Chengdu J-20 news and analysis Part III

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
950
Reaction score
1,651
^ these blurry picture leaks makes me feel nostalgic, like its 2011 again!

I've always felt for these "long" looking aircraft.. like the J-20, F-14, etc.. the twin seaters look more visually nicer
 

Deino

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
1,312
till waiting for confirmation, but it looks at least realistic IMO
 

Deino

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
1,312
I know this is far from a conclusive confirmation or even a proof, but just after a rough comparison with single seater images, the new prototype - if real - has as expected a different and larger canopy. So waiting now for better clearer images.

J-20B twin seater - comparisons.jpg
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
920
I cannot wait to see what the new twin seat trainer variant of the J-20 looks like, I certainly hope that they have not just crammed in the second cockpit at the expense of fuel.
Looking good in my humble opinion, if the artist renditions are legit.

Those are non official artistic renditions, and the second one depicts a more dramatic "strike" twin seater.

This image below is one that was featured for a brief second in an AVIC video last year which is probably the most likely appearance at this stage imo.


Also, I would be surprised if it operates as a trainer. If it operates in any form as a trainer, it would likely be for advanced tactics development.
A more plausible role, one floated by one of the more credible insiders over a year ago, is that of an enhanced battle management and UAV controller aircraft.


View attachment 666703
Yep. No way is it a trainer. We already know they don't need one. Think Growler but with the back seater controlling UCAVs.

Ok so no trainer variant, the twin seater will be a UCAV controller with the UCAV’s carrying the anti-radar missiles. Sounds like an interesting development and one that I will be following with interest.
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,012
Reaction score
927
Well Sferrin's point is that.

In order to control the UAV the aircraft has to emit. Datalink or communication has two kinds of antenna, a blade with wide beamwidth and a pencil beam highly directional antenna.

The wide beamwidth antenna may betray stealth as it radiates in practically all direction with equal strength (aka omnidirectional or -almost- omnidirectional). The pencil beamwidth one often works in high frequency have smaller and highly directional beam which can be steered electronically like phased array. The latter is preferred method as not only highly directional with controlled sidelobes which makes ESM life hard, higher signal strength and therefore bandwidth can be gained.

This highly directional communication beam can be generated from dedicated datalink antenna like MADL or be part of the radar's operating modes.

I would assume J-20 radar will include such mode. This allows transmission and reception of good quality high bandwidth signal from long range.
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
920
Well Sferrin's point is that.

In order to control the UAV the aircraft has to emit. Datalink or communication has two kinds of antenna, a blade with wide beamwidth and a pencil beam highly directional antenna.

The wide beamwidth antenna may betray stealth as it radiates in practically all direction with equal strength (aka omnidirectional or -almost- omnidirectional). The pencil beamwidth one often works in high frequency have smaller and highly directional beam which can be steered electronically like phased array. The latter is preferred method as not only highly directional with controlled sidelobes which makes ESM life hard, higher signal strength and therefore bandwidth can be gained.

This highly directional communication beam can be generated from dedicated datalink antenna like MADL or be part of the radar's operating modes.

I would assume J-20 radar will include such mode. This allows transmission and reception of good quality high bandwidth signal from long range.

If the J-20B were to have a link-16 type datalink I would think that it would use internal antenna something similar to what the F-22 has instead of external blade antenna that would degrade the J-20B's stealth capability.
 

latenlazy

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
16
Well Sferrin's point is that.

In order to control the UAV the aircraft has to emit. Datalink or communication has two kinds of antenna, a blade with wide beamwidth and a pencil beam highly directional antenna.

The wide beamwidth antenna may betray stealth as it radiates in practically all direction with equal strength (aka omnidirectional or -almost- omnidirectional). The pencil beamwidth one often works in high frequency have smaller and highly directional beam which can be steered electronically like phased array. The latter is preferred method as not only highly directional with controlled sidelobes which makes ESM life hard, higher signal strength and therefore bandwidth can be gained.

This highly directional communication beam can be generated from dedicated datalink antenna like MADL or be part of the radar's operating modes.

I would assume J-20 radar will include such mode. This allows transmission and reception of good quality high bandwidth signal from long range.

If the J-20B were to have a link-16 type datalink I would think that it would use internal antenna something similar to what the F-22 has instead of external blade antenna that would degrade the J-20B's stealth capability.
External blades can be integrated into surface edges.
 

Blitzo

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
437
Reaction score
163
Well Sferrin's point is that.

In order to control the UAV the aircraft has to emit. Datalink or communication has two kinds of antenna, a blade with wide beamwidth and a pencil beam highly directional antenna.

