XXJ - Chinese fifth generation fighter programme

[Guest JamesG123]

For components like engines, radar/weapons, and other avionics it makes economic sense to let someone else eat the development cost/risk.

[rhino]

Quick question: wouldn't the canards be a disadvantage to stealth? Just seems likes the more that moves, the more your RCS goes up.

[a77]

Quick question: wouldn't the canards be a disadvantage to stealth? Just seems likes the more that moves, the more your RCS goes up.

 

Canards give more agility more lift and shorter take off/landing distance, but a bit more drag. I gees you can reduce the movements of the canards in stealth mode. All "big" nation except US think that is a good compromise and are building there new plane with canards. But US do not have them, that's they are fast to point out and enhance the drawbacks..

[Scythe]

Quick question: wouldn't the canards be a disadvantage to stealth? Just seems likes the more that moves, the more your RCS goes up.

 

At the ranges that matter for stealth (BVR), it shouldn't matter. You're not going to be pulling G's that far out.

 

When you're dogfighting and the extra agility does require the use of canards, then arguably stealth doesn't matter at that point.

[Scythe]

Canards give more agility more lift and shorter take off/landing distance, but a bit more drag. I gees you can reduce the movements of the canards in stealth mode. All "big" nation except US think that is a good compromise and are building there new plane with canards. But US do not have them, that's they are fast to point out and enhance the drawbacks..

 

That's a blatant lie.

 

The F-22 is simply superior to anything flying today, in both stealth and in kinematics. It's the product of $60 billion of taxpayer money, tailored to the needs of the USAF. Saying the F-22 is better than the Eurocanards isn't them "enhancing the drawbacks (of the design)," it's just fact.

 

All that money the U.S. spent researching canard aircraft like the X-31 suggests that there isn't this bias that you claim.

Edited January 10, 2011 by Scythe

[DB]

The F-22 uses thrust vectoring to improve its manoeuvrability compared to other design solutions. Whether it is more or less agile than Eurofighter as a result is scarcely relevant now or in any foreseeable future, but I recall assertions that the instantaneous rate of change of nose pointing was likely to be superior for the Eurofighter, but sustained high-alpha was likely to favour the F-22, although this latter may have had more to do with the latter having greater excess thrust than its vectoring.

 

Calling someone out as a blatant liar when they present an opinion that you disagree with is somewhat unseemly.

[Lampshade111]

Bingo!! It always takes them less time to get up to speed. They have a massive spying campaign going on in the US Military Industrial Complex. They have access to most things we do not as citizens. They have plans for most things that are already in service. It's just too hard to keep anything a secret onced its introduced to the field.

 

How are they getting all of this information? I'm not seeing Chinese spies in every neighborhood or at workplaces. Is it a matter of network security like we have seen all too clearly in recent years?

 

Details may not be known about this J-XX or XXJ but it certainly seems to signal a leap forward for China's aviation industry and the PLAAF's capability. Regardless of how much it is based of Russian and American technology, it seems to highlight how short-sighted canceling F-22 production was. We need something like the F-35 is/was supposed to be to replace the F-16 but I truly believe the F-22 program should have been continued with future upgrades/variants using avionics systems developed for the F-35.

[Archie Pellagio]

How are they getting all of this information? I'm not seeing Chinese spies in every neighborhood or at workplaces. Is it a matter of network security like we have seen all too clearly in recent years?

 

The Chinese make extensive use of the diaspora at lower levels in support functions as well as more direct espionage.

Generally you're talking things like OSINT, managing safe houses, vehicle stocks etc but some other uses, the Olympic Torch Relay rent-a-crowd counter-protests were an excellent example, one the Chinese really fucked up big on.

 

Not unlike Israel's use of the diaspora.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Luke Y

[Guest JamesG123]

But mostly we unzipped our own flies..

All of the engineers and programmers we trained and all the business and economics talent that went to our universities. There is all of the state o' the art manufacturing and technology that we pretty much gave them that has direct military application. All of our electronic components and devices which may or may not have backdoors built into them, etc.

[tankerwanabe]

It'd be funny if we fed the Chinese a flawed blue print.

 

Maybe 99% correct except for that one tiny 1% error that compromises the entire design.

[TSJ]

It'd be funny if we fed the Chinese a flawed blue print.

 

Maybe 99% correct except for that one tiny 1% error that compromises the entire design.

But that would require cunning and deception.

[TRYTRY]

first flight video.

http://att.newsmth.net/att.php?p.387.16239098.419.rar

http://att.newsmth.net/att.php?p.387.16239116.830.rar

http://att.newsmth.net/att.php?p.387.16239124.1720.rar

[swerve]

Bloggers were posting live from the airfield perimeter throughout the first flight. News of preparations being made attracted a crowd.

 

How times change, eh?

[TRYTRY]

Bloggers were posting live from the airfield perimeter throughout the first flight. News of preparations being made attracted a crowd.

 

How times change, eh?

First flight began at 4:50(GMT) and ended at 5:08.

[Scythe]

The F-22 uses thrust vectoring to improve its manoeuvrability compared to other design solutions. Whether it is more or less agile than Eurofighter as a result is scarcely relevant now or in any foreseeable future, but I recall assertions that the instantaneous rate of change of nose pointing was likely to be superior for the Eurofighter, but sustained high-alpha was likely to favour the F-22, although this latter may have had more to do with the latter having greater excess thrust than its vectoring.

 

Calling someone out as a blatant liar when they present an opinion that you disagree with is somewhat unseemly.

 

An opinion? The guy basically came out and said that the U.S. jumps at every opportunity to "enhance the drawbacks" of the use of canards in fighter design. That IS a lie, a completely unsubstantiated one at that.

 

I'm not debating the merits/deficits of the plane design. It's my personal opinion that the Europeans designed and developed what's best for them and the United States did the same thing for the F-22. The Eurocanards all are designed with delta wings, and the canards alleviate many dogfighting weaknesses in having a delta wing by moving the pitch vector in front of the aircraft's center-of-gravity rather than leaving it behind it.

 

The F-22 doesn't even have a delta wing, thus its design would not benefit nearly as much as the Eurocanards. That's all there is to the supposed bias the U.S. has against canards.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Scythe

[X-Files]

It'd be funny if we fed the Chinese a flawed blue print.

 

Maybe 99% correct except for that one tiny 1% error that compromises the entire design.

 

Air Superiority by Harbor Freight

 

Quality Control Crisis in Chinese Jet Fighter Production?

 

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2010/05/21/quality-control-crisis-in-chinese-jet-fighter-production/#ixzz1AlbvIkUG

Defense.org

Emacs!

 

Yesterday, we wrote up RAND�s latest assessment of the PLA air forces that focused on modernization progress over the past decade and China�s development of a fighter production base built largely by reverse engineering Russian and some Israeli designs.

 

Meanwhile, David Axe reports that there have been some pretty serious problems with new jets coming off Chinese production lines. The PLA recently rejected delivery of 16 J-11B (a licensed version of the Su-27 Flanker) because of abnormal vibrations.

 

Chinese production of the single engine J-10B (reverse engineered from Israel�s Lavi) has also veered off course.

 

�On April 22, a J-10 crashed, killing a senior pilot. It was the second known crash in two years of the new fighter, and came just nine days after the Chinese military hosted delegations of African and Middle Eastern arms buyers, in hope of selling them the J-10 and other weapons.

 

Beijing has tried to cover up the J-10 crashes, according to Manu Sood. �The 22 April crash became public because a senior colonel had died in the crash and the funeral became too big to keep the story hushed. The news report also claims that the design of the 200-odd J-10s produced have not worked out as desired by [the] developers.�

[Guest JamesG123]

Compare. US/Russian/anyoneelseyoulike prototype and new model accident rates.

 

Japanese air power wasn't respected until late '41 or so either. Those that forget the past are doomed...etc.

[Nobu]

F-22s for Japan with full transfer of technology and local production rights is the logical countermove.

[TSJ]

"Air Superiority by Harbor Freight"

 

I too am a Harbor Freight target. When I get the catalogs I go into a comatose state overwhelmed at the thought of getting color coded screwdrivers at a dozen for 1.99. The mind whirls at the possibilities. They sure look purty too. The Sons of Chunking know their customers that's for sure.

[tankerwanabe]

BTW, did anyone read some of the yahoo articles on this PRC fighter? One writer wrote that it may be superior to the F-35 because it ... "has 2 engines, whereas the F-35 has only 1 engine."

 

I was really tempted to send a note to that writer suggesting that we're developing a Navalized F-35 with THREE engines in response to the new Chinese threat.

[Guest JamesG123]

I red it on the interwebs so it must be true!!!1!

[Archie Pellagio]

BTW, did anyone read some of the yahoo articles on this PRC fighter? One writer wrote that it may be superior to the F-35 because it ... "has 2 engines, whereas the F-35 has only 1 engine."

 

I was really tempted to send a note to that writer suggesting that we're developing a Navalized F-35 with THREE engines in response to the new Chinese threat.

 

 

I knew there was a reason the USAF has been keeping the B52 in service so long! We want eight!

[TRYTRY]

[Rubberanvil]

F-22s for Japan with full transfer of technology and local production rights is the logical countermove.

Not until they plugged the leaks in their security regarding top secret information.

[chino]

I've lived in Shanghai for the past nearly ten years.

 

I can tell you that with very few exceptions, things made in China are not of good enduring quality. Chinese citizens often defend the quality issue by saying that this is not true. I think this is more out of nationalism since I am a foreigner.

 

I am not being biased, in fact I am as pro-China as any non-PRC citizen can be.

 

But fact is fact.

 

And the quality issue will remain a serious one until people here tackle the problem instead of denying it.