Chengdu J-20 pictures, analysis and speculation Part II

[siegecrossbow]

Video from the show.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30uk2vDfaL0

 

[Rickshaw]

A two barrel job, side by side laid flush and raised slightly. With today's computers and guided shells the extra degree or two isn't a problem.

I've not heard of anybody trying guided shells on an aircraft.

They haven't. The firing solution would be too great for most guided shells to handle the aerodynamic forces involved.

 

[FighterJock]

This is how the BBC reported the J-20 at the show.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37831714

 

[Ian33]

A two barrel job, side by side laid flush and raised slightly. With today's computers and guided shells the extra degree or two isn't a problem.

I've not heard of anybody trying guided shells on an aircraft.

They haven't. The firing solution would be too great for most guided shells to handle the aerodynamic forces involved.

The design team was lead by a man called Keith, top bod for weapons here in the UK.

When they were testing it at 'some where', the rounds kept veering up at random times, for no apparent reason. So after two days of this happening, at utterly random times and rounds, they set it all back up. Then the range Officers came along aghast after one technical lassie was having a moan over a brew.

"Bloody hell people, we'ves been lobbing mortars over your range, we didn't realise, sorry."

The shells had been veering up and striking the mortars as they passed overhead.

That was a long while back too.

 

[Ian33]

Airshow footage.

A thing of terrible beauty indeed.

https://youtu.be/pPsWiJlJsrQ

 

[VH]

I wonder can J-20 supercruise? After all that is a big airplane. And the Russians better get on their jobs because it seems that J-20 is winning the developmental race against the T-50.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Any idea when this video was taken? Pretty sure that it wasn't taken at Zhuhai (despite the title).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMNqbQQQ3w0

 

[Sundog]

Any idea when this video was taken? Pretty sure that it wasn't taken at Zhuhai (despite the title).

That video is already a few pages up thread. That was them flying to Zhuhai.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Any idea when this video was taken? Pretty sure that it wasn't taken at Zhuhai (despite the title).

That video is already a few pages up thread. That was them flying to Zhuhai.

I know the opening 20 seconds were taken on October 1st. What about the rest of the video? Seems like they were patched together from different videos.

 

[Sundog]

Any idea when this video was taken? Pretty sure that it wasn't taken at Zhuhai (despite the title).

That video is already a few pages up thread. That was them flying to Zhuhai.

I know the opening 20 seconds were taken on October 1st. What about the rest of the video? Seems like they were patched together from different videos.

I saw that latter part as well, that was the J-20 practicing for the airshow, IIRC, where the flight testing has been taking place.

 

[FighterJock]

Hope the J-20's do a full airshow routine next year. A 20 second flypast left me wanting more.

 

[litzj]

it seems that flight envelope of j20 is expanded in a few years

 

[Hanse]

Jeff Head has some pretty sweet J-20 pictures on his flickr page here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeff_head/

Sample below:

 

[Hanse]

Another pic.

 

[Deino]

Service entry soon !

First J-20A for PLAAF in full serial number spotted: 78271 confirms the 176. Brigade ... a new unit.

 

[Deino]

Service entry soon !

First J-20A for PLAAF in full serial number spotted: 78271 confirms the 176. Brigade ... a new unit.

And as expected there are (or have been) already 2 J-20A at Dingxin. The image was taken on 17. November

 

[FighterJock]

Service entry soon !

First J-20A for PLAAF in full serial number spotted: 78271 confirms the 176. Brigade ... a new unit.

And as expected there are (or have been) already 2 J-20A at Dingxin. The image was taken on 17. November

What are the transport aircraft next to the J-20As in the top photo Deino? Y-8s or Y-9s? Just curious.

 

[Blitzo]

What are the transport aircraft next to the J-20As in the top photo Deino? Y-8s or Y-9s? Just curious.

Probably Y-8/Y-9 special mission aircraft there for combat exercises, considering pictures we've had on the ground of it.

special mission namely ECM, ELINT/SIGINT

Could also be standard transport aircraft, but hard to tell

 

[FighterJock]

Thanks Blitzo.

 

[Deino]

#78272 spotted !

 

[Dragon029]

In regards to the J-20's planned IOC, do we have any word on what the planned capability / mission set might be? ie, will we be seeing jets declared operational to perform ISR, etc somewhat similar to how the Rafale was initially introduced, or will it be cleared for air-to-air and air-to-ground, warheads-on-foreheads operations?

