J20 Stealth Fighter

[no smoking]

That aircraft shows lack of innovation, Su-57 basically improved that configuration

View attachment 54032

By your logic, you can say the same thing with F-22 which is improvement of F-15 and J-20 is further development of J-10.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

By your logic, you can say the same thing with F-22 which is improvement of F-15 and J-20 is further development of J-10.

that is not my logic but the fact the canards kills lift of the wing, and levcons do not, you example is for children

 

[no smoking]

that is not my logic but the fact the canards kills lift of the wing, and levcons do not, you example is for children

Wow, now you start to invent aerodynamic?
No, the canards don't kill the lift of the wing, it reduces the REQUESTED lift of the wing.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

Wow, now you start to invent aerodynamic?
No, the canards don't kill the lift of the wing, it reduces the REQUESTED lift of the wing.

The downwash over the wing has different effects depending the AoA bellow 16 degrees kills lift above 16 degrees improves lift.

Proof? simple AJ-37 viggen wing

This data is already known, LEVCONS do not produce downwash, and control the vortices of LEX of the wing.

So you like it or not J-20 has 1980s aerodynamics, is much less advanced and so is Su-37, so SU-57 is a generation leap

 

[ARVION]

.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[MiG-29SMT]

.

China is a lot of propaganda


Europe and NATO have close to 5 times the military budget of China, how do we know it?


the USAF at least 4 times more F-22 than J-20s, 10 times more F-35 than J-20.


Europe has more F-35 than China J-31s.

and very likely same number of F-35s to J-20

It has better fighters than J-11 and J-10s.

while China has around 350 Su-27s clones, and 400 J-10s; Europe has a similar number of F-16s, Eurofighters, Rafale, Mirage 2000s Panavia and Gripens, excluding USAF Europe.


Today Europe has around the same level of capacity to China..

So our Chinese Friends are getting in trouble because from Japan to India are considered a threat.

The reality China has no way to defeat the west

 

[ARVION]

 

[MiG-29SMT]

 

[vishnugupt]

If J-20 is 3.5 or 4 generation then why don't IAF buy Tejas in numbers to counter them ?? This IAF expert is just a sample of why Armed forces are in such a pathetic state.
Round the year they do stupidity like J20 junk, Chinese weapons are junk, Su-35 is junk, but when China comes to LAC with the same junk then Armed force runs amok.
Wonder, when our high-rank officers in Armed forces, will get their due IOC and FOC so they can scape stupidity and talk sense. Beggers

 

[ARVION]

If J-20 is 3.5 or 4 generation then why don't IAF buy Tejas in numbers to counter them ?? This IAF expert is just a sample of why Armed forces are in such a pathetic state.
Round the year they do stupidity like J20 junk, Chinese weapons are junk, Su-35 is junk, but when China comes to LAC with the same junk then Armed force runs amok.
Wonder, when our high-rank officers in Armed forces, will get their due IOC and FOC so they can scape stupidity and talk sense. Beggers .

Many of your's points are correct about our lack in the sense of the startegy . And in the constance in the sense they said . As for the J 20's it's still isn't a matured platform like Rafale's so it's too early to comment on this . But as of now we need to focus on increasing on strength of our's squadrons, may it be , more LCA's or Rafale's .

 

[vishnugupt]

Many of your's points are correct about our lack in the sense of the startegy . And in the constance in the sense they said . As for the J 20's it's still isn't a matured platform like Rafale's so it's too early to comment on this . But as of now we need to focus on increasing on strength of our's squadrons, may it be , more LCA's or Rafale's .

I have never claimed a certain weapon/jet/equipment is Suppa duppa even for F-35, Rafale, or Tejas or any other, Because it is impossible to achieve everything in one machine so you have to sacrifice something over other desirable requirements ( primary). Don't forget, the delay is bound to happen irrespective of how much-advanced country you are but people start celebrating prematurely for other's delay.
Important question is, do these F-35, J-20, SU-57, Tejas will reach where they intended to be?? The answer is Yes. Because they were designed as per costumer requirements which will be eventually fulfilled, except for Tejas because of the stupidity of IAF

 

[ARVION]

 

[BangaliBabu]

Stop quoting that Turd Piece by links. Please send screenshots if possible.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

If J-20 is 3.5 or 4 generation then why don't IAF buy Tejas in numbers to counter them ?? This IAF expert is just a sample of why Armed forces are in such a pathetic state.
Round the year they do stupidity like J20 junk, Chinese weapons are junk, Su-35 is junk, but when China comes to LAC with the same junk then Armed force runs amok.
Wonder, when our high-rank officers in Armed forces, will get their due IOC and FOC so they can scape stupidity and talk sense. Beggers

it is not as bad as you might think, most latin america es defenceless versus the USAF in aerospace and strategic forces, India is not, J-20 does not make a big difference, your air forces are pretty powerful and only slightly behind China

 

[no smoking]

The downwash over the wing has different effects depending the AoA bellow 16 degrees kills lift above 16 degrees improves lift.

