Join this channel to support it: th-cam.com/channels/VDkfkGRzo0qcZ8AkB4TMuw.htmljoin Support me on Patreon www.patreon.com/Millennium7 One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Millennium7star Join the Discord server discord.gg/6CuWEWuhsk Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/?aff=173 ---------------------------- Ask me anything! Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below! forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0 -------------------- Visit the subreddit! www.reddit.com/r/Millennium7Lounge/ ---------------------
From wikipedia: "Kopáč (the word means "digger" in Czech) was an early electronic warfare support measures (ESM) system developed in Czechoslovakia in the early 1960s that used measurements of time difference of arrival (TDOA) of pulses at three sites to accurately detect and track airborne emitters. The system used the principle of multilateration and was capable of simultaneously manually tracking up to six targets. It was first deployed in 1963 and was also known by its serial number, PRP-1. The initials PRP come from the Czech "Přesný radiotechnický pátrač", meaning "Accurate Radiotechnical Locator", the name comes from "Korelační pátrač", meaning "Correlation Locator". Ramona - the second generation Czech ESM TDOA system Tamara - the third generation Czech ESM TDOA system VERA - the current and fourth generation Czech ESM TDOA system Kolchuga - a similar system developed in Ukraine" Any chance for making video about passive sensors and how much of STEALTH value is lost because of this 1960's invention and its modern variants?
@@sumanneogi2679 just killing machines and taking our human species back to mad_max style..hmmm.. don't picking on Russia.. it have it's back on the wall... hmmm and nuclear strike is a reality..😑
I remember the jealous idiots several years ago said that J-20 is a copy of the F-22. Not even close. If anything it was the J-31. But then again you don't hear a peep for these people about the other countries stealth that's coming on line. especially the South Korean that looks like the new version of the F-22.
Maybe they need to look at the Korean KAI KA 21.... Looks like a direct knock off.... What is this bullshit that "Lockheed Martin gave them the technology?" There is a federal law that prevented the Japanese from buying the jet. Unless, the majority of the engineers were actually outsourced engineer from Korea during the 1990's. The fact proves this since during that same time they were ramping up national manufacturing for CARS and electronics. Aw...I see you driving that KIA or Hyundai....
6:46 The canard angles are also mirroring the angle of the top of the air intakes on the opposite side, so they're not introducing a new angle to the equation.
Awesome video, I always wondered why stealth models were so similar. Had no idea the geometry limits the engineering so much in the stealth regard. I feel a little smarter today so thank you 🙏
Re: inclined vertical empenage? Keep in mind that there's also an advantage for high-alpha maneuvers from this. Having it not directly above the fuselage but angled and to the side greatly increases the effectiveness of the vertical empenage in stabilizing a high AOA maneuver.
They are serrated, but they don’t have the double row of serrations as the F-35 does. Also, the individual blades making up the nozzle are flat, whereas the blades making up the F-35’s nozzle are ridged to reduce the RCS of each individual blade. The J-20’s nozzles are also situated further to the rear of the aircraft than the F-35 and F-22, and therefore aren’t as well shielded from radar. The J-20 does have small lower vertical stabilizers to mitigate this from the lower side aspect, but the nozzles are more visible from all other angles, and the stabilizers themselves add two more vertical reflective surfaces, which may counter any benefit.
Canards and vertical stabilizers which do not use rudder (all moving ver. stabilizer as well as small ver. stabilizer on the bottom of the plane) can be empty. There are no fuel tanks or pumps inside of them, no hydraulic/electric mechanism and antennas can be mounted elsewhere. As such they can be made at least partially and maybe even entirely out of composite radar-transparent materials, such as epoxy-glass fiber. So one problem with trying to evaluate stealth characteristics of planes and drones is that except for the radome we can't tell what is radio transparent and what is not.
We also can’t determine how tight the manufacturing tolerances are or the quality of the RAM and other construction materials. Russia and China can’t machine parts to as tight of tolerances as the US can, and export of the machine tools necessary to do it is banned by Western countries. They are also known to be behind in metallurgy, hence their struggles to develop aircraft engines that can match Western designs from 20-30 years ago. So even if the J-20 looks like it gets the angles right and is a nice-looking aircraft, that doesn’t mean there aren’t too-wide or uneven seams, subtle rises or dips in the metal, etc. that diminish its stealth capabilities compared to US stealth aircraft. We also can’t really see how well it has shielded the engine fan blades with S-ducting, or whether it has any IR detection shielding on the exhaust nozzles like the F-35 and especially the F-22 do. And then there’s the ECM equipment and radar capability (remember, the US has had 40+ years to design stealth aids and counters, and China is just getting into the game). All in all, I suspect the J-20 is a good aircraft in its designed role (which I see more as an interceptor than a true air superiority fighter). It should be reasonably maneuverable for its size and is likely reasonably stealthy (much more so than the overrated Su-57). But I wouldn’t take it over an F-35 or F-22, especially once the AIM-260 and Peregrine are deployed in the next couple of years. As for canards and stabilators being empty, sure, but they presumably still need some sort of metal structural framing.
@@bluemarlin8138 You can make them entirely out of composites. However the production of high quality fiber canvas and making a high performance product with them is much more complicated then it sounds. Personally I do not believe that China had reached that stage, but there is a possibility. And we should take it into account as worst case scenario. Well worst case for us, not them :) Also European planes like to use composites very much. And although none of them are true stealth aircraft their RCS is probably lower then it would seem on the first glance.
@@dariozanze4929 I’m also interested to see whether the US will continue to develop the ceramic RAM coating developed at NC State University last year. Supposedly it is much more radar absorbent than current RAM while also being much more durable. If as advertised, it could really improve sortie rates and decrease costs for US stealth aircraft, and might even be usable on 4th gen aircraft to make them more survivable. But yeah, as for China, I think we’re getting at the same thing. They seem to have a surface level understanding of stealth, but whether they understand the finer details and can effectively implement them is an open question. We pretty much know for sure Russia can’t make real stealth aircraft, but China can throw more money at engineering and production.
@@bluemarlin8138 Do you think it is possible that those two test F-22 with "mirror" coating are using ceramic RAM? That kind of upgrade makes perfect sense to me since F-22 is a super-capable fighter and it's biggest flaw is hard and expensive to maintain RAM coating. Pareto's Principle, 20% of effort gives 80% of the value and 80% of effort gives that last 20% of value. In my opinion Chinese catching up on technological level is slowing down and from now on it's an uphill battle for them. And they had reached a point at which they can't simply reverse engineer things anymore and technology is kept much safer from industrial espionage.
@@dariozanze4929 It’s possible. The mirror coating has to be some sort of experiment with RAM, laser weapons, IRST, or something similar. I assumed the ceramic RAM coating would be dull, but hey, what do I know?
it is true that canards affect its stealth capability. by special design, this problem can be minimized but not eliminated. I believe most western people do not underestimate j20. the engine still has many problems and needs to be improved or redesigned.
I don't think people underestimate the J-20, but they do often point out the obvious with regards different features of the jet that could 'potentially' increase it's radar cross section. I mean just look at the large seem between the fuselage and the canards. To the eye this area sticks out like a sore thumb, how do you think this area alone would stand out on radar (from the side, from the front canards are much less an issue.)
@@rzqian8242 How are canards any different from horizontal stabilizers? the video makes the mistake of simplifying all incoming radar signatures as horizontal. when in real life, ground radars or AWACS radars are often coming from different angles. Which means in pretty much all cases, horizontal stabilizers reflects as much radar as canards. since not all plane fly at the same altitude. J-20 with the WS-10C engine does have stealthy serrated nozzles, something this video got wrong.
Recipe: put in pot cream ,black pepper ,wash buckwheat ,and salt. To cook(and mix) until the cream is little brown. To add boiling water ,mix until is ready 👍
One thing you missed as well, (maybe you focused only radar side of stealth), the IR signature of the F22 and the f35 are lower than the j-20. The f35 having its engine deeply buried inside the fuselage. The f22 having the nozzles which are smaller than the engine outlet. But the j20 has their engine outlet in the open without any surfaces hiding it.
The low-end mobile phones produced in China have widely used graphene heat dissipation technology, and it is not difficult to apply this technology to the use of stealth aircraft to reduce infrared characteristics.
it's more helpful 2 put the development/design of the 20 into context: usa's aviation industry has been at the leading edge for many generations and ergo, has been designing stealth a/c for over a generation. j20 is china's first iteration (and natch, heavily influenced by us designs). in this respect, j20 as a first iteration should hardly be expected to be a peer of us stealth designs - to be generous, a near peer? so, j20 is quite an achievement in that respect (also bear in mind china's excruciatingly slow development, of its military aviation industry since 70's hobbled by the culural revolution and subsequent self-imposed industrial/technological. china's aviation idustry (witness how long it has takien and is still taking ch to develop turbofan engines from the mid-1970s when they first imported a rr spey engine factory (a 'tale' in itself - the failure of that factory that is to say), indeed, china's scientific deveoplment as a whole (only nuclear weapons research and velopment was potected from the excesses of the cultural revltuion) bypassed china in those crucial years (1970s - 1990s).
As far as I know. They're only using one ws-10 for now. Because it's newer it needs a trial. The old engine is very trustworthy and reliable. So for good safety reasons an unspecified trial run is in effect. I would think no less than 6 months to a year. Then full production of both engines to ws-10 and rotational integration to the others who have one and one. There will be no less than 500 J-20 to be built. China at this point in time had an equal number of J-20'S as America has "combat ready" F-22. The combat readiness is an important factor in war. F-22 and F-35 have HORRENDOUS records and what's publicly released for numbers, will obviously look better than the actual reality. But even what's publicly known, it's bad. I'm American but it's obvious to me that the J-20 has both the F-22 and F-35 in deep shit. The electronic suite of the J-20 is, no matter what update the F-22 has, much more advanced and data transfer and sharing has no current analogy. It's so high they created the J-20S so another pilot could manage the enormous amount of data it can wield!
@@Ram-1231 Only the first batch of J-20s use AL-31F, after that, all J-20 are using two WS-10Cs. AL-31F and WS-10C have different wires and connection. It is not pratical to use one AL-31F and one WS-10C since you need to rearrange many things inside.
F22 main maneuvering strength is the fact that it is basically a delta wing formula with horizontal stabilisers attached beyond the engine exhausts nozzles. Giving it amazing authority.
Back in the 80s I looked at using blimps as platforms for a modern version of chain home... these would carry sensor modules that could be easily swapped out and would be tethered to coastal anchor dash data nodes ... they would have been very very cheap to operate.. involve almost no human risk whatsoever... and operations could be quickly ramped up or reduced as the situation warranted... they would easily provide more coverage than any squadron of awacs at less cost and upgrading would be a simple matter of replacing modules... the ground stations could be numerous at little cost and cross connected to avoid dislocation... I revisited this in about 2005 and it would have been even more economical with modern material availability and modular sensors etc.... Given the production of windfarms in the north Sea and supposed issued with ground based radars because of same.. it would stand to reason that some of these would cover this deficiency.. alt hough the possibility of anchoring a few of them on platforms further out would perhaps be opening things up a bit too much for the narrow minded.. it would however add significantly and at little cost to national defence... similur systems for other countries would also be desirable. .
Go after it man, you've got one life to live. I know it would cost 100k+ of investment, but you would stand to make a lot of money off of that idea; I'm probably not alone in thinking that it has other applications rather than military...
The Pentagon tested the concept is. JLENS which was eventually cancelled. Two Helium-filled JLENS blimps float 10,000 feet in the air and carry radars capable of providing 360-degree coverage of objects from 340 miles away. The blimps can remain aloft for 30 days at a time and transmit the information they gather to a range of defensive systems. The U.S. government initially planned to buy 16 pairs of JLENS blimps, but the purchase ultimately was curtailed to two pairs of test blimps. The blimps are used in pairs because one conducts surveillance and the other analyzes the information that the first one gathers.
Lmfao sure. There are very good reasons that the airforces uses an awacs system. Your project wont replace it or even come close to it. Not to mention this isnt even an original idea.
What are the odds? I've been hitting up airmodels like crazy. I've got a mean itch for 1/200 scale diest cast bomber and transport planes at the moment-its pretty bad. Certainly isn't going away anytime soon, always nice to help out content creators like yourself.
Totally unbiased and i agree with pretty much many things you said. Yeah some may say J20 is less stealthy bla bla bla but the Chinese aren't necessarily that much stupid either.
@@slr150 Russia's GDP is only equivalent to one province in China, go check how many provinces there are in China In addition, China has the largest manufacturing capacity of consumer electronic products, and can easily manufacture the highest quality weapon-grade optoelectronic equipment and various electronic components required for active radar. Based on the above facts, do you think China's military capabilities are still equivalent to Russia's?
@@金界凯伦 I don't know and neither do you. Like the Russians who though they could walk all over Ukraine, no one will ever know until the Chinese try something . Try Taiwan see what happens
@@slr150 i guess before he was a sweedish, french and english fan before he was ruski fan is that correct??? Well at least that's what you logic is trying to tell me 🤣🤣🤣
Around 14:40 the motors for the flaps in the F-35 aren’t inside the wing rather in the body of the aircraft itself. It’s copied from the Russians, where they integrated them in the back of the rudders. Here it’s at the end of the wing where wing and body meet.
May well be so, but the F35 does not use hydraulics. This has the advantage of lower maintains, (no hydraulics fluid tanks to re-fill after each flight, no piston seals to leak or maintain). And the other advantage of the electro-mechanical? Well, when you riddle the F35 with bullets or the F35 takes damage? You have no hydraulic lines to hit, nor are they none to leak. Thus, without lines to hit, you have a more robust design. Even better yet is the networked computers can use (and find) multiple electronic paths to the control surfaces - the result is a far more robust and higher redundancy for the control surfaces as opposed to running hydraulics lines all over the place. this is just another reason why the F35 takes less ground crews and man hours to keep flying then a F18, F15, and even a F16.
@@Albertkallal back in WW2, Kurt Tank designed his FW190 with electrical controls instead of hydraulics for the very same reason of reliable and easy to maintain!!!!!
But actually the coating is just the icing on a cake. It isn’t as important as the geometry of the plane. Cuz if it is, then people would just coat every older fighters with the coating and claim that they have ‘stealthed’ their entire airforce lol.
@@emirredzematovic5123 Not every, it would convert some radar wave into infer red, not all. And yes let me rephrase, it is important, just not as important as the geometry. Otherwise why all these weird and aerodynamically unfavourable shapes? Just coat it like a non stick pan, and call it the day.
@@franksun4017 I worked on the YF-22 program, the prototype of the F-22, and it has been tested at the RATSCAT rcs facilty in the middle of the californian desert. It proved to absorb almost every wave that was shot at it. The most reflective area were its nozzles.
If Russian have enough money, I doubt would they gonna focus on su57, In terms of products alone, the j-20 is also the ultimate MiG fighter in the minds of the MIG Design Bureau
In the past you and I have discussed that pure stealth might become less dominant. The present fashion still seems to be to converge reflections into only a few directions. Your remarks about a banking F22 becoming a perfectly flat reflector at a certain angle is spot on. I the same vein all these designs are almost perfect radar reflectors from directly below. I believe that the true future of stealth is maximum dispersion. So to not as much totally reduce reflections in certain directions only, which is basically impossible anyway, to spreading the radar return signals to all directions at once and thus, with the help of Ram minimize the portion returning to the radar emitter to an absolute minimum. This would then also work for non aligned emitters / receivers. A quick example is a flat lying elliptical cross section shape (remember the MIG 1.44) or a compound shape like that of the Blackbirds front body in which a rounded shape curves into a horizontal lime. So half a future stealth aircraft's shape might actually align nowhere when one cuts it straight through the middle vertically from nose to tail. In the process such aircraft will then become more aerodynamic again. The bulges on the F35 sides and fixed intake cones of both the F35 and J20 could actually already be expressions of such a change in philosophy. Remember that the external designs of both the J20 and F35 where frozen much later then that of the F22.
you haven't thought this through. A useful radar track requires continuous detectable returns. A sphere like you described will facilitate such a track at a predictable range. An F22 may flash a flat plate at long range if not careful but that return dusapears as soon as you roll flat again. It can control what the enemy sees. Besides *every* airplane is a flat plate perpendicular to the wings. Maximum RCS for an F-15 or F-22 is about the same 10,000 m^2 but minimum RCS is more like 4m^2 vs 0.0001m^2.
Question! Aren't the semi-elliptic(rounded) shapes on the top and bottom of the fuselage there to help guide creeping waves to the opposite (sharp)edge to be dissipated? I thought creeping waves was a much bigger problem for stealth than straight edge reflections when using radar absorbing materials?
No, they are also for high frequency dispersion at angles off the front. Since no shape can be angled everywhere from every direction a compromise must be made. certain shapes produce cancellation over wider ranges of angles. In X band the reflection is neither optical nor whole body but local and with interference. Some shapes also produce high change in reflection over small changes in view angle, very unlike a sphere.
Luckly you have a great discussion atmosphere of subscribers, while most of the comments where are contradistinctions about F-22/35 & J-20 would just became post-apocalyptic wasteland🤦♀️
You’re one of the few technical, objective and detail oriented aircraft analysts out there on TH-cam especially on Chinese aircraft. I love your contents. I have a request for you regarding the J-20. I have debated many who believe the J-20 is more of an interceptor/missile truck than an air superiority fighter. They believe the J-20 is not maneuverable and is a terrible dog fighter. I have my opinions and technical assessments, but I’d like to hear what you think. How do you think is the J-20 when compared with other 5th gen fighters: F22/F35/Su57, in terms of within visual range combat capabilities? Because the odds are, when two stealthy fighters meet, they will most likely be “close encounters”.
@@RogueBeatsARG i need to take another look at the three versions because i thought they were just smaller You would know they were up there, even in the cloud
Stealthy aircraft with axis-symmetry nozzles like J20 and F35 will have poor rearward RCS and a little larger rear fuselage compared to F22 with rectangular nozzles. But that is good enough if they are used for defence.
@@joelau2383 The F-35’s engine nozzle is buried much further into the tail of the aircraft than the J-20’s engines, and is almost completely obscured from all but the rear aspect by the vertical stabilizer sponsons, the vertical and horizontal stabilizers themselves, and general profile of the aircraft. (It’s rather impressive when you look at photos from different angles). The J-20’s miniature lower vertical stabilizers do conceal the engine nozzles from the lower side aspect, but the engine nozzles are mounted much closer to the rear of the aircraft than the F-35’s and are more exposed from more angles. There are also two of them, which means two reflective features compared to one, plus a wider “viewing angle” for radar than that on a single-engine aircraft (the F-22 also mounts its engines deeper into the tail and shields them with huge horizontal stabilizers to reduce this effect, as well as using low-profile nozzles). The lower vertical stabilizers (vertical is bad for RCS, as you know) also create two more reflective surfaces, which likely counteracts some of the RCS reduction from shielding the nozzles. The F-35’s nozzles are also about as close to stealthy as you can make a circular nozzle due to the multiple sawtooth edges and contoured ridges on each “blade.” (GE claims that the RCS is close to the F-22’s nozzle.) The J-20’s nozzles do use a single sawtooth trailing edge, but the blades making up the nozzle aren’t individually ridged to reduce RCS. They’re flat, which makes each blade more reflective to radar. Don’t get me wrong...the J-20 appears to be a very good aircraft and it probably qualifies as 5th-gen, unlike the Su-57. It just doesn’t have some of the subtle advanced features of the F-22 and F-35, probably because it’s China’s first stealth aircraft while the US has been doing it for 40+ years. If China wanted to really reduce the rear RCS of the J-20, they would be well-advised to develop a flattened nozzle similar to the F-22’s for the WS-10/15 engine. The significant reduction in RCS and IR signature would be worth the veeeeery slight loss in maneuverability from 3D vectoring (even if it’s true 3D vectoring like on the F-15 ACTIVE and not faux-3D-actually canted 2D-vectoring like on Russian fighters). The only catch is it’s apparently extremely expensive and difficult to do those nozzles right, which is why the Russians quit trying to put it on the Su-57. But it looks like the J-20 may not go for either, which is probably ok since it would mostly be in an interceptor role anyway.
@@bluemarlin8138 You can make whatever explanation for not completely covering nozzle metal parts, but it is clearly a great reflector for the lower side angle. BTW, J-20 lower vertical stabilizer is not movable and doesn't contain any metal parts. It is fully made of composite and absorbent material. It is probably the most stealthy part on J-20. Besides, it also help reducing size of the upper movable vertical stablizers with metal movable parts. I don't think it has more RCS than conventional larger upper vertical stablizers with larger metal movable parts. P.s. the horizontal angle doesn't matter because it reflects signal to other direction. The vertical angle is what really matters because long range surface radar can reach and receive signal from far away even if there is only slight lower angle exposure of metal part.
@@joelau2383 Its not that good of a design lol.. the Yf-23 beats it in every area in stealth, and that was a prototype we ditched.. You are aware the su-57 and j-20 are the worst 5th gen jets right ? In reality, the j-20 performs no better, actually probably worse then ur standard canard delta wing jet, typhoons, gripens. Probably actually worse because of its frame having to encorporate stealth. The only cool thing about the J-20 is the tail planes move as a whole. Just like the Yf-23s, only the yf-23s werent straight up to the degree the j-20s fins are. The yf-23s were angled, and each one was about the size of a f-35 wing, giving it manueverability of damn near what the thrust vectoring gave the f-22. It also has better rear profile, than a j-20 and hides it heat alot better. Even better than a f-22. The su-57's stealth profile, isnt actually bigger than a f-18s, i bet you didnt know that did you lol, but the f-18 cant carry internal weapons. The j-20s might be better than the su-57s, but its nowhere near the raptors, like nowhere near. All this plane is is a delta wing canard type caus the chinese probably couldnt figure out how to install thrust vectoring cheap enough. We were coming up with completely new type of wing designs, in the 80s, that outperfomed this "j-20" and the su-57, wich only has 2 actualy off the line production models built, the other 10 or 13 are all hand built prototypes. If designs we made and scrapped in the 80s can out perform brand new tech other countries are pushing out, these planes arent that impressive.You cant just have a stealth philosophy and forget about the rear. Those engines on the J-20 and Su-57 are no different than a gen 4 fighters.
During Pelosi's visit to Taipei, Taiwan's air defense announced that they detected multiple China's warplanes like J11 J16, Y9 and Y8 flew into its air space except J20. That shows j20 stealth capabilities are good.
If you look carefully at those curved surfaces on the F-35 they never actually reach the vertical - they are always sloped a bit away from a side-on radar. So while they undoubtedly to increase the range of elevations at which the F-35 has significant RCS (i.e. its RCS isn't as strongly "lobed" in elevation as the F-22 or J-20), I don't think that they compromise the all-important (for reasons you outlined earlier in the video) zero-elevation case. The thing that grabs my attention about the J-20 is how close those canard trailing edges are to having zero sweep. Like the straight exhaust, that will boost RCS from the rear axis.
the nozzles of j20 have been altered into something similar as the the F35, the pictures of J20 showed in this video were about 5 years back, they did make some changes on the J20 within this period of time.
I think that in the South China Sea the J-20 doesn't need to find the F-35 so much as it needs to find their air refuelling support, which can only be operating in so many places, protected by so many assets. In the opening days of a conflict, the loss of just one or two tankers could potentially be devastating, particularly if the advantage gained is immediately seized upon and exploited. No tanker has ever been lost in air to air combat, mostly due to the fact that no nation has ever possessed the capacity to threaten one. The J-20 doesn't need to be exceptional in its combat operations, it just needs to be solid. The F-35 on the other hand will need to be at another level entirely because it will be fighting at a distinct disadvantage in the Western Pacific. Being solid won't be anywhere near enough.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 Your arrogance makes me laugh. In the red flag, F35 countered F16s and F15s. If Chinese jets are trash, then the U.S won't be so nervous as it is now. A month ago, J20 tracked down your precious F35 without getting detected by both F35 and AWACS. Now, tell me, which one is trash? In fact, the missile that J20 uses, PL15, has a longer range than AIM120D which is used by F35. How do you propose to shoot down an aircraft with a shorter-range missile? Underestimating an enemy is a big nono. When you see a Chinese-made weapon, if you are like: copy&paste, then you are either stupid or naive.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 Wow that's so true! The US air force commander of the western Pacific theater must be highly toxicated when he quoted that their mighty F-35 being embarrassed by a fleet of J-20 + HJ-500 squadron nearby East China Sea. It's totally their strategic propaganda to fool the world.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 did you not hear the US colonel admitting to F-35 J-20 encounters? He said the J-20 were flown professionally and hinted that the F-35 got spotted first by a KJ-500 and approached by a J-20 from behind. Obviously, he leaked this encounter to ask for more budget.
Always delighted to watching your informative video,but if you could add English subtitles would be much appreciated,because for none active readers, watching with subtitles might be much helpful
while recent batches (~30 per year) are larger than previous years, i would not call it massed produced. It was designed with WS-15 in mind and that engine has just started testing on J-20 platform if recent leaked photos are true. Given that CAC has start transfering J-10 as well as JF-17 production to GAC, if this is indeed to make room for J-20 once WS-15 test finishes, and I would not be suprised if J-20 production would double or even triple than the current rate for actual mass production. For comparison current rate of F-35 production (145 in 2021) and it is expected to be 156 per year until program completion. I would expect J-20 + J-31/35 production rate to match or exceed that once both programs enter full production.
@@sharequsman596 In fact, no country is competing with China in manufacturing capacity, and the manufacturing industry in the United States is being squeezed out by the financial industry
There are some problems with the geometry on the J-20 which aren't outlined here. But I'm not inclined to elaborate. Also, curved surfaces aren't really particularly inferior to flat surfaces, but the shape and alignment of the geometry of the curves are crucially important. Worth pointing out, when flat surfaces do create an angular return, the direction of such relative to the motion of the aircraft matters. For example, if you are going to have flat surfaces potentially face a radar at times, you want such facing alignments to be "likely brief" in nature.
A correction at 3:00, most F-22 nose cones are serrated. You're looking at a photo of an early F-22, not a production F-22. In most photos of F-22s, you can clearly see the nose cone serration. nationalinterest.org/sites/default/files/main_images/W47%20(1).jpg
Stealth reduces detection but doesn't destroy airframes.... whats the point of being invisible if you cant acheive a kill? Also anything that is moving through the air causes air disruption... Doppler radar linear air disruption?
Stealth always co-operate with superior situation awareness........ For example, a J-20 versus a F -15EX. Of course EX have superior firepower, but if he has no idea a stealth fighter is closing in, he will engage at a wrong position, wrong direction. Let's say, the J-20 is at eagle's three to four o'clock. Eagle's radar cannot detect J20 and it will not maneuver before J-20 launch the missile if the signal of J-20's LPI radar is not intercepted in time. But if the electronic warning system of F-15 EX is powerful enough to detect the unusual radar scanning, it will have some chance to fight back. You see, recon ability is as important as camouflage. Two factors synergies.
@@yixinmei5854 Thats all great but no one mentioned the F15 at all. Your not wrong though with what you said. Not sure if the F15 can see far away enough to take advantage of its missiles before getting fired at.
@@wolfgangjr74 I just take the existing strongest non-stealth fighter as example. Replace it with J-16 and Rafale things will be the same. Besides, even if a stealth fighter is exposed for a few seconds, if you have not superior force to chase it from various directions, it still have chance to retrieve the advantage.
Actually stealth fighters are able to achieve a silent kill. One test successfully performed by US is two F-35s use their EODAS to accomplish triangulation, then launch the AIM-120 without emitting radar waves. Before the active seeker of missile is triggered, F-16 as the target which is 60 KM away failed to do any response. This is a more thorough way of silent kill.
Somewhat off-topic question: do you know if non-planar AESA RADAR antennae would be workable? It seems like you could both increase the functional surface area and allow over-the shoulder scanning by fitting a hemispherical antenna to an AESA RADAR.
Strange f35 have a lot of rounds in bottom, but it's ok radar absorb blablabla but j20 have small rounds around hydrolycs sounds like j20 don't have radar absorbing materials??? Do you really think that only us have radar absorbing materials, who told that Chinese or Russian absorbing materials are worser then others actually it's top secret no one knows which is better
@@agera.rs7 lol, America developed stealth, they’ve had it for over 40 years now and you seriously think that others have managed to surpassed them. Hahahaha
Here is a question. Can Stealth jet fly without their "major stealth flight panels" like Star War Y fighters. The Y-wing is a workhorse starfighter has been in use since the Clone Wars. Used for dogfights and for bombing runs against capital ships and ground targets, Y-wings are often overshadowed by newer models such as the X-wing and the A-wing. But the Y-wing's historical importance is remarkable, and it has reliably served multiple generations of star pilots. However, the Y-Wing always looked unfinished as time went on, as if you were looking at the core of a jet; simply the propulsion and cockpit, navigation but none of the body or paneling.
Let’s see one fully built and operational and go from there . The one that was at the “ big showing” ( from what I understand ) didn’t have most of the wiring and other vary vital parts in and or on it . It was a nice looking shell they were trying to sell other countries to fund the rest of the project . Russia was and is broke economically and if they really have the technology to come up with up to date battle equipment they do not have the funds to make and field it .
Hi John, Most Countries have Stealth Technologies. Ultimately and greatly depends in the Pilot's Combat Skill and Dogfight Techniques. Can you give lectures on the Polit Combat Skills and Dogfight Knowledges👍
What's the point of stealth if you are going to be engaging in dogfight? The whole point is to detect and shoot down the enemy fighter before they can see you
Why not just use a network of receivers to receive deflected radar signals.. then you can triangulate the reflected signal to calculate the originating location
The most stealthy aircraft is the one right there in front of you now, can't see it.... Stealth lol Can't believe people were told stealth made aircraft invisible to the eyes and radar back in the 90s The British could see them coming way out over the Atlantic
One thing not asked, is is this a valid comparison? the f 22, is much older than the j20, it was the first "stealthy" interceptor, it was made with 80-90s technology, and avionics, and was designed to be low observable, not invisible, tactically, its all based on the first rule of modern combat, he who see's first, and shoots first, then bugs out fastest, lives. The j 20, and other comparable aircraft, were designed with the benefits of being able to observe, backwards engineer, and "procure by other means" the plans and design principles of the f22. My thought? The f 22, may have been a mistake, as it was chosen because of its dogfighting ability. That might not be the airwar we will fight going forward. if the yf23, was viable for production, it may have been a better choice, as it had better stealth, and was faster. I think it might have been A better match against the j 20... My thought? If your low observable interceptor finds itself in a gun fight, you really screwed the pooch...
YF23 variants would have been insanely more expensive to procure and maintain. The F-22's production had to be halted at some 170 odd frame due to mounting costs; fewer aircraft could have been fielded if the YF23 was inducted into service. The same problem is going to arise with NGAD. These projects are so big, they're destined to fail owing to the cost of operations and logistics alone. F-35 has already been a reminder and nobody's paying attention.
Yeah some info on the the respective tech on the canopies would be nice. F-22s canopy in the picture at 1:45 has a golden look while the one on J-20 look more transparent.
While it seams to have some stealth effect is quite easy. The question is how hard it is to have sufficent. If the enemy simply can get a better radar.. it seams like its in vane.. or at least for looks. Of cause, if you fight a lowet tear enemy, the impact might be sognificant.
Thanks for such a detailed analysis of the aero/stealth features of all 3 aircrafts. It is now easy to see that the J20 is not a copy of any american aircraft. Love more analysis of other aircraft and their systems.
Great analysis … the designers of these things used supercomputer simulations to reduce radar cross section though, not casual analysis. Also, China used own stealth played war games against own non-stealth, and decided investing heavily on stealth. In war games, it’s been found that even very green pilot in stealth can easily win over very experienced pilots in non-stealth, and that’s very desirable and worth everything.
I've heard for older stealth that "shape, shape, shape, and materials are the four factors that influence stealth" I believe this no longer applies. It should be "shape, materials, behavior, and heat."
I like the game. For old stealth it could have been shape shape shape shape shape material behavior heat. For more recent stealth it could be shape shape shape shape material material behavior heat. Actually behavior alone could nullify stealth, but it is a different thing...
Question: With the major detriment to stealth vertical empennages cause, what are your thoughts on the artist rendition of the NGAD in the Air Force Acquisition Biennial Report page 55? Are those grooves meant to signify that the rudder surfaces will be retractable?
Seems like stealth design is assuming ground based radar transmitters and receivers only. If we have high speed secure data link (quantum?) enabling a coordinated mixture of ground and low orbit clusters space based radar transmitters and receivers, the current stealth technology will be defeated.
true but also US navy has already tested missiles on taking out low orbit satellites like the ones used in china's kill chain and surveillance satellites they were a successful test. thus leaving only ground radar's because the first targets would be the kill chains and the surveillance satellites should china decide to fuck around and find out.
@James Cunliffe oh they've finally got a laser weapon working good for them they're only a decade behind the US. considering we've been putting them on our boats since 2011 and been experimenting with planes since 2001.
Not the same… The F-22 is a millennium-2000 air superiority platform design to pick up from where the F-15 has left off while… The F-35 is an all weather system (hence JSF) designed to maintain the massive market dominated by the F-16 Falcon… J-20, clearly, is a LONG RANGE STRIKE PLATFORM* whose gist is *ATTACK and DEEP PENETRATION* much like that of the F-111 Aardvark or that of the B-58 Hustler if we go further back… As a contender for the F-22, I think Chinese Flankers with stealth coatings such as the J-15 and J-16 will be China’s primary backbone while the up coming nasalized J-31 (or J-35) will be China’s attempt to catch up hence the two power plants design to bring it to par with the F-18 and other 4, 4.5 generation American fighters. Course, with AI operated systems, UCAV’s, and hypersonic systems going full throttle both Beijing and Washington, I doubt if these 4.5-5ft generation manned system would be of any value in tomorrows battlefield environment. .
They claim 2 axis but the biggest deficit they face is developing good thrust vectoring, without a very advanced TV system they will always rely on radar-loud canards to make impossible acrobatic moves. I don't think this thing is anywhere near as reliable under high load. The dark smoke the they constantly fart out tells me these are potentially the world's most expensive ejector seat test stands
Thank you for another informative video. I was about to purchase two planes, F22 & F35 for my brother who is aircraft crazy. One thing that disappointed me was that the scale for the F22 & F35 are not the same so although one gets a scale model, one cannot actually compare the sizes. Why would a manufacturer do this? Once again, thank you, I really enjoy your very informative videos.
I read China is working on the next generation stealth: there will be no tail vertical fins, less wing control surfaces -- all maneuverability will come from all directional vector thrust engines. And, that will bring ultimate super maneuverability along with ultimate stealth of clean design.
J 28 fire dragon. If you think it’s gonna be super maneuverable however you are sadly mistaken. The generic Gen 6 fighter images you see on Google is likely the design most countries are going for. Only one single delta wing on the plane and nothing else. I don’t need to be a expert to tell you that this type of design severely limits maneuverability. Without the assistance of technologies such as active flow control, this plane will have to use 360 degrees thrust vectoring, even that would not make the plane any less clumsy. But they don’t need maneuverability at all, because fighters of the future will never get into dogfights. The J 28 and FA XX will be flying turkeys with missiles.
Dear... (Scusa non so come ti chiami), the path of my thinking... But I want to tell you that your examination of this subject is so importante to curious, shrewd people that i'm voi g to supporto you on patreon or else. Keep in going.
The j20 is long range interceptor of hostile forces coming towards it like usa planes and battle groups China has other planes to do air superiority role like su35. Where as the f22 is a air superiority fighter. That’s what everyone needs to understand thank me later.
Not correct. Both are ASFs. J-20 just makes sacrifices for range whereas the F-22 is operationally useless in Asia with the low range due to low bypass (it was designed for a war in Europe).
the j20 has everything from the russian sukoi 47 tail and fuselage canopy nose just the wings where swept forward and here they make it delta and the canards bigger even landing gear and weapon bay are similar its just a sukoi47 the chinese configert its a berkut su 47 russian sold like sukoi 27,30,33,35 in the past migs 13,15,17,19,21sukoi 7,9,20,22 like everything guns kanons tanks aircraft cariers
Thank you so much for this unbiased analysis. The Taiwan Armed Forces said that by April 2022, PLA military aircraft had conducted 277 sorties of patrols. However, China claimed that the actual number is way larger. So, what type of aircraft has been missed? 😏
China, like Russia like to "claim" many untrue things. Hence Russia's ass kicking right now. I'll give China one notch above Russia in terms of performance of their tech. Lol.
Millennium is dreaming of an era when AI controlled fighters are of such agility and energy that they rendered missile technology obsolete, forcing a return to dogfights and fighter designs focused on aerodynamics.
Join this channel to support it:
th-cam.com/channels/VDkfkGRzo0qcZ8AkB4TMuw.htmljoin
Support me on Patreon www.patreon.com/Millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Millennium7star
Join the Discord server discord.gg/6CuWEWuhsk
Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/?aff=173
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
www.reddit.com/r/Millennium7Lounge/
---------------------
First
From wikipedia:
"Kopáč (the word means "digger" in Czech) was an early electronic warfare support measures (ESM) system developed in Czechoslovakia in the early 1960s that used measurements of time difference of arrival (TDOA) of pulses at three sites to accurately detect and track airborne emitters. The system used the principle of multilateration and was capable of simultaneously manually tracking up to six targets. It was first deployed in 1963 and was also known by its serial number, PRP-1. The initials PRP come from the Czech "Přesný radiotechnický pátrač", meaning "Accurate Radiotechnical Locator", the name comes from "Korelační pátrač", meaning "Correlation Locator".
Ramona - the second generation Czech ESM TDOA system
Tamara - the third generation Czech ESM TDOA system
VERA - the current and fourth generation Czech ESM TDOA system
Kolchuga - a similar system developed in Ukraine"
Any chance for making video about passive sensors and how much of STEALTH value is lost because of this 1960's invention and its modern variants?
@@Bialy_1 i know.
Please compare su 57 with f35 and f22
@@sumanneogi2679 just killing machines and taking our human species back to mad_max style..hmmm.. don't picking on Russia.. it have it's back on the wall... hmmm and nuclear strike is a reality..😑
Great video, one correction at 14:53
The J-20 with the WS-10C engine DOES have serrated engine nozzles, similar to the F-35
True. Is an omission.
"DOES" lol
@@channelrafy He had to make sure that we understood, it DOES have serrated engine nozzles…🤣
That's the most powerful part of China. They can improve it continuously. That's why USAF wants to have next gen fighters now.
@@aarontan1810 lol yeah ok guy 😂 it's just copied garbage, trying to use stolen technologies they don't even understand 🤣
I am a welding inspector and have been trained for ultrasound to check for flaws in welds. I find it interesting that the concept of radar is similar.
I remember the jealous idiots several years ago said that J-20 is a copy of the F-22. Not even close. If anything it was the J-31. But then again you don't hear a peep for these people about the other countries stealth that's coming on line. especially the South Korean that looks like the new version of the F-22.
kf21
Maybe they need to look at the Korean KAI KA 21.... Looks like a direct knock off.... What is this bullshit that "Lockheed Martin gave them the technology?" There is a federal law that prevented the Japanese from buying the jet. Unless, the majority of the engineers were actually outsourced engineer from Korea during the 1990's. The fact proves this since during that same time they were ramping up national manufacturing for CARS and electronics. Aw...I see you driving that KIA or Hyundai....
@@rgloria40 yep. said that recently
@@rgloria40 the kai ka 21 is inferior to the F-22 in many aspects. The only thing that the koreans got mostly right is the shape but that's about it.
6:46 The canard angles are also mirroring the angle of the top of the air intakes on the opposite side, so they're not introducing a new angle to the equation.
Awesome video, I always wondered why stealth models were so similar. Had no idea the geometry limits the engineering so much in the stealth regard. I feel a little smarter today so thank you 🙏
Re: inclined vertical empenage?
Keep in mind that there's also an advantage for high-alpha maneuvers from this. Having it not directly above the fuselage but angled and to the side greatly increases the effectiveness of the vertical empenage in stabilizing a high AOA maneuver.
great video. But I have to point out that J-20's nozzles also have serration for years
Yes it was an early picture, unfortunately.
Yes that’s right. It got them with an upgraded engine I believe.
They are serrated, but they don’t have the double row of serrations as the F-35 does. Also, the individual blades making up the nozzle are flat, whereas the blades making up the F-35’s nozzle are ridged to reduce the RCS of each individual blade. The J-20’s nozzles are also situated further to the rear of the aircraft than the F-35 and F-22, and therefore aren’t as well shielded from radar. The J-20 does have small lower vertical stabilizers to mitigate this from the lower side aspect, but the nozzles are more visible from all other angles, and the stabilizers themselves add two more vertical reflective surfaces, which may counter any benefit.
@@bluemarlin8138 就是，有没有一种可能，f22的设计方向是错误的
@@我们在探讨言论自由你 😂😂
Canards and vertical stabilizers which do not use rudder (all moving ver. stabilizer as well as small ver. stabilizer on the bottom of the plane) can be empty. There are no fuel tanks or pumps inside of them, no hydraulic/electric mechanism and antennas can be mounted elsewhere.
As such they can be made at least partially and maybe even entirely out of composite radar-transparent materials, such as epoxy-glass fiber.
So one problem with trying to evaluate stealth characteristics of planes and drones is that except for the radome we can't tell what is radio transparent and what is not.
