian aviation industry. Given the choice, many countries in the position to procure arms from either the west or Russia have willingly chosen Russian hardware. India (not that great example), Malaysia, and Indonesia have all procured advanced versions of the Flanker to serve alongside their Mirage's and F-16's. When buying from the US, the price you pay is that you need to ask for permission before using your hardware, whereas there are no such strings attached with buying made in Russia. Indigenous are too much of a resource sink of said country does not have its own developed aviation industry, so off-the-shelf is a better bet if the money's there. well, you're absolutely right since good parts of Chinese aviation industry is still heavily dependent on Russia. My understanding is that there are severe issues in doing local engines, and then all the radars and the more advanced weapons are still not quite indigenous. But give China another decade. Hell, who would have though in the early 90s that the Chinese would've been building their own knock off version of the SU-27, never mind even contemplating about a stealth fighter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 That thing is freaking huge. I wonder how agile it is compared to the rest of the 4.5/5th gens. My first thought is that the PRC is just going for a stealthy long range missile boat and placing less emphasis on the 'dogfight' part of the package but then why bother with the stealth hindering canards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Canards can have other uses rather than just agility; the Viggen used them to help shorten take-off/landing runs, though its worth pointing out that the Viggens canards weren't like "modern" canards; IIRC they even had their own ailerons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 The F-22 and Super Flanker are among the largest fighter jets ever---and they're debatably the most agile ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 An interesting view on the F-22. Sources below the video: Link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VF-19 Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Wow. Somebody has an axe to grind. Wonder how much of that video is true... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Wow. Somebody has an axe to grind. Wonder how much of that video is true... Ouch, wonder if it's someone who got RIFed at Lockheed or if it's someone in the Pentagon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 The F-22 and Super Flanker are among the largest fighter jets ever---and they're debatably the most agile ever. Well yes but they had the advantage of until then, rarely seen combination of TVC, canards (SFlanker) and massive thrust weight ratio(F-22). Well, in any case, the Superflanker and Raptor looks agile just sitting there. The J-20 just looks phat. If the J-20 is going to weigh like it looks, it's thrust/weight isn't going to be anywhere near the F-22/Su-35. Unless the pie in the sky dream spec WS-15 comes to reality. On that subject, did you guys see the frontal pic of the amount of deflection the J-20 tail fin can pull? There is this one pic of it almost perpendicular to the axis. Could the YF-23 do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Wow. Somebody has an axe to grind. Wonder how much of that video is true... The video is based on various GAO reports (links are on the actual youtube site). On the one hand, they are supposed to be impartial and non-partisan, but the on the other staffed by accountants, and lawyers for the most part . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizman Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I thought all that info on the F-22 was common knowledge. It's an American super fighter, its gonna cost alot, be fragile, and have many bugs for at least 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 An interesting view on the F-22. Sources below the video: Link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E hilarious. Being #1 is a relative thing and despite all it's flaws, I'll stick pick the F-22 over it's competitors produced in Russia or China Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 On that subject, did you guys see the frontal pic of the amount of deflection the J-20 tail fin can pull? There is this one pic of it almost perpendicular to the axis. Could the YF-23 do that? Extreme deflection is fairly pointless---it starts having less of an aerodynamic effect, and just becomes pure drag. Plus, the extreme strain on the structure of trying to support such a large surface area by just one attachment point against the wind. That may be a "landing only" position to act as an airbrake, much like a Gripen's canards do. (though with the parachute, it seems kinda pointless and may foul the chute) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JELEINEN Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Don't know if this particular case is real, but there have been constant rumors of a resurgence of prop-driven light attack COIN aircraft resurgence. Perhaps marketed for export. They offer a number of benefits making them ideally suited for tasks like close air support, most notably their low speed. Also, I'm guessing the lack of jet exhaust greatly reduces the effectiveness of IR guided missiles. Don't see it working for the US though, unless it's for cost-cutting. The combination of Apaches & Cobras, and A-10's has historically worked very well. I'd just never heard of it before and I wasn't seeing much in the way of information on it outside that website. The prop version of the plane itself reminds me of the ones in Wings of Honneamise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phyrox Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Modern jets? booring. But here's something those of us in SoCal can enjoy: The newly flying Fw-190 will be flying at Chino this Saturday (8th) for one of the museum's events. The email I got didn't say much about how long it'd be in the air, or whether it'd be available for ground inspections/photos, but it'll be there. An honest to god 190 in Chino. While you're there you can check out some of the other rare/one-of-a-kind aircraft at the museum. Rare pic: Actual Fw190A using actual BMW801 engine. Photo taken this Tuesday. I believe that takes the world-wide total of airworthy Fw190's from 0 to 1 now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 That PLA fighter looks like it was meant more for the interceptor role than tactical fighter one. A stealthy Foxbat/Foxhound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 An interesting quote in an article from that bastion of anti-F-35 sentiment, Aviation week. “China has got thousands of redundant MiG-21s,” Davies points out. “Why not make them into drones? What if each one absorbs one of the four missiles that an F-35 can carry. A MiG-21 drone is not a significant threat, but if you [face] a thousand of them and only [have] 200 missiles, you can be overwhelmed.” This is off an entertaining article on wargaming between China and US over Taiwan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) An interesting quote in an article from that bastion of anti-F-35 sentiment, Aviation week. “China has got thousands of redundant MiG-21s,” Davies points out. “Why not make them into drones? What if each one absorbs one of the four missiles that an F-35 can carry. A MiG-21 drone is not a significant threat, but if you [face] a thousand of them and only [have] 200 missiles, you can be overwhelmed.” This is off an entertaining article on wargaming between China and US over Taiwan. Immediate thoughts that spring to mind off the top of my head is that drones still need fuel, possibly someone to fly them so bandwidth, with modern sensor systems might be easily distinguished from more modern platforms/airframes, still require somewhere to take off from, and if presumably you're going to put them all in the air at once, even the stupidest fighter jock is going to work out that maybe he'd best wait until the real threat gives itself away. Plus what are the drones armed with? If its fairly short range IR guided missiles, you could just keep your distance until they run out of fuel. Oh, and the cost; it might be cheaper to make thousands of drones but thats not the same as cheap. Oh, and the F-35 carries four missile internally - if you suspect thats what the bad guys are doing, break out the wing hardpoints or send up the F-18s with 10 AMRAAMs each (I know David is going to point out about maximum carrier take-off weights somewhere here... )and get them to do the dirty work... Its not entirely a bad idea - overwhelming the German radar with chaff ("window") during World War II, along with concentrating the bombers into a "stream" of aircraft did work, but... Edited January 7, 2011 by F-ZeroOne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Oooh, sneaky sneaky--those who've spent a lot more time analyzing the pics than me, say there's two J-20's, both numbered 2001 to confuse us. If you go panel-by-panel near the engines you can apparently tell them apart, and the two prototypes have different engines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 That PLA fighter looks like it was meant more for the interceptor role than tactical fighter one. A stealthy Foxbat/Foxhound. I think that's about right. According to Carlo Kopp, the intended role seems to be to get behind enemy lines and wreck AWACS, tankers, and other force multipliers.... bashing of the F-18E and F-35 ensues ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 According to Carlo Kopp, Yup, that's all you need to know right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Yup, that's all you need to know right there. He makes nice diagrams... and stuff, he has a doctorate in "Top Gun" and a masters in "Ace Combat" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 There's big F-35B news/cancellations/Super Hornets ordered to cover the gap, but every story I read is a different version. Anyone have an actual raw press release or something, and not some reporter's interpretation? The F-35B doesn't affect the Navy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 There's big F-35B news/cancellations/Super Hornets ordered to cover the gap, but every story I read is a different version. Anyone have an actual raw press release or something, and not some reporter's interpretation? The F-35B doesn't affect the Navy... I don't believe there's been an official budget yet. It's just Defense Secretary Gates briefing Congress on his budget plans but no real details yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vifam7 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 There's big F-35B news/cancellations/Super Hornets ordered to cover the gap, but every story I read is a different version. Anyone have an actual raw press release or something, and not some reporter's interpretation? The F-35B doesn't affect the Navy... It's not cancelled. Gates said