The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
China's testing a new stealth fighter. https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5151 |
Page 1 of 1 |
Author: | Screeling [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 9:56 am ] |
Post subject: | China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... TopStories Spoilered for size. Spoiler: I honestly don't think we're taking China seriously enough. It bugs me that it looks very similar to the F-22. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:24 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
Screeling wrote: I honestly don't think we're taking China seriously enough. It bugs me that it looks very similar to the F-22. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't most stealth accomplished via geometry? If so they'd all have a limited form-factor. |
Author: | Elmarnieh [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:41 am ] |
Post subject: | |
A large amount of stealth comes from the angular deflection of waves, another sizable aspect is reducing heat signature. So yes they are going to e designed within certain parameters just like all planes are going to have an airfoil shape to their lift generating components. |
Author: | Lex Luthor [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:45 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
Screeling wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808704576061674166905408.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories Spoilered for size. Spoiler: I honestly don't think we're taking China seriously enough. It bugs me that it looks very similar to the F-22. We won't ever go to war with China. Our economies are linked too much. It's suicidal even if you only look at economic devastation. |
Author: | Dash [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:48 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
Screeling wrote: It bugs me that it looks very similar to the F-22. Why does that bug you? |
Author: | Jeryn [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Kind of in a "Seriously? Go do your own R&D, you have the money" sense is my guess. I remember hearing a lot of that sort of thing whenever a new MiG would look strikingly like something else. |
Author: | Stathol [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:06 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I don't know about anyone else, but I'd be apprehensive as hell to get in the cockpit of anything that relied on Chinese electronics for fly-by-wire. Correct if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the "flying wing" designs and their derivatives are highly unstable without it. |
Author: | Lex Luthor [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:08 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Stathol wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but I'd be apprehensive as hell to get in the cockpit of anything that relied on Chinese electronics for fly-by-wire. Correct if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the "flying wing" designs and their derivatives are highly unstable without it. I'd be more than apprehensive about getting into the cockpit of anything, but I bet these planes are much safer than WW2 era planes. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Jeryn wrote: Kind of in a "Seriously? Go do your own R&D, you have the money" sense is my guess. I remember hearing a lot of that sort of thing whenever a new MiG would look strikingly like something else. Come to think of it, aerodynamic properties are kind of a law of physics no? There can only be one most aerodynamic design so eventually all fighters should evolve to the same basic design. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:17 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hopwin wrote: Jeryn wrote: Kind of in a "Seriously? Go do your own R&D, you have the money" sense is my guess. I remember hearing a lot of that sort of thing whenever a new MiG would look strikingly like something else. Come to think of it, aerodynamic properties are kind of a law of physics no? There can only be one most aerodynamic design so eventually all fighters should evolve to the same basic design. Nah, there's an optimum aerodynamic design based on certain inputs, such as lift capacity, available thrust, manueverability, reduced radar signature, etc. To gain one, you will lose another, and so on. This will result in a variety of designs based on performance preferences. |
Author: | Corolinth [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hopwin wrote: Come to think of it, aerodynamic properties are kind of a law of physics no? There can only be one most aerodynamic design so eventually all fighters should evolve to the same basic design. In a sense, they already have. Fighters all have two main wings, a tail, and a cockpit.
|
Author: | Hannibal [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 4:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Corolinth wrote: Hopwin wrote: Come to think of it, aerodynamic properties are kind of a law of physics no? There can only be one most aerodynamic design so eventually all fighters should evolve to the same basic design. In a sense, they already have. Fighters all have two main wings, a tail, and a cockpit.and thanks to Bill Clinton- the fighters of our two nations prob share a lot more! |
Author: | Jeryn [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 7:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Nah, there's an optimum aerodynamic design based on certain inputs, such as lift capacity, available thrust, manueverability, reduced radar signature, etc. To gain one, you will lose another, and so on. This will result in a variety of designs based on performance preferences. I love the Internet! When I was a teenager and a big aerospace geek, I always wondered about stealth aircraft. You can mess with the airframe, use novel materials, shroud your exhaust to lower your infrared signature, and whatnot. No matter what though, the thing always has to move through space (okay, the sky, before someone says something ) at a pretty good speed, and that's going to make a wake vortex. So maybe you can't see the plane, but you can detect that something is displacing a lot of air. Here's some Air Force guy's 20-year-old masters thesis barking up the same tree: (spoilered for gratuitous geekiness) Spoiler: |
Author: | Vindicarre [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Man that thing looks F-111 big. Looks more like a tactical strike aircraft or strategic bomber, especially with that cargo door. |
Author: | Müs [ Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:38 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Its similar to the F-22, but it looks quite a bit larger. I would guess that its about the size of the Russian PAK-FA (which *also* looks similar to the F-22). Also, this is interesting. It *is* huge. It you look at all of the 5th gen fighters, (F-22, F-35, PAK-FA, this J-20, and the YF-23) They all have similar appearances. Interestingly enough though, this J-20 has a canard layout(like the Eurofighter Typhoon and SU-37) rather than the elevators that most of the others use. I don't know a *lot* about Chinese fighter tech, but it may be worth a looksee. F-22 (Lockheed Martin) F-35 (Lockheed Martin) PAK-FA (Sukhoi) YF-23 (Northrop) And for comparison: Eurofighter Typhoon SU-37 (Sukhoi) |
Author: | Jeryn [ Thu Jan 06, 2011 10:49 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
And the Eurofighter Typhoon looks fundamentally like the 40-some-odd year old Viggen design (delta wing with canards). Everything's derivative |
Author: | Screeling [ Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
Jeryn wrote: And the Eurofighter Typhoon looks fundamentally like the 40-some-odd year old Viggen design (delta wing with canards). Everything's derivative Fixed. |
Author: | Talya [ Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
Screeling wrote: Jeryn wrote: And the Eurofighter Typhoon looks fundamentally like the 40-some-odd year old Viggen design (delta wing with canards). Everything's derivative Fixed. How is your red-x a "fix?" |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:56 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: China's testing a new stealth fighter. |
If they're just now at a taxi test, they're still a good ways off from operational capability. I doubt it's going to be an equal to the F-22 regardless mainly because from my understanding China is a lot farther behind on jet engines than on other aspects of the technology. |
Author: | Müs [ Tue Jan 11, 2011 6:23 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Its flying. http://video.sina.com.cn/v/b/44929492-1 ... l#44929270 Its REALLY loud though Doesn't appear to have thrust vectoring either. |
Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |