XXJ - Chinese fifth generation fighter programme

[Archie Pellagio]

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a5e77ec0d-445e-4c8a-8a0d-adc33123ad5f

 

 

http://youtu.be/TQqefi9ShRM

Edited October 4, 2011 by Luke Y

[Guest JamesG123]

Gongle Hawk Fu?

[pikachu]

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a5e77ec0d-445e-4c8a-8a0d-adc33123ad5f

 

 

http://youtu.be/TQqefi9ShRM

 

Xianglong/Soardragon UAV. Nothing like Global Hawk. Range is only about 2,000 km. More of a spotter than a long-range surveillance craft. The UAV also has a unique box-wing design that has never been seen in a flying aircraft before.

[Archie Pellagio]

Gongle Hawk Fu?

 

I was going to roll with Golan-Globus Hawk which seems kind of fitting with the whole 80's Evil Commie black-with-red-stars paint jobs by a country led by two guys named Who and When...

[Archie Pellagio]

Xianglong/Soardragon UAV. Nothing like Global Hawk. Range is only about 2,000 km. More of a spotter than a long-range surveillance craft. The UAV also has a unique box-wing design that has never been seen in a flying aircraft before.

 

The WZ-2000 looks like an exact copy of the global hawk but about 40% smaller

Here is a good shot of the box wing on the Xianglong.

 

[Guest JamesG123]

They copied the basic fuselage configuration (if not had the exact LockMart plans and aerodynamic data!).

 

This is the WZ-2000:

 

 

 

 

The wings are interesting. Is it a "diamond tandem" or a "biplane" configuration? Any other aspects on it?

 

[Yalmuk]

They copied the basic fuselage configuration (if not had the exact LockMart plans and aerodynamic data!).

 

 

Or they used computer to calculate best aerodymanical fuselage.

[Guest JamesG123]

And the Global Hawk is the absolute optimum design? Right...

[tankerwanabe]

Xianglong/Soardragon UAV. Nothing like Global Hawk. Range is only about 2,000 km. More of a spotter than a long-range surveillance craft. The UAV also has a unique box-wing design that has never been seen in a flying aircraft before.

 

I think that the box-wing is by necessity rather than choice. I can't think of any other reasons for such a design other than to compensate for a material weakness in the wings themselves. In other words, they can't make the wings strong enough to withstand an optimum design and are stuck with this box-wing.

[Guest JamesG123]

lol no. The laws of physics and materials engineering are the same in China.

 

If that's the airfoil profile, chord, and length/area that they wanted, having a strut allows it to be built lighter, not that it would be impossible.

 

If its a diamond wing configuration, you have to have the strut.

[CaptLuke]

The WZ-2000 looks like an exact copy of the global hawk but about 40% smaller

Here is a good shot of the box wing on the Xianglong.

 

 

So the WZ-2000 is an exact copy except for being a completely different size and using a completely different wing arrangement, one never before seen on an operational UAV?

 

I am old enough to remember talk about how the Japanese didn't know how to innovate and all they did was copy, a lot of which was in the years right before they kicked our ass in cars, electronics, etc. A lot of the "Chinese copy" talk now strikes me as similar. I'm not saying the Chinese are 10 feet tall, they aren't any more than Japan was, but I think any knee jerk reaction to Chinese products as automatically being inferior copies of western designs is a very dangerous idea.

[Archie Pellagio]

So the WZ-2000 is an exact copy except for being a completely different size and using a completely different wing arrangement, one never before seen on an operational UAV?

 

That isn't a WZ-2000.

 

This is a WZ-2000

 

[Corinthian]

Gongle Hawk Fu?

 

Nope. The name is Chinese already, e.g. White Crow, Drunken Monkey, Vigorous Dragon, Global Hawk....

 

 

Ok that was a lame attempt at humour I must admit.

[Corinthian]

I think any knee jerk reaction to Chinese products as automatically being inferior copies of western designs is a very dangerous idea.

 

+1

 

 

 

Is that khaki guy pithing pissing on it?

[pikachu]

The wings are interesting. Is it a "diamond tandem" or a "biplane" configuration? Any other aspects on it?

 

Diamond.

 

 

Probably intended to give the plane a higher cruising ability than would otherwise be possible with a straight wing, or to compensate for weaker/less efficient engines by reducing drag. Materials engineering might be part of the reason too.