 

[FighterJock]

In regards to the J-20's planned IOC, do we have any word on what the planned capability / mission set might be? ie, will we be seeing jets declared operational to perform ISR, etc somewhat similar to how the Rafale was initially introduced, or will it be cleared for air-to-air and air-to-ground, warheads-on-foreheads operations?

I thought the primary mission of the J-20A was to be long range interception and long range strike.

 

[latenlazy]

In regards to the J-20's planned IOC, do we have any word on what the planned capability / mission set might be? ie, will we be seeing jets declared operational to perform ISR, etc somewhat similar to how the Rafale was initially introduced, or will it be cleared for air-to-air and air-to-ground, warheads-on-foreheads operations?

I thought the primary mission of the J-20A was to be long range interception and long range strike.

Hah. No. It's always been air superiority. Every leg of that analysis has basically been kicked out now. The J-20 is not substantially bigger than other 5th generation fighters (certainly not the 23 m long aardvark analogue many thought it was when it was first revealed), doesn't have a substantially big weapons bay for heavy ordinance, and has been consistently shown flying alpha maneuvers.

 

[Deino]

Forgot to add ...

 

[FighterJock]

Forgot to add ...

I always thought the J-20A looked stunning side on.

 

[Hanse]

Hah. No. It's always been air superiority. Every leg of that analysis has basically been kicked out now. The J-20 is not substantially bigger than other 5th generation fighters (certainly not the 23 m long aardvark analogue many thought it was when it was first revealed), doesn't have a substantially big weapons bay for heavy ordinance, and has been consistently shown flying alpha maneuvers.

Relatitve sizes:

 

[Deino]

Hah. No. It's always been air superiority. Every leg of that analysis has basically been kicked out now. The J-20 is not substantially bigger than other 5th generation fighters (certainly not the 23 m long aardvark analogue many thought it was when it was first revealed), doesn't have a substantially big weapons bay for heavy ordinance, and has been consistently shown flying alpha maneuvers.

Relatitve sizes:

What basis did You take ??? The size of the canopy ??

I did only a rough comparison some days ago based on that GE-image ...

 

[Hanse]

Hah. No. It's always been air superiority. Every leg of that analysis has basically been kicked out now. The J-20 is not substantially bigger than other 5th generation fighters (certainly not the 23 m long aardvark analogue many thought it was when it was first revealed), doesn't have a substantially big weapons bay for heavy ordinance, and has been consistently shown flying alpha maneuvers.

Relatitve sizes:

What basis did You take ??? The size of the canopy ??

Yes, given the original was virtually identical, even down to some of the hardware. Also if you overlay the two the entire forward fuselage is very similar geometrically.

 

[Blitzo]

I thought the primary mission of the J-20A was to be long range interception and long range strike.

Almost definitely not.

See my write up on it from a while ago about why it is illogical http://plarealtalk.com/2015/12/27/j-20-striker-interceptor/


tl;dr -- long range interception and long range strike will be among its missions, but it is primarily a long range/long endurance air superiority fighter.


Remember folks, aircraft that can only interception missions and strike missions typically can't do air superiority, while aircraft that can "only" do air superiority missions can generally also do interception and strike.

 

[FighterJock]

I thought the primary mission of the J-20A was to be long range interception and long range strike.

Almost definitely not.

See my write up on it from a while ago about why it is illogical http://plarealtalk.com/2015/12/27/j-20-striker-interceptor/


tl;dr -- long range interception and long range strike will be among its missions, but it is primarily a long range/long endurance air superiority fighter.


Remember folks, aircraft that can only interception missions and strike missions typically can't do air superiority, while aircraft that can "only" do air superiority missions can generally also do interception and strike.

Thanks for the link Blitzo, that has been bothering me for some time ever since I had read it online.

 

[Deino]

Hah. No. It's always been air superiority. Every leg of that analysis has basically been kicked out now. The J-20 is not substantially bigger than other 5th generation fighters (certainly not the 23 m long aardvark analogue many thought it was when it was first revealed), doesn't have a substantially big weapons bay for heavy ordinance, and has been consistently shown flying alpha maneuvers.

Relatitve sizes:

What basis did You take ??? The size of the canopy ??

Yes, given the original was virtually identical, even down to some of the hardware. Also if you overlay the two the entire forward fuselage is very similar geometrically.

