F22/J20

[Rollingthunder]

Just too many similarities to have been engineered totally separately?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/18/article-2146283-1328B557000005DC-249_636x360.jpg

Something not quite right about ?photo? of J20s

[Buster Hyman]

Something not quite right about ?photo? of J20s
Yes, the "photo" depicts two J20's airborne at the same time!

[GreenKnight121]

Lets see... similarities:
1. they are both combat airplanes
2. they both have 2 engines
3. they both have two vertical tails
4. they both have stealth characteristics

Yeah, they must be twins, right?

dis-similarities:
1. one is conventional wing-tailplane while the other is canarded semi-delta
2. one has full stealth configuration while the other has
"frontal-aspect-only" stealth
3. one has box-type pitch-only thrust-vectoring nozzles while the other has round nozzles with Russian-designed all-angle thrust vectoring to be added later
4. one has forward-swept vertical tails, the other aft-swept
5. one has close-spaced engines, the other has wide-spaced engines


Shall we continue?

[stilton]

They look like the fighter Crint Eastwood, stole in 'Firefox' was it ?


(Crint is the Japanese version)

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

The other thing "not quite right" about the J-20 pic is that it's an artist's impression...

The second J-20 apparently only flew just recently, and both test jets have nose mounted test probes and differently contoured radomes.

[Harley Quinn]

Similar requirements seem to result in similar design solutions; that should not be a surprise. The Chinese design has external characteristics found in American and Russian designs- so what? What would be more interesting in terms of technology transfer is what is happening from the paint finish down.

Maybe they stole some ideas from these (http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/TESTORS%20MIG%2037-B%20FERRETT%20PAGE.htm)- they were in toy shops in the 80's.

Or maybe not.

[ihg]

Just too many similarities to have been engineered totally separately?
Similarities .with the F22? :rolleyes:...Hopefully, they didn't copy the oxygen system....

Nah, not at all. It sure has some basis..but more a Russian one:

Looks more like a "stealthyfied" version of the Mig 1.42/1.44...whose development became a victim of the end of the cold war ( lockheed martin | 1999 | 0071 | Flight Archive (http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1999/1999%20-%200071.html) )

http://http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_MiG_1.44_Display_Top_lg.jpgMay have a look at the last but one paragraph of this ancient Fligth article: "..Despite
these claims, there are no immediate plans to open funding for further development. MAPO is thought to be lobbying for clearance to let China invest in the programme. Chinese officers attended the MFI presentation. The moves to revive the 1.44
follow Sukhoi's unveiling..."

http://http://aviapoint.ch/files/090822_zhu_162hp.jpghttp://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_MiG_1.44_Display_Top_lg.jpg
(http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_MiG_1.44_Display_Top_lg.jpg)

http://aviapoint.ch/files/090822_zhu_162hp.jpg
(aviapoint.ch (http://aviapoint.ch/index.php?article_id=109&datei=090822_zhu_162hp.jpg&galerie=0&pos=44))

Regards,
ihg

[stilton]

'Ah but can the Chinese version land on ice for a flask of coffee?'


I'm sure Clint could have done it.

[ihg]

on 'Ah but can the Chinese version land on ice for a flask of coffee?'
A no brainer for this beauty. It also masters reverse parking in inner city parking lots and is absolutely water tight.

Regards, ihg

[ASDF T_T]

The Mig 1.44 is just a failed twin engine version of the J-10.