 

It's lately occurred to me that all the recent Chinese aeronautical "innovations" are LockMart and Northrop-based. From the DSI (LockMart) to box wing (LockMart) to EO-DAS (Northrop) to near-exact copy of Globalhawk (Northrop). While somewhat late, one would consider a total revamp in security for both companies might be in order. Also, turns out the UCAV model from Shenyang more closely resembles the Boeing Phantom Ray UCAV or its X-45C predecessor than the NG X-47. Maybe time to take a closer scrutiny at Boeing too?

 

In the case of the Xianglong, though, gotta hand it to the Chinese for beating LockMart to it. The latter have had the concept published since 1997 but done nothing with it.

[Corinthian]

Well, if it isn't industrial/.mil espionage, could also be that defense companies are dealing with the chinese, albeit in an under-the-radar/under-the-table way.

[tankerwanabe]

Well, if it isn't industrial/.mil espionage, could also be that defense companies are dealing with the chinese, albeit in an under-the-radar/under-the-table way.

 

I think that an Israeli company recently got busted for selling certain sensitive technology to China.

[CaptLuke]

That isn't a WZ-2000.

 

This is a WZ-2000

 

 

Apologies, should have noticed that the text and the picture were referring to different UAVs.

 

Still, similar appearance does not necessarily mean a copy for systems designed with similar goals and similar technologies. The Israeli Hermes 900 looks like a scaled down Global Hawk as well. Doesn't mean the Israelis don't have a lot of their own UAV design capability and execution technology.

Edited October 7, 2011 by CaptLuke

[pikachu]

Apologies, should have noticed that the text and the picture were referring to different UAVs.

 

Still, similar appearance does not necessarily mean a copy for systems designed with similar goals and similar technologies. The Israeli Hermes 900 looks like a scaled down Global Hawk as well. Doesn't mean the Israelis don't have a lot of their own UAV design capability and execution technology.

 

Actually, it's also important to note that aircraft with names not following standard Chinese military designations are usually built by the companies without preexisting orders from the PLAAF. In this way they are similar to some company-funded efforts in the West. The names Xianglong, Pterodactyl, WZ-2000 etc. are definitely not standard Chinese PLAAF designations, and the fact that their existence has been made public indicates that a lot of them are intended for the export market instead of the PLAAF. Usually when the PLAAF decides to buy or put them in service, the aircraft in question would suddenly disappear from public view and reemerge in actual military airbases under proper PLAAF colors. The only clear exception to this so far has been the J-20, which is PLAAF-driven from the start, but that is understandable due to the obvious propaganda value. Because the UAVs are company-funded projects, it makes sense for the companies to just imitate what's already proven to work elsewhere, but with Chinese characteristics. An earlier example of this trend can be seen in the YJ-12 supersonic cruise missile which looks almost exactly like the Air-Sol Moyenne Portee, but carries a conventional warhead and intended to serve multiple functions, from anti-ship to ground strikes to anti-radar and with multiple seeker head versions.

 

The Xianglong UAV is finished in China's new "dark green propaganda" colors like the recent J-20 and WZ-10. Its unique shape, emphasizing indigenous design, and massive size compared to similar efforts by other companies, indicate that there may be formal PLAAF backing behind it now. If you look at the original model, it was intended to have the standard ubiquitous light grey finish similar to the rest of China's company-funded UAV programs, which indicates that it was originally just another such project. It was also originally envisioned in two versions, one the jet-powered version in testing today, and another with a pusher turboprop. The arrival of the flying prototype (not to mention its color) may mean that, like the J-20, it is meant to enter service with the PLAAF.

 

There's also an interesting trend up north with Shenyang painting their J-11B/BS/BSH and J-15 prototypes in white (or very light grey) color. All Shenyang prototypes (also the Chengdu J-10Bs) now fly with WS-10 engines. However, the current reported buy of nearly 300 Al-31F engines (of which 120 are Al-31FNs for the J-10s) indicate that there is no intent to retrofit older planes with the new engines. Most likely the older Su-27SK/J-11 and J-10/10A planes will still fly with Russian engines and only newbuilt planes will fly with Chinese engines (to circumvent the Russian semi-embargo). Apparently Russia is now only willing to sell enough engines to replace old ones in the existing fleet rather than provide enough engines for the Chinese to expand their fleet.

[Yalmuk]

I found good pics of J-10S (trainer)cockpit.

[Yalmuk]

Now there is two of them.

Edited May 11, 2012 by Yalmuk

[Guest Charles]

Now there is two of them.

These are both prototypes, are they not. How long has it taken the PLAA R&D chaps to get this far?.

 

Charles

[pikachu]

Now there is two of them.

These are both prototypes, are they not. How long has it taken the PLAA R&D chaps to get this far?.

 

Charles

 

One year and five months. Interestingly, in Chengdu's tradition "XX02" has normally been reserved for the static testbed instead of a flying prototype. The second flying prototype has traditionally been "XX03" instead, and would start flying about one and a half years after "XX01". The schedule fits precedence, but the numbering doesn't. Traditionally, "XX04" would represent the final configuration and start flying between 1.5 and 2 years after "XX03". The length of a Chengdu project from first flight of first prototype to squadron service has historically been 8-9 years.

[Jeff]

Surprise! China’s Stealth Jets Are 2 Years Ahead of Schedule

By Spencer Ackerman

May 18, 2012

 

Last year, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates was greeted in Beijing by China’s experimental stealth jet buzzing over his head. Gates didn’t sweat it: He proclaimed that the J-20 wouldn’t be ready until at least 2020. Oops.

 

The Pentagon’s top China official has now revised that estimate. The J-20, China’s first stealth jet, will be operationally ready “no sooner than 2018,” David Helvey, deputy secretary of defense for East Asia and Asia Pacific Security Affairs, told reporters Friday.

 

The new anticipated timetable for the J-20 hardly augurs the end of American military dominance. But it wasn’t the only Chinese military development that took the Pentagon by surprise last year.

 

According to the Pentagon’s new report (.pdf) on the Chinese military, China’s got three nuclear-powered submarines — an advance that Helvey conceded the U.S. military didn’t anticipate. China also fielded an “improved” amphibious assault vessel last year, while the U.S. Marine Corps is having trouble upgrading its own.

 

And that’s just the stuff that the Pentagon can see. Helvey speculated that the Chinese military keeps its research, foreign military acquisitions and nuclear modernization off its books. The report estimates that China’s declared $106 billion annual military budget is really more like $120 to $180 billion.

 

None of that means China’s military will overtake America’s anytime soon. China won’t, for instance, have a global communications and navigation satellite network until 2020, which means it doesn’t have a prayer of having a truly global Navy until at least then — even if it starts building its own aircraft carriers. Helvey disclosed that China still has neither built nor acquired any armed drones, and the spy robo-planes it has are the Harpies that Israel sold it nearly a decade ago. And while China may have an amphibious ship, the report says it can’t actually invade or hold nearby Taiwan, let alone any target further away or better defended.

 

At the same time, it’s hard not to notice that America’s own stealth fleet keeps racking up #fails.

 

First there’s the Air Force’s F-22 Raptor. It’s choking its pilots, and the Air Force doesn’t know why. Gates’ successor, Leon Panetta, this week restricted Raptor flights and hurried up an installation of a backup oxygen system onto the jets — which won’t be complete until at least 2014. Panetta did not ground the F-22, so the nearly 200 planes will definitely be in Air Force’s arsenal ahead of the J-20. But until the mysterious oxygen problems are decisively fixed, pilots may be wary of flying them, and the Air Force leadership may be wary of ordering it into combat.

 

Then there’s the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a family of jets for the Air Force, Navy and Marines. It’s already the most expensive weapons program in human history — current estimates peg the F-35′s lifetime costs over decades at $1.1 trillion-with-a-T — and not a single one of the advanced, powerful stealth jets is in the air. The Marines’ variant was so riddled with cost-overruns that it was put on a timeout in 2011; it’s off probation now. But testers keep finding expensive engineering flaws with the family of jets, and the Pentagon has given up predicting when it will actually patrol the skies.

 

The U.S. doesn’t want conflict with the Chinese, whose economy is inextricably tied to its own. But it might not see one coming. Especially not if China’s stealth planes are advancing while its own are stalling.

 

http://www.wired.com...na-stealth-jet/

[Max H]

and not a single one of the advanced, powerful stealth jets is in the air.

 

 

 

Would it really have been that difficult to say "in service"?