It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A new prototype of China's J-20 has rolled out and taken flight

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
They've got some serious challenges to overcome. I don't think this actually have an RCS that small, I think they are using this as a development platform. The engine nozzles are still round and appear to have no scattering geometry nor Low RCS coatings. That alone makes this a pet project. Perhaps they're waiting to pop in a different powerplant all in one modular replacement, but the F-22 has a RCS of a pinball. This aircraft with those nozzles is like two airborne 55 gallon drums. Plus, their is a canopy bow. It looks like they have tried to emulate the geometry of the F-22 without fully understanding how to drive RCS down to bird-sized levels.




posted on Nov, 25 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Why don't we just bend the vertical stabilizers
slightly outboard on our F35's and badge them Chinese ?
That's apparently what they did.



posted on Nov, 25 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmania

I suspect they're just focusing on frontal stealth, so rear aspect stealth features like the engine nozzles are low priority. This is a big bird, I don't see it so much as a dog-fighter as an attack aircraft or possible an interceptor. It's big, fast and can carry lots of ordinance. So it just needs to fly straight in all stealthy like, lob its missiles at enemy carriers from standoff range, then turnaround and go home to reload before anyone can catch them. It could be pretty effective.



posted on Nov, 25 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Orwells Ghost

It's their equivalent of the F-22. It's designed to hunt AWACS, and other aircraft. Frontal aspect stealth is both easiest and important for that role.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Orwells Ghost

Considering SEAram engaging Anti ship missiles or the newer lasers coming out anything short of a ICBM delivered warheads going to be hard to get through a CAG's defenses. And a ICBM launch of their "carrier killer" will spell doom for China because it will be considered a Nuclear launch.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I was going to say, this thing is gigantic for a single-seat "fighter", and with that huge fuselage and those tiny engines, it looks like it'd be a real dog in anywhere but a straight line. I've been wondering for a while about what China actually wants to use these things for.

It looks like it *could* be as stealthy as an early-90's F-22 EMD, from the front at least, so there's that. Then there are those stealth-killing canards, which would make sense on a small dogfighter, or even on an N-ATF sized air superiority platform, but on something that sized, they'd only make sense if China is planning on using this thing as a carrier-based platform.

Otherwise, it reminds me of a stealth version of those giant Soviet interceptors from the 60's. This thing has Flagon/Fiddler written all over it.

Which makes sense, I guess, if they're using it as an anti-AWACS- rather than an anti-bomber interceptor.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Lasers are less effective against ICBMs or other weapons designed for high speed/high temperatures. Reentry is very brutal.

However, against those, we will have the railguns. The US Navy is looking at them for anti missile defense as well as long range bombardment. They did a test of a railgun round vs a ballistic missile warhead on a static mount. The damage was impressive.

The real revolution of lasers and railguns is the cost per shot. Lasers are pennies. Railguns are far, far cheaper than missiles.

That's part of the reason the Chinese are seeking boost glide hypersonic weapons: if we miss, the chance to try to kill the incoming again goes down a lot at hypersonic speeds. At Mach 1, a missile covers 30 miles in 150 seconds (+/-). At Mach 5, that's 30 seconds. Mach 10, 15 seconds. However, the cost of hypersonic weapons is probably going to be very high.

Boost glide weapons are rather different in flight path than traditional ballistic missiles. Also the ASM DF-21s are intermediate range missiles rather than ICBMs. Again, a different trajectory. If they ever built an ICBM ASM, that'd possibly be an apocalyptic mistake.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: yuppa

Lasers are less effective against ICBMs or other weapons designed for high speed/high temperatures. Reentry is very brutal.

However, against those, we will have the railguns. The US Navy is looking at them for anti missile defense as well as long range bombardment. They did a test of a railgun round vs a ballistic missile warhead on a static mount. The damage was impressive.

The real revolution of lasers and railguns is the cost per shot. Lasers are pennies. Railguns are far, far cheaper than missiles.

That's part of the reason the Chinese are seeking boost glide hypersonic weapons: if we miss, the chance to try to kill the incoming again goes down a lot at hypersonic speeds. At Mach 1, a missile covers 30 miles in 150 seconds (+/-). At Mach 5, that's 30 seconds. Mach 10, 15 seconds. However, the cost of hypersonic weapons is probably going to be very high.

Boost glide weapons are rather different in flight path than traditional ballistic missiles. Also the ASM DF-21s are intermediate range missiles rather than ICBMs. Again, a different trajectory. If they ever built an ICBM ASM, that'd possibly be an apocalyptic mistake.



yes the DF-21 is not a Long range attacker but it IS launched the same way. And it still gets into space for a few minutes. SO it can still be considered a launch worthy of a nuclear response .

The DF-21D has a range estimated between 1,035 to 1,726 mi (1,666 to 2,778 km), so a carrier battle group would need to be located through other means before launching. Over-the-horizon radars could detect ships, but their exact locations could be off by miles. Chinese recon satellites would be able to look for and locate a battle group. Recon aircraft and submarines could also look for them, but they are vulnerable to the carrier's defenses. Finally, the missile may have a hard time hitting its target. To hit ships moving at 55 km/h (30 kn; 34 mph), the DF-21D has radar and optical sensors for tracking. These are supposed to make it accurate, but the missile has not yet been tested against a moving target, let alone ones at sea against clutter and countermeasures.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

The J-20 isn't meant for carriers. Look at the landing gear. With that spindly little gear it wouldn't make one landing.



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Then the notion of canards on an underpowered F-111-sized platform makes even less sense. I was hoping it was for low-speed control like the NATF's canards.

Instead they're just a stealth-lessening oddity



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

If it has optical and radar, its going below a certain velocity, making the DF-21D warhead much easier to hit. One of the reason Project Thor was a bust was because of the plasma sheaf.



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: yuppa

If it has optical and radar, its going below a certain velocity, making the DF-21D warhead much easier to hit. One of the reason Project Thor was a bust was because of the plasma sheaf.


Thats true BUT.... according to the navy its similiar to the pershing missile,that has similar guidance that travels at mach 8 after a 25 g pull up manuver to into final targeting mode. Still it cant really travel in too erratic a line and the SM-3 can be tasked to hit it,just not as accurate as if it was in space. Its also Jammable or able to be blinded by a laser(ecm) then you have the last line of defense the Searam has a 11 mile engagement zone and can prolly nail it as it comes into range but there will be shockwave damage due to how close it might get



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

The pershing used a terrain matching radar, but even so, it had a /nuke/ onboard, making its accuracy (while relatively high) less than what the DF-21D needs. And, back in the 1980s, the concern about ABMs was far, far less.

The US Navy's strength is in air warfare, not just aircraft, but also missiles to bag winged things /and/ ballistic missiles. For that matter, their missiles make passable asats we found out.



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Chinese Defense blog now has a post up with the dates of the maiden flights for the J-20 prototypes.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Thought I'd share some info on the J-20:

It has stealth - composite plasma detectable by all current NATO radar systems. Stealth only to Indian and comparable radar systems.

It has radar bridge with shung hai ground based radar systems.

It has trajectory differentiate with missiles from Chinese modern batteries.

It moves at ground for takeoff in vertical space for 20 sec.

It has Armament like a Chinese 🐉 with fourteen a-to-a missiles of the coptyx idea. Missiles are effective against even the f-22.

Its biggest weakness is its engine that gives off a clear ir target.

Second weakness is range - only some 1600 miles cruise and 3400 miles transit.

With new technology the aircraft can be weakened further:

Ir sensor needs strengthening on the patriot and all comparable with in-shield in-target sensor.
Signals jamming at UHF 400-3/4NM will render it deaf and mute.
Crystal signature shield under development at DARPA is a must for f-22.
Without range you can shoot it down with benzodimethylchloride driven missiles, also DARPA project at current...
Wings are titanium, hull is starseed. Shoot one down Over Ryukujo and you have starseed...
Wings are vulnerable all over due to construction weakness - Chinese defect.
Wings are situated at aft of integral-body(think Russian armata concept) so they break off when put under pressure in excess of 16 metric tonnes per square inch ( Chinese measuring unit, closest is inch...)
Vents are cooled with liquid nitrogen, creating a tunnel of cloud round the craft, but engine is not covered sufficient...



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
I don't know what Fredrik is talking about, but I want to get me some starseed.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   
what is starseed?

is that a translation issue?



posted on Dec, 2 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Its problably a wonky translation issue. My guess would be carbon. A la Carl Sagan and his star stuff.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join