J-20 goes operational again

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

garrya

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1001
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

Unread post28 Jul 2022, 05:02

RMR_22 wrote:garrya, In the duct opposite the stairs, I would say that you can see where the floor and wall of the duct end.

Yep, will add that
viewport.png
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4332
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post28 Jul 2022, 15:33

spad_s.xiii wrote:Not only for J-20, all new chinese radars:
tphuang wrote:Chinese radar are really good and they are really good in EW. All the new radars are using GaN modules. They can all be operate in LPI mode.

Impressive, if it is true.


Yeah, yeah sure :roll:

Chinese AESA radars such as the KLJ-7 still rely on old Track-While-Scan (TWS) modes in order to track aircraft while western AESA radars rely on much more advanced Scan-While-Track (SWT) modes in order to do the same!
But yeah, all Chinese AESA radars use GaN modules (unlike the western ones)... :doh:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5860
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post28 Jul 2022, 19:01

Corsair1963 wrote:I very much doubt the F-22 has a lower RCS than the F-35....(just saying)


I think you have that backwards.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1877
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post28 Jul 2022, 19:18

ricnunes wrote:
spad_s.xiii wrote:Not only for J-20, all new chinese radars:
tphuang wrote:Chinese radar are really good and they are really good in EW. All the new radars are using GaN modules. They can all be operate in LPI mode.

Impressive, if it is true.


Yeah, yeah sure :roll:

Chinese AESA radars such as the KLJ-7 still rely on old Track-While-Scan (TWS) modes in order to track aircraft while western AESA radars rely on much more advanced Scan-While-Track (SWT) modes in order to do the same!
But yeah, all Chinese AESA radars use GaN modules (unlike the western ones)... :doh:


KLJ7 is mark for couple different radars. First KLJ7 is quite old tech mechanical radar it is based on soviet N001 they got with Su27 it is similar to N019 which is scale down N001 for MiG29.

Then you have KLJ7V1 which have more modern antenna but still mechanical one it use TWS mode.

Latest KLJ7 is KLJ7A which is AESA but not much is known about it expect it will use or is used in JF17 which isnt best Chinese fighter in fact China don't even operate JF17. Btw KLJ7A could still use software of older versions so TWS could real but don't use KLJ7A as some analog to J20 radar.

It is like some haters like to point out F18 aesa problems as evidence f35 radar sucks even though they don't have nothing common expect they are both aesa tech.

GaN modules if is true is huge advantage but I am sceptical it could be classic fanboy spin.

Fanboy saw some GaN land or ship based radar and that is evidence fighter size Xbsnd radars are for sure GaN tech too.
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 922
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post28 Jul 2022, 22:27

Wait isn't this the radar in Syria? The big radar that can't detect F-35s? You sound like a Russian fanboy in January if this year lol.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1877
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post29 Jul 2022, 07:42

jessmo112 wrote:Wait isn't this the radar in Syria? The big radar that can't detect F-35s? You sound like a Russian fanboy in January if this year lol.


One radar which was on same location for weeks. Not hidden at all. You don't need f35 to take it out.

I am talking about GaN radars in fighters if and that is BIG if China do have them then they are ahead of US but I still didn't saw evidence.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4332
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post29 Jul 2022, 11:58

milosh wrote:KLJ7 is mark for couple different radars. First KLJ7 is quite old tech mechanical radar it is based on soviet N001 they got with Su27 it is similar to N019 which is scale down N001 for MiG29.

Then you have KLJ7V1 which have more modern antenna but still mechanical one it use TWS mode.

Latest KLJ7 is KLJ7A which is AESA but not much is known about it expect it will use or is used in JF17 which isnt best Chinese fighter in fact China don't even operate JF17. Btw KLJ7A could still use software of older versions so TWS could real but don't use KLJ7A as some analog to J20 radar.

It is like some haters like to point out F18 aesa problems as evidence f35 radar sucks even though they don't have nothing common expect they are both aesa tech.

GaN modules if is true is huge advantage but I am sceptical it could be classic fanboy spin.

Fanboy saw some GaN land or ship based radar and that is evidence fighter size Xbsnd radars are for sure GaN tech too.


I was referring to the KLJ7-V2 which is AESA.