it's on a "2-year probation". http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=62351 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 It's not cancelled. Gates said it's on a "2-year probation". http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=62351 Isn't that the equivalent of cancelled? Heh heh. The marines might be better off spending money on a VF-0 or a SV-51 prototype. That's real CAS; when the strafing run doesn't work, just transform and physically squash them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Immediate thoughts that spring to mind off the top of my head is that drones still need fuel, possibly someone to fly them so bandwidth, with modern sensor systems might be easily distinguished from more modern platforms/airframes, still require somewhere to take off from, and if presumably you're going to put them all in the air at once, even the stupidest fighter jock is going to work out that maybe he'd best wait until the real threat gives itself away. Plus what are the drones armed with? If its fairly short range IR guided missiles, you could just keep your distance until they run out of fuel. Oh, and the cost; it might be cheaper to make thousands of drones but thats not the same as cheap. Oh, and the F-35 carries four missile internally - if you suspect thats what the bad guys are doing, break out the wing hardpoints or send up the F-18s with 10 AMRAAMs each (I know David is going to point out about maximum carrier take-off weights somewhere here... )and get them to do the dirty work... Its not entirely a bad idea - overwhelming the German radar with chaff ("window") during World War II, along with concentrating the bombers into a "stream" of aircraft did work, but... One side thought on this one, if the Chinese did put up this type of scenario, might it work with its millions of online gaming trained pilots (I know Koreans are better, but I'm sure the Chinese are catching up) and actually load up those antiquated Mig-21 with missiles, so that they're a little more like "dangerous". Of course, I'm only half serious here on this, the way the article read, it sounds like that whole scenario assumes one gigantic air battle one time, not a series of engagements where you could put the tankers much further out, and as for the AWACS and ELINT aircrafts, assuming a conflict in Taiwan straits, we would probably assume that there are still Taiwanese ground assets active in case the support aircraft gets killed, so that whole scenario is a bit disingenuous I think. The interesting question is what the real capabilities of the DF-21s (Chinese anti carrier ballistic missiles) are. The real threat is all about having carriers on station to project the firepower, if the DF-21s are good enough to deter the carriers from coming close, that's a more credible scenario. (which instantly made me think of gigantic submersible carriers as the next counter measure... protected by submarine escorts... my goodness, Macross Zero is full of goodies today) There was yet another article in Aviation week that talked about this in more credible terms, it was as much about the stealth fighter as it was about the DF-21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 J-20 flew. I'm sure (hoping) there'll be better video soon, but here it is: http://www.56.com/flashApp/56.10.12....=57752850&ref= (not the most interesting, it won't actually takeoff until about 4 mins in, then they cut right to it landing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) One side thought on this one, if the Chinese did put up this type of scenario, might it work with its millions of online gaming trained pilots (I know Koreans are better, but I'm sure the Chinese are catching up) and actually load up those antiquated Mig-21 with missiles, so that they're a little more like "dangerous". Of course, I'm only half serious here on this, the way the article read, it sounds like that whole scenario assumes one gigantic air battle one time, not a series of engagements where you could put the tankers much further out, and as for the AWACS and ELINT aircrafts, assuming a conflict in Taiwan straits, we would probably assume that there are still Taiwanese ground assets active in case the support aircraft gets killed, so that whole scenario is a bit disingenuous I think. Again, off the top of my head - you still have to acquire the targets, which presumes either some sort of sensor system on the airframe or on an airframe linked to all the drones (and its unlikely one modern multi-engine sensor platform would be able to handle, in the very best case, about two hundred or so "friendlies" all at once - theres a reason you have squadron leaders after all. Or, I suppose ground control - better hope they don't work out where you're transmitting from and send a few cruise missiles into the control bunkers, eh?), with "pilots" who probably haven't been trained (regardless of on-line experience) in modern multi-linked fighter combat techniques (Oops, due to sensory overload Drone pilot 67 just flew into your AWACS!). And, although I've only been at the controls of a light aircraft for about 5 minutes total, my lasting impression was, wow, real flying isn't like Ace Combat! Not to mention also finding all the control set-ups, bandwidth and accommodation for the "XBox Air Force"...! I know you're probably not being entirely serious, sorry, just can't help replying...! Edited January 11, 2011 by F-ZeroOne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts