Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

Miramar_14_MV-22_1621a.JPG

Miramar_14_MV-22_1726a.JPG

Miramar_14_MV-22_0074a1.JPG

Miramar_14_FA-18C_0409a.JPG
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





New Chinese 5th Generatio Aircraft

This is a discussion on New Chinese 5th Generatio Aircraft within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Nar I didn't call it, googlefoo did and given it was a Taiwanese report to their Parliament, it was a ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old September 16th, 2012   #16
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 430
Threads:
Nar I didn't call it, googlefoo did and given it was a Taiwanese report to their Parliament, it was a safe bet
________________
Air Vice-Marshal Osley, 2012 : Air Power Australia made several errors of fact and misrepresentations about F-35 capability..their analysis is basically flawed through incorrect assumptions and lack of knowledge..
jack412 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2012   #17
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Abraham Gubler's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,237
Threads:
This looks like another Chinese 'Purvis Eureka'... There is still no hard evidence to indicate they have anything approaching fifth generation fighter technology in LO and SA. Just because they fly one, two or three aircraft with hard chines and symmetrical angles does not mean anything. Its what's under and in the skin that is important: hence the Purvis Eureka.
Abraham Gubler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2012   #18
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: central illinois
Posts: 261
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abraham Gubler View Post
This looks like another Chinese 'Purvis Eureka'... There is still no hard evidence to indicate they have anything approaching fifth generation fighter technology in LO and SA. Just because they fly one, two or three aircraft with hard chines and symmetrical angles does not mean anything. Its what's under and in the skin that is important: hence the Purvis Eureka.
Agreed, It was some length of time before the Raptor flew, and another 10 years before it reached IOC, this is a pretty fair rendition outwardly although obviously smaller and lighter. After watching this for well over a year with the J-20 it does seem that things have slowed, to date there are only two airworthy J-20s, and its first flight is approaching two years? I continue to believe that powerplants are also an ongoing issue.
Air Force Brat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2012   #19
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Abraham Gubler's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,237
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Air Force Brat View Post
Agreed, It was some length of time before the Raptor flew, and another 10 years before it reached IOC, this is a pretty fair rendition outwardly although obviously smaller and lighter. After watching this for well over a year with the J-20 it does seem that things have slowed, to date there are only two airworthy J-20s, and its first flight is approaching two years? I continue to believe that powerplants are also an ongoing issue.
Flying is no benchmark of importance. Anyone can build an aircraft and fly it. There are hundreds of aerospace enterprises in the world that given $20-50m and a pair of fighter engines will be able to build and fly an aircraft that looks like an F-22.

But fit it out with the systems required to make it a fifth generation fighter? That’s an entirely different ballpark. The Chinese have done very little to demonstrate they have the capability to develop the SA and LO capability.
Abraham Gubler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2012   #20
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 223
Threads:
The reason why the F-22 took so long to develop wasn't so much the stealth aspect of the design, but rather the fact that they basically had to invent the electronics for it because they didn't exist back in the 80 when they started working on the aircraft.

Now you can buy highly advanced but cheap computer components everywhere. Who designs a machine like that today has it much easier, so it was inevitable that it wouldn't take long for others to build something similar or comparable to the F-22 much faster and for way less money.

Recently I saw a TV report about the newest German warship and the whole thing runs on "off the shelf" SUN server systems instead of proprietary military electronic hardware. In a few years they just have to invest a few thousand bucks into new servers that can be exchanged within a day or two and will have multiplied the computing capacity of the ship's systems instead of fussing around for 20 years with some clunky military stuff that costs 1000 times what it is worth performance wise because it was developed for one specific application only, as they did it till now.