However if we look at the KLJ7A which is a proposed radar for the JF-17 Block 3 and being a proposed radar it means that at best it's still in development and thus being more modern than the J-20's KLJ5 radar and it's not known if the KLJ7A will use GaA or GaN modules:
https://quwa.org/2017/11/21/klj-7a-prop ... ing-tests/
http://errymath.blogspot.com/2018/01/jf ... uO3t3bMKUk

IMO, this is an indication that this radar (KLJ7A) uses GaA and not GaN. If it used GaN then we would already know since this would be a great propaganda opportunity for China.

BTW, it also seems that the KLJ7A is based on the KLJ-5 at least in terms of arrangement:
https://www.armadainternational.com/202 ... er-radars/

Resuming, if the Chinese used GaN modules in their fighter aircraft then the Americans would already know that by now and as such we as the public would also likely know and above all, new variants of radars like the APG-77 and APG-81 (and other US AESA radars) with GaN modules would already be in development and close to start to be fielded.

And yes, I do agree with you that just because the Chinese have a radar on ships with GaN modules that doesn't mean that they have fighter based radars with GaN modules too.

So no, I don't believe for a second that the J-20's radar uses GaN modules.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

tphuang

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 222
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post03 Aug 2022, 03:26

ricnunes wrote:
tphuang wrote:I think you should throw 0.05 sqm out in general, because it's just a picture from late night TV show. And there are much better data set from USAF and US intelligence.


And which data set from USAF and US intelligence contradicts the 0.05 sqm RCS value for the J-20, may I ask??

you mean aside from what I quoted already? This is what someone I've been talking to have said. Take it for what you will

Well, I can't discuss specific signature performance, but generally yes we rate it to perform around as well as early block F-35s in EW free environments.

ultimately, the presence of EW, the broader sensor apparatus and intelligence-distribution system, and the actual operational factors of the day make any individual RCS measurement kinda useless

Indeed, it's just unfortunate that the folks who give out that information puff it up so much as to give the impression that it's relevant

Whether an aircraft has a 0 degree frontal aspect signature of 0.000001m^2 against a Ku band emitter with blah blah polarization, emitting at blah blah PRF, in blah blah weather, at blah blah atmospheric pressure, at blah blah distance doesn't matter that much in the grand scheme of things. They're relevant, sure, but they are superceded by far more pressing factors.

so, he couldn't provide me with numbers. But according to him operationally speaking, US military rates J-20's signature as above.

RMR_22 wrote:I do not understand why it is so difficult to believe that the designer of the FC-31 says in an interview the approximate RCS of his plane.
Especially considering that the FC-31 had no support from the government and the company desperately tried to market it.The navalized J-35 is the only one that bears the national insignia

So now, you are saying that comment was regarding the RCS of FC-31, not J-20. Okay, that changes things, lol. Without factoring in stealth layer and RAM coating and a whole host of other factors, it'd be pretty hard and probably not that relevant to know the exact RCS of J-20.

garrya wrote:I don't think I ever heard about J-20 radar with GaN model, are you sure about that?.
One thing that I find super weird about J-20 is that somehow, it has no avionic cooling scope???. Both F-57 and Su-57 have them, F-22 also have them inside their splitter plate


It is quite possible that I'm wrong about this. I made the assumption because even export version of air defense radars from mid 2010 like SLC-2 and SLC-7 use GaN modules
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/attach ... jpg.88301/
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/attach ... jpg.88300/
Given the wide availability of GaN modules on Chinese Internet for quite a few years now, I concluded that J-20 is also using GaN modules.
I mean you can buy 25W X-band GaN T/R modules very easily on Alibaba these days.
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/attach ... jpg.88352/

ricnunes wrote:
I was referring to the KLJ7-V2 which is AESA.