We also can’t determine how tight the manufacturing tolerances are or the quality of the RAM and other construction materials. Russia and China can’t machine parts to as tight of tolerances as the US can, and export of the machine tools necessary to do it is banned by Western countries. They are also known to be behind in metallurgy, hence their struggles to develop aircraft engines that can match Western designs from 20-30 years ago. So even if the J-20 looks like it gets the angles right and is a nice-looking aircraft, that doesn’t mean there aren’t too-wide or uneven seams, subtle rises or dips in the metal, etc. that diminish its stealth capabilities compared to US stealth aircraft. We also can’t really see how well it has shielded the engine fan blades with S-ducting, or whether it has any IR detection shielding on the exhaust nozzles like the F-35 and especially the F-22 do. And then there’s the ECM equipment and radar capability (remember, the US has had 40+ years to design stealth aids and counters, and China is just getting into the game). All in all, I suspect the J-20 is a good aircraft in its designed role (which I see more as an interceptor than a true air superiority fighter). It should be reasonably maneuverable for its size and is likely reasonably stealthy (much more so than the overrated Su-57). But I wouldn’t take it over an F-35 or F-22, especially once the AIM-260 and Peregrine are deployed in the next couple of years.
As for canards and stabilators being empty, sure, but they presumably still need some sort of metal structural framing.
@@bluemarlin8138 You can make them entirely out of composites. However the production of high quality fiber canvas and making a high performance product with them is much more complicated then it sounds.
Personally I do not believe that China had reached that stage, but there is a possibility. And we should take it into account as worst case scenario.
Well worst case for us, not them :)
Also European planes like to use composites very much. And although none of them are true stealth aircraft their RCS is probably lower then it would seem on the first glance.
@@dariozanze4929 I’m also interested to see whether the US will continue to develop the ceramic RAM coating developed at NC State University last year. Supposedly it is much more radar absorbent than current RAM while also being much more durable. If as advertised, it could really improve sortie rates and decrease costs for US stealth aircraft, and might even be usable on 4th gen aircraft to make them more survivable.
But yeah, as for China, I think we’re getting at the same thing. They seem to have a surface level understanding of stealth, but whether they understand the finer details and can effectively implement them is an open question. We pretty much know for sure Russia can’t make real stealth aircraft, but China can throw more money at engineering and production.
@@bluemarlin8138 Do you think it is possible that those two test F-22 with "mirror" coating are using ceramic RAM?
That kind of upgrade makes perfect sense to me since F-22 is a super-capable fighter and it's biggest flaw is hard and expensive to maintain RAM coating.
Pareto's Principle, 20% of effort gives 80% of the value and 80% of effort gives that last 20% of value. In my opinion Chinese catching up on technological level is slowing down and from now on it's an uphill battle for them.
And they had reached a point at which they can't simply reverse engineer things anymore and technology is kept much safer from industrial espionage.
@@dariozanze4929 It’s possible. The mirror coating has to be some sort of experiment with RAM, laser weapons, IRST, or something similar. I assumed the ceramic RAM coating would be dull, but hey, what do I know?
Many people underestimate J20 especially due to canards which they wrongly consider as unstealthy highly reflective of radar.
it is true that canards affect its stealth capability. by special design, this problem can be minimized but not eliminated.
I believe most western people do not underestimate j20. the engine still has many problems and needs to be improved or redesigned.
I don't think people underestimate the J-20, but they do often point out the obvious with regards different features of the jet that could 'potentially' increase it's radar cross section.
I mean just look at the large seem between the fuselage and the canards. To the eye this area sticks out like a sore thumb, how do you think this area alone would stand out on radar (from the side, from the front canards are much less an issue.)
NOTHING is inherently stealthy
everything needs to be specifically designed to be stealthy. through edge alignments and materials
@@jamstagerable funny that next gen US FA-XX will getting canards. If it's so bad, why...?
@@rzqian8242 How are canards any different from horizontal stabilizers? the video makes the mistake of simplifying all incoming radar signatures as horizontal. when in real life, ground radars or AWACS radars are often coming from different angles.
Which means in pretty much all cases, horizontal stabilizers reflects as much radar as canards. since not all plane fly at the same altitude.
J-20 with the WS-10C engine does have stealthy serrated nozzles, something this video got wrong.
Recipe: put in pot cream ,black pepper ,wash buckwheat ,and salt. To cook(and mix) until the cream is little brown. To add boiling water ,mix until is ready 👍
One thing you missed as well, (maybe you focused only radar side of stealth), the IR signature of the F22 and the f35 are lower than the j-20. The f35 having its engine deeply buried inside the fuselage. The f22 having the nozzles which are smaller than the engine outlet. But the j20 has their engine outlet in the open without any surfaces hiding it.
Exposing the tail to the enemy in air combat is a failure, the J20's pelvic fins have blocked the engine
The low-end mobile phones produced in China have widely used graphene heat dissipation technology, and it is not difficult to apply this technology to the use of stealth aircraft to reduce infrared characteristics.
it's more helpful 2 put the development/design of the 20 into context: usa's aviation industry has been at the leading edge for many generations and ergo, has been designing stealth a/c for over a generation. j20 is china's first iteration (and natch, heavily influenced by us designs). in this respect, j20 as a first iteration should hardly be expected to be a peer of us stealth designs - to be generous, a near peer? so, j20 is quite an achievement in that respect (also bear in mind china's excruciatingly slow development, of its military aviation industry since 70's hobbled by the culural revolution and subsequent self-imposed industrial/technological. china's aviation idustry (witness how long it has takien and is still taking ch to develop turbofan engines from the mid-1970s when they first imported a rr spey engine factory (a 'tale' in itself - the failure of that factory that is to say), indeed, china's scientific deveoplment as a whole (only nuclear weapons research and velopment was potected from the excesses of the cultural revltuion) bypassed china in those crucial years (1970s - 1990s).
4got to say, the vid was o/s👌👌👍
Both F-22 and J-20 equip IR image short range missile, IR signature of the engine isn't relevant anyway.
j20 already upgraded with ws-10c engine that comes with serrated nozzles and exhaust cooling duct
As far as I know. They're only using one ws-10 for now. Because it's newer it needs a trial. The old engine is very trustworthy and reliable. So for good safety reasons an unspecified trial run is in effect. I would think no less than 6 months to a year. Then full production of both engines to ws-10 and rotational integration to the others who have one and one.
There will be no less than 500 J-20 to be built. China at this point in time had an equal number of J-20'S as America has "combat ready" F-22. The combat readiness is an important factor in war. F-22 and F-35 have HORRENDOUS records and what's publicly released for numbers, will obviously look better than the actual reality. But even what's publicly known, it's bad.
I'm American but it's obvious to me that the J-20 has both the F-22 and F-35 in deep shit. The electronic suite of the J-20 is, no matter what update the F-22 has, much more advanced and data transfer and sharing has no current analogy. It's so high they created the J-20S so another pilot could manage the enormous amount of data it can wield!
@@Ram-1231 very recently they already started serial production allowing them to use the J-20 on daily CAP.
By 2040 China will have technological parity.
@@Ram-1231 regarding technology j20 probably copied Russian tech designs and we all know Russian tech is trash
@@Ram-1231 Only the first batch of J-20s use AL-31F, after that, all J-20 are using two WS-10Cs. AL-31F and WS-10C have different wires and connection. It is not pratical to use one AL-31F and one WS-10C since you need to rearrange many things inside.
I like your videos so much. Your calm and gentle presentation.
F22 main maneuvering strength is the fact that it is basically a delta wing formula with horizontal stabilisers attached beyond the engine exhausts nozzles.
Giving it amazing authority.
Back in the 80s I looked at using blimps as platforms for a modern version of chain home... these would carry sensor modules that could be easily swapped out and would be tethered to coastal anchor dash data nodes ... they would have been very very cheap to operate.. involve almost no human risk whatsoever... and operations could be quickly ramped up or reduced as the situation warranted... they would easily provide more coverage than any squadron of awacs at less cost and upgrading would be a simple matter of replacing modules... the ground stations could be numerous at little cost and cross connected to avoid dislocation... I revisited this in about 2005 and it would have been even more economical with modern material availability and modular sensors etc....
Given the production of windfarms in the north Sea and supposed issued with ground based radars because of same.. it would stand to reason that some of these would cover this deficiency.. alt hough the possibility of anchoring a few of them on platforms further out would perhaps be opening things up a bit too much for the narrow minded.. it would however add significantly and at little cost to national defence... similur systems for other countries would also be desirable. .
Go after it man, you've got one life to live. I know it would cost 100k+ of investment, but you would stand to make a lot of money off of that idea; I'm probably not alone in thinking that it has other applications rather than military...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JLENS?wprov=sfla1
The practical application was less than acceptable.
The Pentagon tested the concept is. JLENS which was eventually cancelled. Two Helium-filled JLENS blimps float 10,000 feet in the air and carry radars capable of providing 360-degree coverage of objects from 340 miles away. The blimps can remain aloft for 30 days at a time and transmit the information they gather to a range of defensive systems.
The U.S. government initially planned to buy 16 pairs of JLENS blimps, but the purchase ultimately was curtailed to two pairs of test blimps. The blimps are used in pairs because one conducts surveillance and the other analyzes the information that the first one gathers.
Lmfao sure. There are very good reasons that the airforces uses an awacs system. Your project wont replace it or even come close to it. Not to mention this isnt even an original idea.
What are the odds? I've been hitting up airmodels like crazy. I've got a mean itch for 1/200 scale diest cast bomber and transport planes at the moment-its pretty bad. Certainly isn't going away anytime soon, always nice to help out content creators like yourself.
@James Cunliffe you know. I'm gonna take my sweet ass long time getting to that point lmao
Thank you! I finally know how the stealth models works and why it looks same.
Totally unbiased and i agree with pretty much many things you said. Yeah some may say J20 is less stealthy bla bla bla but the Chinese aren't necessarily that much stupid either.
He was a ruski fan before the war, gave it up after so many of their plains were shootdown. Same with Chines I suppose
@@slr150 Russia's GDP is only equivalent to one province in China, go check how many provinces there are in China
In addition, China has the largest manufacturing capacity of consumer electronic products, and can easily manufacture the highest quality weapon-grade optoelectronic equipment and various electronic components required for active radar.
Based on the above facts, do you think China's military capabilities are still equivalent to Russia's?
@@金界凯伦 I don't know and neither do you. Like the Russians who though they could walk all over Ukraine, no one will ever know until the Chinese try something . Try Taiwan see what happens
@@slr150 lol whatever dude 😂😂😂😂
@@slr150 i guess before he was a sweedish, french and english fan before he was ruski fan is that correct??? Well at least that's what you logic is trying to tell me 🤣🤣🤣
Around 14:40 the motors for the flaps in the F-35 aren’t inside the wing rather in the body of the aircraft itself.
It’s copied from the Russians, where they integrated them in the back of the rudders. Here it’s at the end of the wing where wing and body meet.
May well be so, but the F35 does not use hydraulics. This has the advantage of lower maintains, (no hydraulics fluid tanks to re-fill after each flight, no piston seals to leak or maintain). And the other advantage of the electro-mechanical?
Well, when you riddle the F35 with bullets or the F35 takes damage? You have no hydraulic lines to hit, nor are they none to leak. Thus, without lines to hit, you have a more robust design. Even better yet is the networked computers can use (and find) multiple electronic paths to the control surfaces - the result is a far more robust and higher redundancy for the control surfaces as opposed to running hydraulics lines all over the place.
this is just another reason why the F35 takes less ground crews and man hours to keep flying then a F18, F15, and even a F16.
@@Albertkallal back in WW2, Kurt Tank designed his FW190 with electrical controls instead of hydraulics for the very same reason of reliable and easy to maintain!!!!!
One correction, the F-22 doesn't have a reflective coating but a radar absorbing coating. This gives it a huge stealth advantage.
But actually the coating is just the icing on a cake. It isn’t as important as the geometry of the plane. Cuz if it is, then people would just coat every older fighters with the coating and claim that they have ‘stealthed’ their entire airforce lol.
@@franksun4017 It is important, Every radar wave that touches the F-22 will be absorbed and not reflected back to the receiver of the enemy.
@@emirredzematovic5123 Not every, it would convert some radar wave into infer red, not all. And yes let me rephrase, it is important, just not as important as the geometry. Otherwise why all these weird and aerodynamically unfavourable shapes? Just coat it like a non stick pan, and call it the day.
@@franksun4017 I worked on the YF-22 program, the prototype of the F-22, and it has been tested at the RATSCAT rcs facilty in the middle of the californian desert. It proved to absorb almost every wave that was shot at it. The most reflective area were its nozzles.
@@emirredzematovic5123 how old are you?
My fave is the su57 but it’s severely under funded project by Russia unfortunately but it has great potential with enough funds.
If Russian have enough money, I doubt would they gonna focus on su57, In terms of products alone, the j-20 is also the ultimate MiG fighter in the minds of the MIG Design Bureau
@James Cunliffe how do you know about Mig 39 or 1.44
One of my favorite military aircraft, beautiful in design.
In the past you and I have discussed that pure stealth might become less dominant. The present fashion still seems to be to converge reflections into only a few directions. Your remarks about a banking F22 becoming a perfectly flat reflector at a certain angle is spot on. I the same vein all these designs are almost perfect radar reflectors from directly below. I believe that the true future of stealth is maximum dispersion. So to not as much totally reduce reflections in certain directions only, which is basically impossible anyway, to spreading the radar return signals to all directions at once and thus, with the help of Ram minimize the portion returning to the radar emitter to an absolute minimum. This would then also work for non aligned emitters / receivers. A quick example is a flat lying elliptical cross section shape (remember the MIG 1.44) or a compound shape like that of the Blackbirds front body in which a rounded shape curves into a horizontal lime. So half a future stealth aircraft's shape might actually align nowhere when one cuts it straight through the middle vertically from nose to tail. In the process such aircraft will then become more aerodynamic again. The bulges on the F35 sides and fixed intake cones of both the F35 and J20 could actually already be expressions of such a change in philosophy. Remember that the external designs of both the J20 and F35 where frozen much later then that of the F22.
you haven't thought this through. A useful radar track requires continuous detectable returns. A sphere like you described will facilitate such a track at a predictable range. An F22 may flash a flat plate at long range if not careful but that return dusapears as soon as you roll flat again. It can control what the enemy sees.
Besides *every* airplane is a flat plate perpendicular to the wings. Maximum RCS for an F-15 or F-22 is about the same 10,000 m^2 but minimum RCS is more like 4m^2 vs 0.0001m^2.
@@appa609Yeah, people tend to forget this. And it’s much more important from what aspect you’ll receive said minimum radar return most of the time
Very good comparison of aircraft stealth design features.
Question! Aren't the semi-elliptic(rounded) shapes on the top and bottom of the fuselage there to help guide creeping waves to the opposite (sharp)edge to be dissipated? I thought creeping waves was a much bigger problem for stealth than straight edge reflections when using radar absorbing materials?
No, creeping waves are important but geometry is much more and RAM do not change the substance of the problem.
No, they are also for high frequency dispersion at angles off the front.
Since no shape can be angled everywhere from every direction a compromise must be made.
certain shapes produce cancellation over wider ranges of angles.
In X band the reflection is neither optical nor whole body but local and with interference. Some shapes also produce high change in reflection over small changes in view angle, very unlike a sphere.
Nice video but I need to point out that the F-35 and the F-22 Raptor have a gold plating around the glass where the pilot sits to help reflect
Luckly you have a great discussion atmosphere of subscribers, while most of the comments where are contradistinctions about F-22/35 & J-20 would just became post-apocalyptic wasteland🤦♀️
You’re one of the few technical, objective and detail oriented aircraft analysts out there on TH-cam especially on Chinese aircraft. I love your contents. I have a request for you regarding the J-20.
I have debated many who believe the J-20 is more of an interceptor/missile truck than an air superiority fighter. They believe the J-20 is not maneuverable and is a terrible dog fighter.
I have my opinions and technical assessments, but I’d like to hear what you think. How do you think is the J-20 when compared with other 5th gen fighters: F22/F35/Su57, in terms of within visual range combat capabilities? Because the odds are, when two stealthy fighters meet, they will most likely be “close encounters”.
Canards on a non-maneuverable plane? When has that ever happened?
I saw 4 f35bs over Cumbria England on Wednesday
One was moving up and down the line then few into cloud
They are loud
The B are the ones that look ugly?
@@RogueBeatsARG Hover
@@somethingelse4878 oh yeah the one with the ugly canopy haha i heard they were loud, i guess sound stealth is not an issue?
@@RogueBeatsARG i need to take another look at the three versions because i thought they were just smaller
You would know they were up there, even in the cloud
3:40 That stealthiness with those fuel tanks...
Stealthy aircraft with axis-symmetry nozzles like J20 and F35 will have poor rearward RCS and a little larger rear fuselage compared to F22 with rectangular nozzles. But that is good enough if they are used for defence.
J-20 engine nozzle is covered by the lower vertical stabilizers, so it won't reflect radar signal to side way significantly like F-35.
@@joelau2383 The F-35’s engine nozzle is buried much further into the tail of the aircraft than the J-20’s engines, and is almost completely obscured from all but the rear aspect by the vertical stabilizer sponsons, the vertical and horizontal stabilizers themselves, and general profile of the aircraft. (It’s rather impressive when you look at photos from different angles). The J-20’s miniature lower vertical stabilizers do conceal the engine nozzles from the lower side aspect, but the engine nozzles are mounted much closer to the rear of the aircraft than the F-35’s and are more exposed from more angles. There are also two of them, which means two reflective features compared to one, plus a wider “viewing angle” for radar than that on a single-engine aircraft (the F-22 also mounts its engines deeper into the tail and shields them with huge horizontal stabilizers to reduce this effect, as well as using low-profile nozzles). The lower vertical stabilizers (vertical is bad for RCS, as you know) also create two more reflective surfaces, which likely counteracts some of the RCS reduction from shielding the nozzles. The F-35’s nozzles are also about as close to stealthy as you can make a circular nozzle due to the multiple sawtooth edges and contoured ridges on each “blade.” (GE claims that the RCS is close to the F-22’s nozzle.) The J-20’s nozzles do use a single sawtooth trailing edge, but the blades making up the nozzle aren’t individually ridged to reduce RCS. They’re flat, which makes each blade more reflective to radar. Don’t get me wrong...the J-20 appears to be a very good aircraft and it probably qualifies as 5th-gen, unlike the Su-57. It just doesn’t have some of the subtle advanced features of the F-22 and F-35, probably because it’s China’s first stealth aircraft while the US has been doing it for 40+ years.
If China wanted to really reduce the rear RCS of the J-20, they would be well-advised to develop a flattened nozzle similar to the F-22’s for the WS-10/15 engine. The significant reduction in RCS and IR signature would be worth the veeeeery slight loss in maneuverability from 3D vectoring (even if it’s true 3D vectoring like on the F-15 ACTIVE and not faux-3D-actually canted 2D-vectoring like on Russian fighters). The only catch is it’s apparently extremely expensive and difficult to do those nozzles right, which is why the Russians quit trying to put it on the Su-57. But it looks like the J-20 may not go for either, which is probably ok since it would mostly be in an interceptor role anyway.
@@bluemarlin8138 You can make whatever explanation for not completely covering nozzle metal parts, but it is clearly a great reflector for the lower side angle.
BTW, J-20 lower vertical stabilizer is not movable and doesn't contain any metal parts. It is fully made of composite and absorbent material. It is probably the most stealthy part on J-20. Besides, it also help reducing size of the upper movable vertical stablizers with metal movable parts. I don't think it has more RCS than conventional larger upper vertical stablizers with larger metal movable parts.
P.s. the horizontal angle doesn't matter because it reflects signal to other direction. The vertical angle is what really matters because long range surface radar can reach and receive signal from far away even if there is only slight lower angle exposure of metal part.
@@joelau2383 Its not that good of a design lol.. the Yf-23 beats it in every area in stealth, and that was a prototype we ditched.. You are aware the su-57 and j-20 are the worst 5th gen jets right ? In reality, the j-20 performs no better, actually probably worse then ur standard canard delta wing jet, typhoons, gripens. Probably actually worse because of its frame having to encorporate stealth. The only cool thing about the J-20 is the tail planes move as a whole. Just like the Yf-23s, only the yf-23s werent straight up to the degree the j-20s fins are. The yf-23s were angled, and each one was about the size of a f-35 wing, giving it manueverability of damn near what the thrust vectoring gave the f-22. It also has better rear profile, than a j-20 and hides it heat alot better. Even better than a f-22. The su-57's stealth profile, isnt actually bigger than a f-18s, i bet you didnt know that did you lol, but the f-18 cant carry internal weapons. The j-20s might be better than the su-57s, but its nowhere near the raptors, like nowhere near. All this plane is is a delta wing canard type caus the chinese probably couldnt figure out how to install thrust vectoring cheap enough. We were coming up with completely new type of wing designs, in the 80s, that outperfomed this "j-20" and the su-57, wich only has 2 actualy off the line production models built, the other 10 or 13 are all hand built prototypes. If designs we made and scrapped in the 80s can out perform brand new tech other countries are pushing out, these planes arent that impressive.You cant just have a stealth philosophy and forget about the rear. Those engines on the J-20 and Su-57 are no different than a gen 4 fighters.
During Pelosi's visit to Taipei, Taiwan's air defense announced that they detected multiple China's warplanes like J11 J16, Y9 and Y8 flew into its air space except J20. That shows j20 stealth capabilities are good.
If you look carefully at those curved surfaces on the F-35 they never actually reach the vertical - they are always sloped a bit away from a side-on radar. So while they undoubtedly to increase the range of elevations at which the F-35 has significant RCS (i.e. its RCS isn't as strongly "lobed" in elevation as the F-22 or J-20), I don't think that they compromise the all-important (for reasons you outlined earlier in the video) zero-elevation case.
The thing that grabs my attention about the J-20 is how close those canard trailing edges are to having zero sweep. Like the straight exhaust, that will boost RCS from the rear axis.
I had no idea that the depth of stealth could be so obvious by viewing its surfaces. As always a Great Video!!
More extreme examples are the Northrup Grumman B-2 and B-21.
the nozzles of j20 have been altered into something similar as the the F35, the pictures of J20 showed in this video were about 5 years back, they did make some changes on the J20 within this period of time.
I think that in the South China Sea the J-20 doesn't need to find the F-35 so much as it needs to find their air refuelling support, which can only be operating in so many places, protected by so many assets. In the opening days of a conflict, the loss of just one or two tankers could potentially be devastating, particularly if the advantage gained is immediately seized upon and exploited. No tanker has ever been lost in air to air combat, mostly due to the fact that no nation has ever possessed the capacity to threaten one. The J-20 doesn't need to be exceptional in its combat operations, it just needs to be solid. The F-35 on the other hand will need to be at another level entirely because it will be fighting at a distinct disadvantage in the Western Pacific. Being solid won't be anywhere near enough.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354
Your arrogance makes me laugh.
In the red flag, F35 countered F16s and F15s. If Chinese jets are trash, then the U.S won't be so nervous as it is now. A month ago, J20 tracked down your precious F35 without getting detected by both F35 and AWACS. Now, tell me, which one is trash?
In fact, the missile that J20 uses, PL15, has a longer range than AIM120D which is used by F35. How do you propose to shoot down an aircraft with a shorter-range missile?
Underestimating an enemy is a big nono. When you see a Chinese-made weapon, if you are like: copy&paste, then you are either stupid or naive.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 Wow that's so true! The US air force commander of the western Pacific theater must be highly toxicated when he quoted that their mighty F-35 being embarrassed by a fleet of J-20 + HJ-500 squadron nearby East China Sea. It's totally their strategic propaganda to fool the world.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 F-35 lost against the J-20 in recent "friendly" engagement and got the US air force worried, so I won't bet on it.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 did you not hear the US colonel admitting to F-35 J-20 encounters? He said the J-20 were flown professionally and hinted that the F-35 got spotted first by a KJ-500 and approached by a J-20 from behind. Obviously, he leaked this encounter to ask for more budget.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 th-cam.com/video/GNPo6S5uwZQ/w-d-xo.html
Always delighted to watching your informative video,but if you could add English subtitles would be much appreciated,because for none active readers, watching with subtitles might be much helpful
The J20 using the Russian engine is only an early transition product, The current mass-produced J20 uses the Chinese WS10c engine.
“Mass produced”
while recent batches (~30 per year) are larger than previous years, i would not call it massed produced. It was designed with WS-15 in mind and that engine has just started testing on J-20 platform if recent leaked photos are true. Given that CAC has start transfering J-10 as well as JF-17 production to GAC, if this is indeed to make room for J-20 once WS-15 test finishes, and I would not be suprised if J-20 production would double or even triple than the current rate for actual mass production. For comparison current rate of F-35 production (145 in 2021) and it is expected to be 156 per year until program completion. I would expect J-20 + J-31/35 production rate to match or exceed that once both programs enter full production.
@@WangGanChang i doubt that chineese production could surpass american.They have way more experience manafacturing stealth jets
@@sharequsman596 In fact, no country is competing with China in manufacturing capacity, and the manufacturing industry in the United States is being squeezed out by the financial industry
@@dingxiong8604 I'm talking about millitary not commercial goods
This is very imformative, thx for the good content
You should show radars avg wavelengths relative to size of aircraft. 🤔
Good point
There are some problems with the geometry on the J-20 which aren't outlined here. But I'm not inclined to elaborate.
Also, curved surfaces aren't really particularly inferior to flat surfaces, but the shape and alignment of the geometry of the curves are crucially important.
Worth pointing out, when flat surfaces do create an angular return, the direction of such relative to the motion of the aircraft matters. For example, if you are going to have flat surfaces potentially face a radar at times, you want such facing alignments to be "likely brief" in nature.
Why? Because you have no idea how to?
@@suisinghoraceho2403 Sure, lets go with that.
As usual a high quality video, will you be making a video doing a deep dive on RAM and which countries have made a significant R&D on this tech?
A correction at 3:00, most F-22 nose cones are serrated. You're looking at a photo of an early F-22, not a production F-22. In most photos of F-22s, you can clearly see the nose cone serration.
nationalinterest.org/sites/default/files/main_images/W47%20(1).jpg
Thanks, I missed that.
Stealth reduces detection but doesn't destroy airframes.... whats the point of being invisible if you cant acheive a kill? Also anything that is moving through the air causes air disruption... Doppler radar linear air disruption?
Thats why the J20's are just cannon fodder. Once all the missiles are launched it can't even defend itself.
Stealth always co-operate with superior situation awareness........ For example, a J-20 versus a F -15EX. Of course EX have superior firepower, but if he has no idea a stealth fighter is closing in, he will engage at a wrong position, wrong direction. Let's say, the J-20 is at eagle's three to four o'clock. Eagle's radar cannot detect J20 and it will not maneuver before J-20 launch the missile if the signal of J-20's LPI radar is not intercepted in time. But if the electronic warning system of F-15 EX is powerful enough to detect the unusual radar scanning, it will have some chance to fight back. You see, recon ability is as important as camouflage. Two factors synergies.
@@yixinmei5854 Thats all great but no one mentioned the F15 at all. Your not wrong though with what you said. Not sure if the F15 can see far away enough to take advantage of its missiles before getting fired at.
@@wolfgangjr74 I just take the existing strongest non-stealth fighter as example. Replace it with J-16 and Rafale things will be the same. Besides, even if a stealth fighter is exposed for a few seconds, if you have not superior force to chase it from various directions, it still have chance to retrieve the advantage.
Actually stealth fighters are able to achieve a silent kill. One test successfully performed by US is two F-35s use their EODAS to accomplish
triangulation, then launch the AIM-120 without emitting radar waves. Before the active seeker of missile is triggered, F-16 as the target which is 60 KM away failed to do any response. This is a more thorough way of silent kill.
always appreciate your analysis ^^
Somewhat off-topic question: do you know if non-planar AESA RADAR antennae would be workable? It seems like you could both increase the functional surface area and allow over-the shoulder scanning by fitting a hemispherical antenna to an AESA RADAR.
Not really
you can but it would produce a spread out radar return.
Strange f35 have a lot of rounds in bottom, but it's ok radar absorb blablabla but j20 have small rounds around hydrolycs sounds like j20 don't have radar absorbing materials??? Do you really think that only us have radar absorbing materials, who told that Chinese or Russian absorbing materials are worser then others actually it's top secret no one knows which is better
Actually in a way it's kinda good if the adversary underestimate you.
@@nuclearwarhead9338 if you expect a. actual fight yes. If you want s deterrent then no.
I suspect China wants a deterrent.
Its all these americans thinking they know something about these extremely classified pieces of modern technology..
@@agera.rs7 lol, America developed stealth, they’ve had it for over 40 years now and you seriously think that others have managed to surpassed them. Hahahaha
@@KkevrockK i never said others surpassed them. I said that no american knows the classified value and data on those other 2 planes.
8:50 this is a great example of how accurate you were when you said "You won't find this level of analysis in our videos in other TH-cam channels"
12:20 those areas are most likely transparent to radar and are antenna cavities
Here is a question. Can Stealth jet fly without their "major stealth flight panels" like Star War Y fighters. The Y-wing is a workhorse starfighter has been in use since the Clone Wars. Used for dogfights and for bombing runs against capital ships and ground targets, Y-wings are often overshadowed by newer models such as the X-wing and the A-wing. But the Y-wing's historical importance is remarkable, and it has reliably served multiple generations of star pilots. However, the Y-Wing always looked unfinished as time went on, as if you were looking at the core of a jet; simply the propulsion and cockpit, navigation but none of the body or paneling.
No. There is no part of the panelling of a plane that is removable and the plane can still fly.
Here comes a stealthy push for the algorithm, HA!😊
فى النهاية عندما تتقاتل كلا منهما وتسقط طائرة منهن وتكرر العملية كل مرة هى احصاء يبين من هى الافضل والاقوى
Cockpits reflections can be reduced with semi-autonomous systems and virtual cockpits.
COFFIN
Let’s see one fully built and operational and go from there . The one that was at the “ big showing” ( from what I understand ) didn’t have most of the wiring and other vary vital parts in and or on it . It was a nice looking shell they were trying to sell other countries to fund the rest of the project . Russia was and is broke economically and if they really have the technology to come up with up to date battle equipment they do not have the funds to make and field it .
Hi John, Most Countries have Stealth Technologies. Ultimately and greatly depends in the Pilot's Combat Skill and Dogfight Techniques. Can you give lectures on the Polit Combat Skills and Dogfight Knowledges👍
If you have stealth tech , what's combat skills for?
What's the point of stealth if you are going to be engaging in dogfight? The whole point is to detect and shoot down the enemy fighter before they can see you
Lol dogfight requires manuerabuilty not stealth coming to manuerabuilty su 57 is beast in that
@@ChrisZ901finding a stealth plane isn't that hard, maintaining a radar lock is
Could you also do an analysis on Su-57 and the Cy-75? If you have time to cover more, could you also do the same on Turkish TKF and Indian AMCA?