Last edited by TrangleC; September 17th, 2012 at 02:00 PM.
TrangleC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2012   #21
Super Moderator
Brigadier General
AegisFC's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,859
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrangleC View Post
Recently I saw a TV report about the newest German warship and the whole thing runs on "off the shelf" SUN server systems instead of proprietary military electronic hardware. In a few years they just have to invest a few thousand bucks into new servers that can be exchanged within a day or two and will have multiplied the computing capacity of the ship's systems instead of fussing around for 20 years with some clunky military stuff that costs 1000 times what it is worth performance wise because it was developed for one specific application only, as they did it till now.
Don't believe the COTS hype. COTS has yet to deliver on any of its promises of cost and reliability.
________________
"The beatings will continue until morale improves."
Forum rules, read them!
AegisFC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2012   #22
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 223
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AegisFC View Post
Don't believe the COTS hype. COTS has yet to deliver on any of its promises of cost and reliability.
Well, it is hardware that runs reliably every day in civil applications (like what we're doing, communicating on the web and all that). The rooms on board of the ship that hold the server bank are shielded against EMP, so I don't see any problem there either.
And of course that stuff is cheaper than proprietary military hardware that is tailor made for one single application.
TrangleC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2012   #23
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Guangzhou, PRC
Posts: 168
Threads:
Some folks who I talk to over here in China are saying that this aircraft is a "step up" from the J-20, although they won't go into further detail, and they're designating it as J-31. This is completely unofficial but some folks I know are in the know over here.
exported_kiwi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 3rd, 2012   #24
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
lucinator's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 165
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrangleC View Post
Well, it is hardware that runs reliably every day in civil applications (like what we're doing, communicating on the web and all that). The rooms on board of the ship that hold the server bank are shielded against EMP, so I don't see any problem there either.
And of course that stuff is cheaper than proprietary military hardware that is tailor made for one single application.
well for one thing look at how the STUXNET virus got into the Iranian enrichment facility, by using the fact that the facility used off the shelf parts for the computer system. It makes male-ware that much easier to attack, and the last thing you want is the blue screen of death at 50,000 ft. Also it has been known that the CIA, other government agencies, and other countries have put viruses and built in backdoors into commercial hardware and let it be bought up, then they take control of it as needed.

As for the aircraft, as pointed out easier sure they got the shaping, anyone who has three pics of the f-35 at different angles can make a exact copy of the thing (on the outside) but the engines show the lack of advanced jet know how. At best guess the thrust of the two engines varies from 10,000 lbs less than the single engine of the f-35, to only slightly more, that shows the Chinese a long ways to go on even the basic development side even when trying to copy other countries stuff, not the least in actually innovating their own stuff.

Lastly one earlier poster noted that this aircraft would probably be for the navy since the navy doesn't have any 5th gen fighters. I want to point out that there is speculation that the j-20 will be used on future Chinese aircraft carriers, also the j-20 is thought to be more of a strike aircraft like the Su-24 or even more accurately a flexible large jet aircraft like the F-111 which was used in a variety of roles. The j-20 is huge and would probably not be very good in a dogfight.
lucinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5th, 2012   #25
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: central illinois
Posts: 261
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucinator
As for the aircraft, as pointed out easier sure they got the shaping, anyone who has three pics of the f-35 at different angles can make a exact copy of the thing (on the outside) but the engines show the lack of advanced jet know how. At best guess the thrust of the two engines varies from 10,000 lbs less than the single engine of the f-35, to only slightly more, that shows the Chinese a long ways to go on even the basic development side even when trying to copy other countries stuff, not the least in actually innovating their own stuff.

Lastly one earlier poster noted that this aircraft would probably be for the navy since the navy doesn't have any 5th gen fighters. I want to point out that there is speculation that the j-20 will be used on future Chinese aircraft carriers, also the j-20 is thought to be more of a strike aircraft like the Su-24 or even more accurately a flexible large jet aircraft like the F-111 which was used in a variety of roles. The j-20 is huge and would probably not be very good in a dogfight.
In the Air Force Magazines Daily Report, dated 9/25/12, Arie Church and John Tirpak, senior editors, had a segment titled "China's Raptor Look Alike". They note the similarities to size and shaping of the F-60 to the F-22, and also that it has a ruggedized landing gear which would give it a leg up on carrier ops, as you have noted, the J-20 is a somewhat larger aircraft and is quite unlikely to end up as a carrier aircraft IMHO. Cheers Brat

