Chengdu J-20 pictures, analysis and speculation Part I

[mithril]

The smaller F-22 is a fighter-bomber so why can't the larger J-20 be one too? -SP

The YF-22 was (originally intended as) a fighter-bomber. Probably would have been a very good one indeed. The F-22A is more of a kludge in this role, although still probably more capable than a lot of aircraft designed from the outset as such.

nope, the ATF was intended from the start to be a pure air combat machine, like the F-15's it was replacing. "not a pound for air to ground".


the J-20 just isn't a very good design for a bomber. small weapon bays, which would limit it's bomb load to the lightest air to ground weapons. wing/canard/tail design best suited to high speed manuevering, but less apt at low speed. (bad idea for a bomber..look at the Luftwaffe "ground attack" F-104's for an example.) and no fittings for designator systems to guide smart munitions.

not to mention the fact that the company that built it is currently in the process of refitting the J-10's in service for the ground to air role.

no, the J-20 is probably designed as a fighter. probably more of a Mig-31 style interception style fighter. high speed, able to reach, shoot down the enemy, and return quickly. just what the chinese need their aerial interdiction offensive doctrine and their defensive doctrine. they've got J-10's and J-11's for air to ground.

 

[Deino]

Are You sure that the bay is too small ???? ;D

 

[chuck4]

J-20 has a true bubble canopy clearly elevated for maximum 360 visbility. Which was the last jet designed from the on-set with a heavy air-to-ground requirement that had a true bubble canopy? If the J-20 has any air-to-ground role, it must be secondary, taking advantage of the fact that a modern fighter optimized for air-to-air must necessarily possess the surplus of thrust and lift to also be able to carry a large bomb load.

 

[Deino]

Confirmed - if not a mock-up - two J-20 at CAC !

 

[chuck4]

Now are the two prototypes externally identical?

 

[Deino]

Now are the two prototypes externally identical?

Honestly ... I think from this picture alone it's not possible to tell.

Otherwise I expect them to be the two aircrfat we've already seen: the one with the AL-31F/FN used for the taxi- and high-speed tests .... and the other one with these "silverish" WS-1X-types (or coloured AL-31) ;D.

Deino

 

[Deino]

There's a lot of controversial discussion going on at SDF after this ... and later another photo was posted, showing two ... or even three J-20 ! ???

IMO the one showing three is "surely" faked by using this new one, which IMO was taken a bit earlier than the one already posted yesterday. As such IMO in the first photo - the one now found - one is sitting in the hangar and the other one is on the taxiway on the left ... rolling from left to right in front of the hangar.

And again some funny "one" used both to ps'e them into one photo showing three J-20. ... or what do You think ??

Deino

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The original photo could be genuine or faked, its very difficult to tell. If you left the camera on a tripod and took multiple pics while the J-20 went out of the hangar and back, its fakable.

We need something more to be sure. Multiple pics. Eyewitness accounts. Video would be much more convincing.

 

[Deino]

The original photo could be genuine or faked, its very difficult to tell. If you left the camera on a tripod and took multiple pics while the J-20 went out of the hangar and back, its fakable.

We need something more to be sure. Multiple pics. Eyewitness accounts. Video would be much more convincing.

Yeppp ... I just tried to put all three "photos" together for comparison ... IMO the last is most likely faked by a simple combination of both, but also the other ones look "strange" IMO. :-[

Deino

 

[Deino]

Nice sequence ... ;D

Below is reportedly the inner AB-details of the J-20's engine ... does it help us do decide if an AL-31-vesion or WS-1x ?? ???

Deino

 

[flateric]

flap-flap-flap
additional propulsor I think)

 

[Trident]

The afterburner flame holder configuration does not match either engine exactly, although it is much closer to the AL-31F (the only difference is that its concentric rings are braced by 10 radial struts rather than 11 as on known AL-31Fs) than the WS-10(A).

EDIT: For some reason the whole thing looks more like a scale model though ???

 

[chuck4]

Indeed, the edge of the after burner nozzle lacks clearly separated pedals, suggesting the whole thing is molded as one piece of plastic as might be found on a scale model built from a kit.

 

[flateric]

Indeed, the edge of the after burner nozzle lacks clearly separated pedals, suggesting the whole thing is molded as one piece of plastic as might be found on a scale model built from a kit.

and Stephen found this MODEL KIT, reporting at DEW Line, winning much of internetz today

 

[Deino]

Hmmm ... Yes I know and esp. after the faked JH-XX story it's "hip" to tell everything again a FAKE or a mock-up.

However - and even if I agree to be more careful than before (YES, me too !) - we should not forget that there's a huge market in China at the moment for everything related to the latest military achievements. Game parks, exhibitions and military shows are spreading like mashrooms after a warm summer rain.

Additionally we already had these reports about two prototypes from eyewitness reports from the first flight ... we all know at least minor differences on the airframe + the different exhausts leaving the possibility of two prototypes (even if some don't like it) ... all what was missing was a photo-proof.

And finally this is at best a subscale model (maybe 1:2 or 1:1,5) made by a company called "Shi Jiazhuang hypo-light-speed tech Ltd" reportedly located in Cangzhou ... and not in Chengdu (I know that is not necessarily an argument, but IMO it's quite stupid to assume that the second one on the tarmac at CAC is this model!)

Deino

 

[flateric]

Andreas, of course I was kiddin'

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Which was the last jet designed from the on-set with a heavy air-to-ground requirement that had a true bubble canopy?