Why not just use a network of receivers to receive deflected radar signals.. then you can triangulate the reflected signal to calculate the originating location
The most stealthy aircraft is the one right there in front of you now, can't see it.... Stealth lol
Can't believe people were told stealth made aircraft invisible to the eyes and radar back in the 90s
The British could see them coming way out over the Atlantic
Nah only trump think like that
Ma se volessi aggiungerla al LinkedIn, chi devo cercare?
One thing not asked, is is this a valid comparison? the f 22, is much older than the j20, it was the first "stealthy" interceptor, it was made with 80-90s technology, and avionics, and was designed to be low observable, not invisible,
tactically, its all based on the first rule of modern combat, he who see's first, and shoots first, then bugs out fastest, lives.
The j 20, and other comparable aircraft, were designed with the benefits of being able to observe, backwards engineer, and "procure by other means" the plans and design principles of the f22.
My thought? The f 22, may have been a mistake, as it was chosen because of its dogfighting ability. That might not be the airwar we will fight going forward. if the yf23, was viable for production, it may have been a better choice, as it had better stealth, and was faster. I think it might have been A better match against the j 20...
My thought? If your low observable interceptor finds itself in a gun fight, you really screwed the pooch...
YF23 variants would have been insanely more expensive to procure and maintain. The F-22's production had to be halted at some 170 odd frame due to mounting costs; fewer aircraft could have been fielded if the YF23 was inducted into service.
The same problem is going to arise with NGAD. These projects are so big, they're destined to fail owing to the cost of operations and logistics alone. F-35 has already been a reminder and nobody's paying attention.
"It's not a bubble"
in other words, the canopy is probably worse from a visibility standpoint.
Question: Do modern stealth planes still have a gold alloy implemented in the canopy? I remember that the F-16 had it.
Yeah some info on the the respective tech on the canopies would be nice. F-22s canopy in the picture at 1:45 has a golden look while the one on J-20 look more transparent.
While it seams to have some stealth effect is quite easy. The question is how hard it is to have sufficent. If the enemy simply can get a better radar.. it seams like its in vane.. or at least for looks.
Of cause, if you fight a lowet tear enemy, the impact might be sognificant.
When will kook deeper to other successful fighters as Rafale and Gripen and Typhoon even Tejas
What do you think of the European 6th gen fighters
Thank you, interesting & entertaining
Thanks for such a detailed analysis of the aero/stealth features of all 3 aircrafts. It is now easy to see that the J20 is not a copy of any american aircraft. Love more analysis of other aircraft and their systems.
Sir, can you make a video about that stealth jet shown in northrup grumman video?🙏
Great analysis … the designers of these things used supercomputer simulations to reduce radar cross section though, not casual analysis. Also, China used own stealth played war games against own non-stealth, and decided investing heavily on stealth. In war games, it’s been found that even very green pilot in stealth can easily win over very experienced pilots in non-stealth, and that’s very desirable and worth everything.
Why does the F22 cockpit appear gold?
RAM is maintenance intensive. F35 has 50% availability.
I've heard for older stealth that "shape, shape, shape, and materials are the four factors that influence stealth"
I believe this no longer applies. It should be "shape, materials, behavior, and heat."
I like the game.
For old stealth it could have been shape shape shape shape shape material behavior heat.
For more recent stealth it could be shape shape shape shape material material behavior heat.
Actually behavior alone could nullify stealth, but it is a different thing...
Question: With the major detriment to stealth vertical empennages cause, what are your thoughts on the artist rendition of the NGAD in the Air Force Acquisition Biennial Report page 55? Are those grooves meant to signify that the rudder surfaces will be retractable?
Doesn’t matter if the nation’s tactics suck. Ukraine Russia war is teaching us this in real time!
Meanwhile US's strategy is fight farmers equiped with RPG.
Seems like stealth design is assuming ground based radar transmitters and receivers only. If we have high speed secure data link (quantum?) enabling a coordinated mixture of ground and low orbit clusters space based radar transmitters and receivers, the current stealth technology will be defeated.
true but also US navy has already tested missiles on taking out low orbit satellites like the ones used in china's kill chain and surveillance satellites they were a successful test. thus leaving only ground radar's because the first targets would be the kill chains and the surveillance satellites should china decide to fuck around and find out.
@James Cunliffe yeah read the post again china also has spy satellites for the same purpose. deny the enemy the advantages you have.
@James Cunliffe oh they've finally got a laser weapon working good for them they're only a decade behind the US. considering we've been putting them on our boats since 2011 and been experimenting with planes since 2001.
@James Cunliffe i don't follow. how is the 747 yal-1 comparable.
While you may not be able to see how good is the stealth, you can visibly see if the stealth is bad.
sir plZ make a vdo about caret inlet and a variable geometry inlet
Most people are just china bashing and don't actually analyse it thoroughly. They just go made in China and stop right there with their judgement
Well, they did wholesale copy the F-35 & the J-20 has proven in practice to have limited stealth capability.
They are just playing ostrich, everything In China must be garbage, ignoring the fact that most of the stuff in their life comes from China
As always, form generally follows function.
Not the same…
The F-22 is a millennium-2000 air superiority platform design to pick up from where the F-15 has left off while…
The F-35 is an all weather system (hence JSF) designed to maintain the massive market dominated by the F-16 Falcon…
J-20, clearly, is a LONG RANGE STRIKE PLATFORM* whose gist is *ATTACK and DEEP PENETRATION* much like that of the F-111 Aardvark or that of the B-58 Hustler if we go further back…
As a contender for the F-22, I think Chinese Flankers with stealth coatings such as the J-15 and J-16 will be China’s primary backbone while the up coming nasalized J-31 (or J-35) will be China’s attempt to catch up hence the two power plants design to bring it to par with the F-18 and other 4, 4.5 generation American fighters.
Course, with AI operated systems, UCAV’s, and hypersonic systems going full throttle both Beijing and Washington, I doubt if these 4.5-5ft generation manned system would be of any value in tomorrows battlefield environment.
.
They claim 2 axis but the biggest deficit they face is developing good thrust vectoring, without a very advanced TV system they will always rely on radar-loud canards to make impossible acrobatic moves. I don't think this thing is anywhere near as reliable under high load. The dark smoke the they constantly fart out tells me these are potentially the world's most expensive ejector seat test stands
What if you built an aircraft so fast stealth is not needed.?
I can send you a picture of the zig-zag, and also China has no engine problems, and the j-20 has a max speed of Mach 2.8
That speed has no real life benefit anyway.
😂 2.8 mach
Cool video
The j20 is not stealth. It tries to look like a stealth fighter, but it's trackable by commercial radar.
Everything is when the reflector lens is out during peacetime
You have suddenly become an expert on stealth fighters! Isn’t that special!
I want to see the J-20 in Ace Combat.
Thank you for another informative video. I was about to purchase two planes, F22 & F35 for my brother who is aircraft crazy. One thing that disappointed me was that the scale for the F22 & F35 are not the same so although one gets a scale model, one cannot actually compare the sizes. Why would a manufacturer do this? Once again, thank you, I really enjoy your very informative videos.
There will be a big problem for J20 if his missile miss and hunt by F 22 because J 20 dont have a Guns or Cannon which is only carry Missiles.
it would be a failure for any stealth fighter to engage in dog fight. It's like having snipers engage in close quarter combat with knives
I read China is working on the next generation stealth: there will be no tail vertical fins, less wing control surfaces -- all maneuverability will come from all directional vector thrust engines. And, that will bring ultimate super maneuverability along with ultimate stealth of clean design.
J 28 fire dragon. If you think it’s gonna be super maneuverable however you are sadly mistaken. The generic Gen 6 fighter images you see on Google is likely the design most countries are going for. Only one single delta wing on the plane and nothing else. I don’t need to be a expert to tell you that this type of design severely limits maneuverability. Without the assistance of technologies such as active flow control, this plane will have to use 360 degrees thrust vectoring, even that would not make the plane any less clumsy. But they don’t need maneuverability at all, because fighters of the future will never get into dogfights. The J 28 and FA XX will be flying turkeys with missiles.
The USAF announced well over a year ago that it had already flown a 6th generation fighter jet. What it looks like is at this point anyone's guess.
Dear... (Scusa non so come ti chiami), the path of my thinking... But I want to tell you that your examination of this subject is so importante to curious, shrewd people that i'm voi g to supporto you on patreon or else. Keep in going.
Se il correttore automatico fosse meno invadente, i miei pensieri sarebbero più chiari.
India's SU-30MKI can see it taking off from its own base.
According to Indian media only.
@@BSPBuilder 🤣🤣
@@BSPBuilder exactly, indians are a strange race. They believe anything that favours them no matter how corrupt the source.
when f22, f35,j20 meets bird as in bird strike , it’s goodbye to plane pilot and poor bird
I'd love to know why the US Air Force wants to retire the F22, currently the F15 has not been retired.
The j20 is long range interceptor of hostile forces coming towards it like usa planes and battle groups China has other planes to do air superiority role like su35. Where as the f22 is a air superiority fighter. That’s what everyone needs to understand thank me later.
Not correct. Both are ASFs. J-20 just makes sacrifices for range whereas the F-22 is operationally useless in Asia with the low range due to low bypass (it was designed for a war in Europe).
the j20 has everything from the russian sukoi 47 tail and fuselage canopy nose just the wings where swept forward
and here they make it delta and the canards bigger even landing gear and weapon bay are similar its just a sukoi47 the chinese configert its a berkut su 47 russian sold like sukoi 27,30,33,35 in the past migs 13,15,17,19,21sukoi 7,9,20,22 like everything guns kanons tanks aircraft cariers
Thank you so much for this unbiased analysis.
The Taiwan Armed Forces said that by April 2022, PLA military aircraft had conducted 277 sorties of patrols.
However, China claimed that the actual number is way larger.
So, what type of aircraft has been missed? 😏
China, like Russia like to "claim" many untrue things. Hence Russia's ass kicking right now. I'll give China one notch above Russia in terms of performance of their tech. Lol.
台湾雷打不行
11:38 Dude, curvy is better than flat....that's a fact :P :'D
I have a personal question:
Do you personally like stealth aircrafts or non-stealth?
Considering the phrase "Stealth kills aerodynamics".
They are no aesthetically pleasing.
Millennium is dreaming of an era when AI controlled fighters are of such agility and energy that they rendered missile technology obsolete, forcing a return to dogfights and fighter designs focused on aerodynamics.
I wonder if one can use the EM package in ANSYS Workbench to compare geometry stealth of these aircraft.
outstanding :)