J20 shows its teeth
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very very unlikely. Too many different angles and too many large gaps. For example:
Leading and trailing edge of canard/foreplane are different.
Both the foreplane angles are different than the wing angles.
And the wing is cranked so has multiple angles
Leading and trailing edges of ventral fin are different from each other and different from wing and foreplane and different from vertical fins.
Big gap between foreplane and body, meaning big corner reflectors in the all important forward aspect.
Big gap between moving leading edge flap and fixed leading edge of wing, so more corner reflectors in the all important forward aspect.
The nose is also double chined with different chine angles. Bad for forward aspect reflectivity.
The intake angles are very different than the wing or the foreplane angles. Again bad for forward aspect reflectivity.
Sharp crease where the engine inlet cones meet the fuselage. More bad for forward aspect reflectivity.
Leading and trailing edge of canard/foreplane are different.
Both the foreplane angles are different than the wing angles.
And the wing is cranked so has multiple angles
Leading and trailing edges of ventral fin are different from each other and different from wing and foreplane and different from vertical fins.
Big gap between foreplane and body, meaning big corner reflectors in the all important forward aspect.
Big gap between moving leading edge flap and fixed leading edge of wing, so more corner reflectors in the all important forward aspect.
The nose is also double chined with different chine angles. Bad for forward aspect reflectivity.
The intake angles are very different than the wing or the foreplane angles. Again bad for forward aspect reflectivity.
Sharp crease where the engine inlet cones meet the fuselage. More bad for forward aspect reflectivity.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
So, basically, NOT stealthy. Just big and nimble (3:30 on the video).
You can hear it miles away, though!
You can hear it miles away, though!
There is something about the J20 which ‘states’ practicality and capability more that might be credited.
Form follows function; long range intercepter, stealth as required for weapons system range. Many internal weapons, adding considerable range and opportunity.
Radar unknown, but consider recent Chinese developments of anti-stealth quantum radar; it’s coming perhaps not yet.
So a capable aircraft, development potential, range, manoeuvrability; single crew suggests integrated systems, autonomous operations.
In its own way it looks right.
Take note
Form follows function; long range intercepter, stealth as required for weapons system range. Many internal weapons, adding considerable range and opportunity.
Radar unknown, but consider recent Chinese developments of anti-stealth quantum radar; it’s coming perhaps not yet.
So a capable aircraft, development potential, range, manoeuvrability; single crew suggests integrated systems, autonomous operations.
In its own way it looks right.
Take note
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
BVR would be the interesting question if it came to a shooting match, but otherwise that looks like a competent platform for patrolling/'defending' the Spratly shoal and other parts of China's perceived 'territory'.