Last edited by OPSSG; October 7th, 2012 at 05:07 AM. Reason: Fixed quote format
Air Force Brat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2012   #26
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
lucinator's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 165
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Air Force Brat View Post
In the Air Force Magazines Daily Report, dated 9/25/12, Arie Church and John Tirpak, senior editors, had a segment titled "China's Raptor Look Alike". They note the similarities to size and shaping of the F-60 to the F-22, and also that it has a ruggedized landing gear which would give it a leg up on carrier ops, as you have noted, the J-20 is a somewhat larger aircraft and is quite unlikely to end up as a carrier aircraft IMHO. Cheers Brat
Actually the size, weight and thrust are much closer to the F-35 than the F-22, along with its configuration of two bays able to hold two missiles and two bombs. its wingspan is 37.5 feet versus the raptors 44ft (the F-35 is 35ft). though comparing aircraft to each other is a rather bad idea. When first discovered the Mig-25 was thought to be a air-superiority fighter with great maneuverability. When the west finally got their hands on one it turned out to be a interceptor with very poor maneuverability. In 2010 there was a lot of people comparing the F-22 to the PAK-FA and claiming the Russians were copying the raptors design, well this proved to be very wrong. The best way to know what a aircraft can do is to observe it in flight or even better obtain a sample yourself (PS and to Chinese pilots reading this the US airforce will pay big bucks for you to defect.. just kidding ) looks are often deceiving.

As to whether the J-20 could be used on a carrier, the F-111 which is about the same size and probably has a worse thrust to weight ratio than the J-20 was originally also supposed to be used on aircraft carriers, also the A-3 which is much heavier could be launched from a carrier. If the Chinese use a catapult type carrier the J-20 could easily be flown off a carrier and I suspect that they probably could off of a STOBAR type either by using a light load or with JATO/RATO.
lucinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2012   #27
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 354
Threads:
The J-31 (F-60) made its maiden flight today.
Relly a impressive show from the fighter industry in China. A F-35 copie? Maybe but still impressive.
China unveils new fifth-generation stealth fighter | South China Morning Post
China's new stealth fighter makes debut flight | Times 247

Pictures
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OdiF27Mef4...10+21+(12).jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_59_T6vCPs...52813%2529.jpg
Wall83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2012   #28
Banned Member
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Los Angeles CA
Posts: 158
Threads:
So from what I understand the J-21 "snowy owl" is now the J-31?

I watched the test flight and read up on it...and I am confused.

Why are the Chinese now trying to put up a second 5th gen fighter in the air when they cant even get their first one up? Are they abandoning the J-20? Because IMO that plane is not even 5th gen...just a 4++ gen with a 5th gen sticker on it..

On top of that the J-31 uses the RD-93 engines(you would think they would get their engine game up before trying to attempt to make a second 5th gen fighter).

Its funny wiki put this up:
With the maiden test flight of the prototype No.31001 on October 31, 2012, China moved ahead of Russia to become the second nation after the United States to have field-tested two stealth fighter designs

Ya..well at least the Pak-FA is a more realistic 5th gen fighter and has a lot more higher chance of being put out on the production line and sooner as well...
Comrade69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2012   #29
Moderator
Major General
RobWilliams's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,283
Threads:
Gen's of aircraft can sometimes be very subjective and when it's concerning Chinese aircraft the water get's even more murky.

Personally, it seems really quite ambitious to bring in 2 types of 5th generation aircraft pretty much as a "first go".

My understanding is the J-20 is going to be a land based strike aircraft whereas the J-31 I think is down to be carrier capable (the type yet to be discussed - it'd hint what they want to do with their carrier program), I can't see it being any other way. There's no way they're abandoning the J-20 IMO so it'll be an arrangement like the US has where the 2 complement eachother.

In regards to the PAK-FA, it seems like the more logical path. Proceeding with developing a single type of 5th gen, get that flying and working and then maybe think about a second variant but focus on the first model first.
RobWilliams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012   #30
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
dragonfire's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 718
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69 View Post
So from what I understand the J-21 "snowy owl" is now the J-31?

I watched the test flight and read up on it...and I am confused.

Why are the Chinese now trying to put up a second 5th gen fighter in the air when they cant even get their first one up? Are they abandoning the J-20? Because IMO that plane is not even 5th gen...just a 4++ gen with a 5th gen sticker on it..

On top of that the J-31 uses the RD-93 engines(you would think they would get their engine game up before trying to attempt to make a second 5th gen fighter).

Its funny wiki put this up:
With the maiden test flight of the prototype No.31001 on October 31, 2012, China moved ahead of Russia to become the second nation after the United States to have field-tested two stealth fighter designs

Ya..well at least the Pak-FA is a more realistic 5th gen fighter and has a lot more higher chance of being put out on the production line and sooner as well...
While its ambitious and results are too soon to be predicted, for China to field two different LO fighters, it certainly is going to be undeniable that China will have a great deal of learning from the parallel programs, the A/Cs seem to be designed with different roles in mind. One has to commend them on being ballsy
dragonfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:20 AM.