YES, but that makes it still not viable to use them at the same size. We know quite sure that the J-20 is "only" between 20.35 and 20.50m long ... so they might be externally similar - they share the same external lines - but at different sizes.

Deino

 

[Hanse]

That comparison shows it at 20.8m, which isn't that far off. (If indeed it is.)

 

[Blitzo]

Thanks for the link Blitzo, that has been bothering me for some time ever since I had read it online.

glad it was interesting.

all in all I can see how the interceptor+striker hypothesis might be superficially logical and perhaps psychologically/emotionally satisfying for people in defence media, but it just doesnt' jive well with the evidence that has been accumulated over the years, not to mention logic.

 

[Deino]

Handover ceremony of the first 6 J-20A was reportedly held yesterday on 11.Dec 2016 ... but no confirm or images yet !

Deino

 

[Hanse]

Handover ceremony of the first 6 J-20A was reportedly held yesterday on 11.Dec 2016 ... but no confirm or images yet !

Deino

China is leaving Russia in the dust with the progress they're making on their stealth fighter.

 

[kilokb]

If they keep this up, they'll be leaving a lot of people in the dust... Just about 5 years since taxi tests. By modern standards this is quick. It would be very interesting to know about their actual capabilities.

 

[Airplane]

If they keep this up, they'll be leaving a lot of people in the dust... Just about 5 years since taxi tests. By modern standards this is quick. It would be very interesting to know about their actual capabilities.

Things are always easier when you steal the technology without inventing it. Or maybe the Chinese haven't caught up with the West in adding needless beaurocracy to defense programs.

Keep in mind that all you're hearing about is all the successes and none of the failures.

 

[Blitzo]

If they keep this up, they'll be leaving a lot of people in the dust... Just about 5 years since taxi tests. By modern standards this is quick. It would be very interesting to know about their actual capabilities.

Things are always easier when you steal the technology without inventing it. Or maybe the Chinese haven't caught up with the West in adding needless beaurocracy to defense programs.

Keep in mind that all you're hearing about is all the successes and none of the failures.

Technically we haven't heard that much about their successes either -- over the last few years since its maiden flight we've only had pictures and rumours to go by, and very few official statements about its development milestones.

So we have no idea how successful or unsuccessful the testing and performance of the aircraft in its various domains have been... so we only have big ticket events to infer the status of the project, like no. of prototypes and speed of prototype production presence at Zhuhai airshow, speed of LRIP, speed of induction etc.

The fact that they are delivering production aircraft to the air force for what would likely be OT&E is just one of those big ticket events we have to try and build off.
It can mean a few things; that their development so far is at a state that they are confident to deliver aircraft to the air force for assessment, but it could also mean there are issues in development but the air force has been willing to overlook them, or maybe that the air force has had low requirements for the aircraft to begin with meaning CAC were able to deliver the aircraft more easily compared to other programmes in the world... or one could even go to the most extreme end and suggest that the entire J-20 development has been a sort of a potemkin event that does not really aim to produce a competitive fighter.

Unfortunately we'll probably never know, unless the eventual CCTV documentary about its development is more open than we expect.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Yeah if the requirement was "a twin engine J-10 with an internal weapons bay and it has to look really cool and stealthy" its progress would not be that impressive. I wouldn't count on that however. The level of stealth and avionics requirements will drive the complexity of the design. Its likely that "Block 1" J-20 will have AA modes and AAMs only, which reduces the complexity substantially over the F-35.

 

[Blitzo]

Yeah if the requirement was "a twin engine J-10 with an internal weapons bay and it has to look really cool and stealthy" its progress would not be that impressive. I wouldn't count on that however. The level of stealth and avionics requirements will drive the complexity of the design. Its likely that "Block 1" J-20 will have AA modes and AAMs only, which reduces the complexity substantially over the F-35.

Yes, I agree mostly.

A big unknown (well, one of the biggest unknowns among many others) is how ready to go the avionics package of the aircraft is. We can all see the EOIRST, the 360 EO PDS, and we know it has big AESA under its radome and an advanced ESM and ECM system can be safely assumed to be there too. How well all of those sensors work together and have been fused together for the pilot's disposal will play a big part in determining how useful and capable the aircraft will be in the immediate future. Better yet, how ready the datalinks of the aircraft are, to be able to slot with the rest of the new 4+ generation fighters, as well as older 4th generation fighters and AEW&C planes etc and act as a force multiplier, will also be unknown.