Sunday, 4 March 2012

China's stealth fighter prototype, the J-20, flaunts its landing gear during its latest test flight. Comments or observations, anyone???






35 comments:

Nayan said...

Difficult to comment unless you earn your living designing fighter aircrafts. Lot of technical details have been given at the following page.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/02/j-20-chinas-ultimate-aircraft.html

Have a look.

NRP

Anonymous said...

Whats there to comment, its the largest wheel well I have seen on any fighter.

cujo

Anonymous said...

Yuck, ugly plane!

Anonymous said...

Flying Brick... flaunts its... landing gear...

Anonymous said...

I had gussed it right the plane is more of a stealth bomber type the landing gear and the shape clearly indicate that it will be carrying internal load like B2

Anonymous said...

wonderfully simple design
"KISS"

soumyadip said...

hello,

coming up with a fifth gen design(look wise)is no big deal...let it show its landing gears as much it wants........what really needs to be seen is the electronics....5th gen radar,avionics,considering its a big aircraft....its RCS management etc....

Anonymous said...

these pics provide a pretty clear view of j-20 and are more descriptive.
From these pics one can see that
1. it has a relatively smaller weapons bay compared to t-50 and f-22.
2.payload capability has been sacrificed to maintain stealth, maneuverability and greater range.
3. landing gears are bound to suffer servicing issues since the structure of j-20 is bulky

Anonymous said...

i still have a gut feeling that the entire program is fake......the picture of the landing gear shown above is very conspicuous in the sense that it mostly looks a copy of the JF 17....Look Closely and compare the images.I personally think that china is fooling the world by making a false body cover to prove its a stealth fighter!!it may be wishful thinking on my part,may be i'm naive,may be i'm jealous....but still its a strong gut feeling knowing fully well how strong propaganda machines these so called commie nations have!!!!

victory said...

Chinese J 20 seems to be stealth bomber instead of multi role fighter, its big size will be a weakness in close dog fight

Anonymous said...

1. old V-type suspension with no shock absorbers?

2. Landing gear internal bays are serrated, so better stealth?

Aditya said...

is it just me or does that vertical stabiliser in the first pic rotate almost completely on its axis? If so, how good is that for its RCS each time the pilot makes a course-correction?!

Vladimir Putin said...

The two wheels have two different shock absorbers!

Anonymous said...

this boy is going to face AOA issues..and I can bet my life on tat

raosahab said...

This is a bomber, not a fighter

also:
1. the landing gear baydoors are sawtooth edged for stealth
2. the fighter is too large
3. the canards at front mean the weight loading at front needed the, and that gives away a lot of stealth

this design is way inferior to f22, but may be a bit better in cross section only. flight agility will suffer

Hari said...

looks weird and broken to me.

Anonymous said...

Its weapon stores are huge if you are not a blind ny way...and it has internal stores on its side like F22 and also in belly...which T-50 seems missing(no side weapons stores)...
landing gear doors are serrated like f22.. pretty much well thought of stealth design....its long coupled canards will help it to super-cruise once the Uprated engine arrives...

Sabertooth said...

1. The rear landing gear is very simple when compared to other western or even russian aircraft. There is just a simple hydraulic shock absorber, hydraulic actuator (1 per wheel).
2. Has one of the biggest wheels i have seen on a supposedly fighter aircraft. Bigger wheels are always difficult to fold back into the aircraft without taking too much space.
3. No articulation in the folding back process noticable. So it would take up huge space internally.
4. So called Bomb bays would be really small in J20. It would be more vertical space than horizontal space. It would be more suited for bombing missions than fighting missions.
5. The materials of the landing gear doors show that its made of metal. Metal is typically avoided in stealth aircraft, instead going for composite materials.

Abid said...

Dear Ajay Sir,
The aircraft's fuselage seems to be derived from the vintage long range strategic bombers. It is good enough for large fuel storage and internal bomb bays. But this aircraft doesn't seem to fit for naval operations, ship borne fighter. If its radar absorbent paint is not successful, then this aircraft is a sitting duck for even a 3rd rated air defense system. It looks big and impressive, but may not be such threatening as it seems.

Shivi Krishna said...

I can see 2 side weapon bays (actually see one just ahead of the rear landing gear and assuming its the same on the other side) and a main weapon bay underneath. So it has 3 weapon bays..

Don't know much about about the LG so can't comment by the doors do look ugly (but does that matter?)

Anonymous said...

Didn't you hear Ajai ji, we are busy crashing our Mirage 2000's right now. Once we are done with the entire fleet, we will take this up right away.

Tathagata

Mr. Ra said...

It is part of a new "great leap" and a new "long march". Hope is is not better than T-50.

Praveen kumar Singh said...

our friends are missing something....
1)observe the air intakes their position and shape remind us of the mig-25 aircraft showing that they may be derived from mig-25s for greater supersonic speeds.

2)another source of the overall design may be the mig-1.44. except for the air intakes and nose-cone design every thing else is quite similar.

Anonymous said...

Colonel,
Slightly off topic, but since we're discussing airplanes, I have a related question for you. Regarding today's Mirage crash - 2nd in the span of a few days, some people on internet forums have cried "conspiracy" - I am sure these people are no experts in the field, but coming as this does immediately after Raffale's selection, part of me is tempted to believe the conspiracy theorists.

What is your take on the possibility of conspiracies?

Also, is it possible to carry out hack attacks against military aircraft? Could fighter aircraft be made to crash by remotely taking over their computer systems?

Anonymous said...

Looks like some copy work from the US f-35 and F-22. Atleast china is able to do that.

Anonymous said...

Compared to Indian built planes, the itching actually flies!

Anonymous said...

The wing surface area looks tiny, does that mean it's meant for higher speeds and probably lower load runs?

Unknown said...

The chinese are not keen on putting this gaint on the production line. tyhe plane seems to be more of a technology demonstrator. The thing to be worried about is that the chinese are as it seems making quite a forray into stealth technology. Just look at the design. Some body has put a lot of time designing that plane and putting it togeather.

Anonymous said...

How does it flaunt its undercarriage? So Whats so great? Why show an essential part of an aircraft unless you think there is something really different or unique?
I done get it.

Anonymous said...

This bird has canards,which compromise stealth

rustom said...

Maybe the DRDO,HAL, NAL should wake up that their planes making it to headlines very so often with good colors should really be soaring the skies with the latest armament...cause now, with their planes making news on every blog ...but not towards sirus, their own hype is going to turn into a liability..after there should be more of their planes in the air firing rockets rather than appearing in bolgs......LCA began in the 80's....c'mom guys at least copy the chinese!!

Bhaiyya said...

It appears the Overkill capability we expect from the FGFA need not necessarily be taken for granted over the Himalayas.
The sad part is that the engineering prowess to fly our AMCA - our equivalent of the J20 - is years and years away

Anonymous said...

Sarkar, now yoy tell us please...you yourself didn't answered last few quizes..this one seems to be going tat way...so frustrating

Venu said...

Semi-reverse engineering. F-22 wanna-be

Venu said...

COG constraint because of wheel-base? reduced maneuverability?