That downwash is only affecting part of main wing area, that is why planes with canard generally have larger main wing, but this disadvantage is negligible comparing to the tail down force produced by horizontal stabilizer. So, overall, in the low AOA, both types have similar CL performance, but in high AOA, canard plane start to produce more lift than conventional plane (5-12%).

 

[no smoking]

This data is already known, LEVCONS do not produce downwash, and control the vortices of LEX of the wing.

So you like it or not J-20 has 1980s aerodynamics, is much less advanced and so is Su-37, so SU-57 is a generation leap

LEVCONS has its own disadvantage in different environment. There is no model only has advantages but no disadvantages. Using which model is depending the intended usage purpose of the plane.

Don't forget, Indians are going to put canards on Tejas MK2 even though they had "advanced" LEVCONS on Tejas MK1 already.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

That downwash is only affecting part of main wing area, that is why planes with canard generally have larger main wing, but this disadvantage is negligible comparing to the tail down force produced by horizontal stabilizer. So, overall, in the low AOA, both types have similar CL performance, but in high AOA, canard plane start to produce more lift than conventional plane (5-12%).

that is a not accurate, if you have a longitudinally unstable aircraft with pitch up tendency how you control it? think a minute.............uhmmmm, aircraft has a pitch up tendency and you have tailplanes? can you guess yes the tailerons neet pitch up force too got it?

Now you forget a detail, wing leading edge extensions increase the aerodynamic center of lift movement forward and the reducction of wing size

In LCA the LEX is just too small, on SU-57 it extends forward resulting in a better vortex formation.


F-15 by having a smaller LEX than F-18 has less powerful vortices.

Su-27 thus has very sharp and long LEX

Effects of Forebody, Wing and Wing-Body-LEX Flowfields on High Angle of Attack Aerodynamics on JSTOR

William A. Moore, Gary E. Erickson, Dale J. Lorincz, Andrew M. Skow, Effects of Forebody, Wing and Wing-Body-LEX Flowfields on High Angle of Attack Aerodynamics, SAE Transactions, Vol. 88, Section 4: 790860–791108 (1979), pp. 3801-3825

www.jstor.org

 

[MiG-29SMT]

LEVCONS has its own disadvantage in different environment. There is no model only has advantages but no disadvantages. Using which model is depending the intended usage purpose of the plane.

Don't forget, Indians are going to put canards on Tejas MK2 even though they had "advanced" LEVCONS on Tejas MK1 already.

Canards have more problems, LEVCONS not only produce vortices and no downwash but also they are better for stealth.

LCA if you gave analize it has two main limitations, first it is too small and inbord part of the wing has less sweep, thus is less powerful for generation of vortices.

F-18 or Su-27 has sharp LEX on their wings, so the vortex generation is better.

further more LCA by being tailess has more control issues if it use flaps to increase lift because they generate a pitch down tendency, the americans and Russians considered therefore the use of elevons to free the wing and have an additional control surface.

But LCA is the better aircraft in terms of stealth, LCA should be pretty hard to see, i guess is harder to find than J-10 and JF-17 even it is not stealth, plus it is small.

Adding canards in a small aircraft might look a good solution but is not, but LCA was designed to be small and adding canards is a solution that contradicts the initial parameters by which it was designed

 

[scatterStorm]

Capable but not numerous. Agni 5 could reach Beijing, but how many Agni Vs does India have VS PLARF ballistic missiles?

It would literally be suicidal for Indian military officials to attempt to respond to PLAAF stealth fighters with nuclear weapons.

So why bring them up like @MiG-29SMT is trying to do? And as you say India and China both have NFU policies for their nuclear arsenals.

Relax nobody is going nuclear and some shit. We have enough tactics to counter J20 or even F22 for that matter. Every platform brings some + and some -. This is a J20 thread, not a nuclear exchange thread. Both countries will think twice (can't say about Pakistan) for doing of with a nuclear exchange against a J20.

So stop yourself from engaging a nuclear exchange in this forum even if it means someone else is doing so.
lets stick to the J20 here. You are the thread creator after-all, you can report thread derailment. Use rules, they are created for your benefit.