A-12, A-10, A-6, B-52, B-47, B-36...

 

[Abraham Gubler]

nope, the ATF was intended from the start to be a pure air combat machine, like the F-15's it was replacing. "not a pound for air to ground".

Actually the ATF started as an air to ground aircraft to replace the F-4E, F-105 and F-111. The F-15 was also built with a full air to ground capability and proved itself as the best bombing tac air platform in US service during its trials. "Not a pound for air to ground" was just a slogan for consumption by Congress, media and other ignorants.

Not that I disagree that the J-20 is focused on air to air. The bomb bay forward of the CG indicates to me that it isn't meant to drop heavy loads.

 

[Deino]

Andreas, of course I was kiddin'

Sorry if I was misleading or a bit harsh in my statement - and I never thought that I think it is a mock-up - but if You read the comments under this and also the ARES-blog post, You sometimes .... ???

Thanks, Deino

 

[Deino]

The J-20 flew twice today ... ;D

Reportedly there were some strange observations on one nozzle again, which was a bit different :huh: ... maybe a replacement engine ?! ???

Deino

 

[chuck4]

Which was the last jet designed from the on-set with a heavy air-to-ground requirement that had a true bubble canopy?

A-12, A-10, A-6, B-52, B-47, B-36...

Not one of them is supersonic. A true bubble canopy is costly to supersonic performance.

 

[Deino]

latest news ... both via Key-Forum & SDF

Today J20 flew 3 times.

2 flights happened in day time, lasted abt one hour each

Third flight ran into night time,abt 40 mins

... making now flights 13 - 15. !!

Deino

 

[vivtho]

Which was the last jet designed from the on-set with a heavy air-to-ground requirement that had a true bubble canopy?

A-12, A-10, A-6, B-52, B-47, B-36...

Not one of them is supersonic. A true bubble canopy is costly to supersonic performance.

Not all that much ... a well designed canopy will allow the designer to do away or minimize the amount of 'wasp-waisting' required for Whitman ruling. The aircraft listed in the OP were subsonic because their roles did not require supersonic performance.


Take a look at the F-15, F-16, Su-27/30/35, MiG-19, JAS-39 Gripen ... all bubble canopies and all supersonic.

 

[Deino]

 

[Triton]

Awesome! Thank you for sharing Deino!

 

[Deino]

Here are a few more and finally without a sign !

Besides that there were two more flights yesterday (now 19) and reports from CAC say the transfer to the CFTE might be soon; additionally the Xiang Long UAV, China's answer to the Global Hawk (albeit much smaller) ... more a "Regional Hawk", is about to fly soon again.

[Note: Thanks to HouShanghai for the pictures.]

 

[Triton]

Uploaded by houshanghai on 06/28/2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsFy98qwKd4

 

[Triton]

Uploaded by houshanghai on 06/26/2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNpbehViDNE&NR=1

 

[Triton]

Chengdu J-20 side bay and belly bay doors open posted by houshanghai at Pakistan Defence forum.

Source:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/111471-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-updates-discussions-9.html#post1898633

 

[Triton]

Posted by Martian2 at Pakistan Defence on June 27, 2011

[Note: Thank you to "Mpleio" for the pictures and "Kroko" for the link.]

Source:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/111471-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-updates-discussions-8.html

 

[Triton]

thanks to =GT at CDF

 

[Triton]

Posted by houshanghai at Pakistan Defence forum on June 17, 2011.

Source:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/111471-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-updates-discussions-5.html

 

[quellish]

Uploaded by houshanghai on 06/26/2011

Interesting bays are interesting.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Uploaded by houshanghai on 06/26/2011

Interesting bays are interesting.

Maybe it had dummy missiles inside that they wanted to see?

 

[Foxglove]

Funny, in the second batch of shots posted by Triton the side bay door seems much smaller than in the first two photos. Also, in the first two photos you can see the lower side bay door, missing from the other shots. My guess: the first two shots have the extra door CG added
Did anybody notice the F-15-style airbrake in the video? This might suggest an obsolete solution to braking, note that there are no dorsal brakes on the F-22, T-50 or F-35.

 

[Blitzo]

^ Prototype, without the flight controls all sorted out and tested -- there's a chance they will remove it from the production version.

Which photos in which post with the supposed CGed weapon bays are you referring to? I myself do not see any disprecancy.

 

[Foxglove]

^ Prototype, without the flight controls all sorted out and tested -- there's a chance they will remove it from the production version.

Which photos in which post with the supposed CGed weapon bays are you referring to? I myself do not see any disprecancy.

Page 26, reply no. 388.

 

[Blitzo]

^ Prototype, without the flight controls all sorted out and tested -- there's a chance they will remove it from the production version.

Which photos in which post with the supposed CGed weapon bays are you referring to? I myself do not see any disprecancy.

Page 26, reply no. 388.

I believe the CG "lower" side weapon bay door you are referring to is the left door for the ventral bay. The right ventral bay door opens on the other side. I think the perspective made it look different.
The J-20's side bays only has one door, the "upper" door, without a "lower" unlike the F-22 which has both.

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean. ^^

 

[LowObservable]

Has anyone seen the right-hand bay door open?

Because you'd put both side bays on an FSD aircraft, or a Y-aircraft, but it would be a waste of money on an X-plane.

 

[Deino]

Has anyone seen the right-hand bay door open?

Because you'd put both side bays on an FSD aircraft, or a Y-aircraft, but it would be a waste of money on an X-plane.

Yeppp ...