F22/J20
Eight Gun Fighter
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Western Approaches
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F22/J20
Just too many similarities to have been engineered totally separately?
Something not quite right about ?photo? of J20s
Something not quite right about ?photo? of J20s
Last edited by Rollingthunder; 19th May 2012 at 02:51.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
The second J-20 apparently only flew just recently, and both test jets have nose mounted test probes and differently contoured radomes.
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- they were in toy shops in the 80's.
Or maybe not.
Maybe they stole some ideas from these- they were in toy shops in the 80's.
Or maybe not.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rollingthunder
Just too many similarities to have been engineered totally separately?
...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 )
May have a look at the last but one paragraph of this ancient Fligth article: "..Despitethese 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://media.defenseindustrydaily.co...lay_Top_lg.jpg)
(aviapoint.ch)
Regards,
ihg
Last edited by ihg; 19th May 2012 at 10:47.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by stilton
on 'Ah but can the Chinese version land on ice for a flask of coffee?'
Regards, ihg