The wide beamwidth antenna may betray stealth as it radiates in practically all direction with equal strength (aka omnidirectional or -almost- omnidirectional). The pencil beamwidth one often works in high frequency have smaller and highly directional beam which can be steered electronically like phased array. The latter is preferred method as not only highly directional with controlled sidelobes which makes ESM life hard, higher signal strength and therefore bandwidth can be gained.

This highly directional communication beam can be generated from dedicated datalink antenna like MADL or be part of the radar's operating modes.

I would assume J-20 radar will include such mode. This allows transmission and reception of good quality high bandwidth signal from long range.

If the J-20B were to have a link-16 type datalink I would think that it would use internal antenna something similar to what the F-22 has instead of external blade antenna that would degrade the J-20B's stealth capability.

Link 16 equivalent as the primary datalink for a 5th generation fighter would be somewhat obsolete.

Higher bandwidth and more stealthy directional datalinks is the norm for 5th gens, like MADL and IFDL, which should already be present on standard J-20s anyhow as a requisite baseline capability.


The twin seater obviously would offer enhanced UAV control capability compared to the standard single seater, but imo the greater significance is one of generally significantly greater enhanced battle management and command capabilities, leveraging the aircraft's sensor suite, avionics and networking capability, which along with increased automation of modern aircraft (that's likely to further advance with time as well), can allow a twin seater J-20 to take on part of the AEW&C/airborne command post mission but in a far more survivable and distributed manner.

I.e. I see a twin seater J-20S as having the greatest effect for moving towards a more distributed AEWC capability in the long term. Though for now, obviously a twin seater J-20S will complement existing traditional AEWC capabilities.
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
920
I think that there could be a whole range of different future mission types for the J-20B, not just a UCAV controller with loyal wingman drones. Expect to see different designations in the near future.
 

In_A_Dream

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
363
Reaction score
230
I think that there could be a whole range of different future mission types for the J-20B, not just a UCAV controller with loyal wingman drones. Expect to see different designations in the near future.

Also serves as a nice R&D platform for other projects.
 

Sundog

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,946
Reaction score
509
Is there a fairing over the nozzles? Something looks different there. it might just be low res image.
 

LowObservable

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,232
Reaction score
269
Managing UAS doesn't take a lot of bandwidth from the controller's end. "Sic 'im, Towser!"
 

Blitzo

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
437
Reaction score
163
Managing UAS doesn't take a lot of bandwidth from the controller's end. "Sic 'im, Towser!"

I think it depends on how many UAVs you are aiming to manage and also the sophistication of the UAVs in question, even with increasing automation. You still need a human being to take the information and options to make tactical decisions after all.

Also, the additional general battle management roles that the second human will be tasked with (which controlling UAVs is likely to be a subset).

If you want to manage a couple of dozen of stealthy UCAVs while also acting as battle management quarterback for dozens of manned fighters and supplementing traditional AEWC, all in a high end battlespace with heavy interference and large numbers of capable opfor aircraft, even automation and AI will still limit the number of tasks and decisions that a human being can make in a given time, acting as the rate limiting step.
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
920
The video looked real.

The video is definitely real.

the picture that was originally in post #909 was doctored however (and not a very good one at that), and it is that picture which Deino was referring to as fake.

So it was the picture that was the fake, I have been duped in the past with photo's allegedly showing the H-20 bomber. And now they (the photoshoppers) are at it again with the J-20B.Damn them. :mad:
 

Deino

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
1,312
The video looked real.

The video is definitely real.

the picture that was originally in post #909 was doctored however (and not a very good one at that), and it is that picture which Deino was referring to as fake.

So it was the picture that was the fake, I have been duped in the past with photo's allegedly showing the H-20 bomber. And now they (the photoshoppers) are at it again with the J-20B.Damn them. :mad:


Sorry for my confusing explanation ... only the very clear side view was fake, this one is surely real:

J-20B twin seater - taxi test - 20211027 - 1 part XL.jpg
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
920
Same here Deino, keep up the good work. It must be hard trying to get good information the latest Chinese Military Aviation projects, and to filter out which is real and which is fake.
 

red admiral

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
758
Reaction score
312
So I'm assuming that because the primer goes all the way to the nose there is no radome and hence no radar and so this will probably be a flight sciences prototype to evaluate air vehicle performance and flying qualities?
 

In_A_Dream

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
363
Reaction score
230
Does the rear seat include an ejection apparatus? Looking at the canopy... looks a little tight going up, lol. Probably just image skewing.
 

Similar threads

Top