However if we look at the KLJ7A which is a proposed radar for the JF-17 Block 3 and being a proposed radar it means that at best it's still in development and thus being more modern than the J-20's KLJ5 radar and it's not known if the KLJ7A will use GaA or GaN modules:

you do realize that is a low quality radar China is offering with JF-17, right? Why would they sell higher end stuff with such a cheaper fighter?
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2933
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post03 Aug 2022, 06:12

Noted China AESA development went thru stages (Generations - see very-dated pic below) where J-10B was Gen 1.5, J-16 was Gen 2 and J-20 was Gen 3. Difference being a 2D design, then added a cooling segment before going to a 4 layer 8 channel 3D MCM system and digital T-R modules. Also note that the J-16 has a direct digital synthesis (DDS) device to generate waveform which is likely incorporated into gen 3.

Image

I would expect the JF-17 nose being smaller would therefore house less TR modules as well as lack of space to integrate the other capabilities. Also the power output can be expected to be lower but the "official" range is still a large jump over phased array radars.

Rather than using subjective criteria like "low quality", it might be more useful to discuss specific capabilities like how the AESA radar on the JF-17 can perform doppler beam sharpening at a ratio of 64-1 and how that compares to traditional radars. I understand that's at least similar to the non-AESA APG-68 mode 2 but the speed and range of DBS is unclear. I suspect it could be faster & longer range considering the current gen tech.
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 922
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post10 Aug 2022, 01:27

After all of this time, we discover that Chinese advances in microchips might be overstated.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/china-corrupt ... 03646.html

Despite years of effort, China hasn’t made much progress in narrowing -- let alone closing -- the gap with the West. Chip-making machinery is still dominated by Dutch firm ASML, despite the efforts of state science institutions and firms like Naura Technology Group Co. to design rival lithography machines. Japanese firms still control the supply of photoresists, a key chemical. Though tech giants such as Huawei drove intense research of local alternatives to US hardware, the country still relies on imports to meet the majority of its $155 billion in annual
chip needs.

What do you guys make of such an embarrassing report?
Is it simply western propaganda?
Could the Chinese have other industries where advances are overstated?
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 922
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post10 Aug 2022, 01:30

It just dawned on me that maybe Beijing has know for awhile that they are behind. Taking Taiwan would give them a huge advantage in this industry.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2933
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post10 Aug 2022, 03:46

Bloomberg on China is "western" propaganda. The lack of real details is a simple sign and if one reads the article, it gives the impression that the China semiconductor investments have been a complete failure which is very far from the truth. The reality is somewhere in between ie a mix of good and bad news.

The issues with Tsinghua unigroup is real though and they have completed their debt restructure. However the reasons behind the arrests may be different from how Bloomberg chose to portray it if one reads the article below.
https://tfiglobalnews.com/2021/12/22/ch ... -with-ccp/

Reading Bloomberg only will unsurprisingly lead to the conclusion that Taiwan is a semiconductor goldmine to attract China's attentions. That is also far from the truth. 95% of global non-mobile phone equipment uses 14nm and above. Other than mobiles, most items eg TVs etc don't need 7nm or under. There's too much to post on China's 14-28nm self reliance efforts in recent years + SMIC's 7nm chip production in China. Just google.

So it begs the question why China will invade Taiwan just to get higher end chips for manufacturing higher end mobile phones that aren't used by the PLA? Right now, other than Huawei/ZTE, China's consumers already have access to sub-7nm mobiles.

Doesn't mean propaganda isn't needed. I can understand the need to make Taiwan "relevant" to US otherwise its just another Vietnam.
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 922
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post10 Aug 2022, 04:35

Ohh I seem to have struck a nerve.

Let me ask this way:

What other major technology has China poured billions into, but hasn't achieved parity with the west?
If it was one issue and one technology, then I'd say it's propaganda. To issues and It's raising eyebrows.
3, 4,5?
"Are cars are almost on par with the west"
"The coming Chinese fighter engine is on par with F-22"
"We have achieved a breakthrough in chips"
"We have built a radar to see stealth planes"


How can people from the west take China seriously?
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2933
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post10 Aug 2022, 06:55

Not a question of nerves or perception. The facts are ~36% of the world's chips were produced in China in 2021 and China consumed 24% of them. The original question raised is whether high end ICs are a sufficient reason for China to invade Taiwan. Nothing in the posts suggest it is.

That's all that's being addressed. Not a question of whether whose <insert> is bigger.
Offline

Scorpion1alpha

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:47

Unread post16 Aug 2022, 02:28

:offtopic:
I'm watching...
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests