Photos and analysis of China's J-20 fighter as it nears first flight

[Matej]

I think that there is the significant difference between being skeptical about the posted material and being skeptical about the existence of the 5th generation fighter itself. I ask everybody to keep the common sense. To replace the knowledge with the belief is the best way to be a fool.

I kept my screaming and the bottle of Champagne until I saw the high-res highly detailed PAK FA photos on the official manufacturer web and there will be no difference in this case.

 

[Husar]

I think that there is the significant difference between being skeptical about the posted material and being skeptical about the existence of the 5th generation fighter itself.

Well said.

I'm looking forward to seeing a proper picture of the J-20....the sooner the better

 

[Matej]

I must admitt that I was under the strong temptation to "manufacture" one image on my own and then make the test arguing with the other people (believers) that will immediately start to advocate it as the genuine photo. All what I ask is that you shouldn't loose your common sense.

 

[Foxglove]

Matej,
Did you notice that the fin in the latest photo is all-moving, F-117 style, as somebody wrote before, rather than the Berkut type?
Secondly, didn't anybody notice the large Soviet/Russian style red star on that same fin? The Chinese DO NOT apply such markings on fins, they just repeat the wing/fuselage markings, resembling those of the USAF, only red/yellow in colour, plus the ideogram in the centre of the star.
The first pic from behind the bushes appears to show an object which is a strange blend of the F-111(nose and centroplane), F-15(cockpit and intake area) and the Su-47(fins). It doesn't look like it's a canard configuration at all.
Conclusion: it could be a fake after all. Please note, it's not Xmas carols we're discussing here, and I bet Chinese counterintelligence is busy here, producing misinformation: the later the enemy gets to know our weapons the better.

 

[Deino]

 

[sferrin]

Reminds me of these:

 

[Dreamfighter]

Could be, when keeping in mind that last pic from almost front-on view. B)
Would look like hell of a beast if that configuration would prove to be true, and more advanced/"futuristic" then I am/was expecting their J-XX or J-20 to be.

When I looked at that 1st blurry pic from beyond the trees, I thought F-111...
Then with the better side-view one, I started to agree with some of the sceptics here; probably F-22 front-fuselage and S-47 Berkut aft-fusalage. Perhaps F-15 mid-fuselage in between?!
With the 1st front-view one, I thought this again looks to much like a F-22's frontview; the arrangement and underline of the fusalage/intakes is (almost?) exactly the same, positioning of the undercarriage and undercarriage-baydoors, canopy, etc...

But the last pic with that slight off-front view, which also shows some of the side and where the canards are quite clearly visible, makes me doubt though... could this one be the real thing after all??... ???
Hmm... the design-team most have mixed-up their espionage-files and their 7th generation copy-machine came up with a F-22/Rafale/S-47-hybrid...
(just joking, no insultary sarcasm towards the Chinese intended)

Anyway, I hope they won't produce more then 187 of them... :

 

[Foxglove]

On the Black Horizon forum somebody has supplied the NATO reporting name for the J-20: Firefang. On the www.defence.pk forum somebody claims that the fin star insignia I've questioned are genuine, there's even artwork showing a close-up of the fin with white 01 number: time will tell if it's true.
A number of forum members there claim that the actual designation is J-13 and J-14, the former related to a 4.5 gen strike fighter, the latter to a 5 gen interceptor.
Chinese Military Aviation have these shots of the nose and cockpit mockup of the J-20, or whatever you call it:

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Best so far...

http://www.china-defense.com/smf/index.php?topic=5373.120

 

[Dreamfighter]

Jee... it is huge!

Though it still looks like they put a F-22 front section on a S-47 aft's and added canards and (all-moving?) canted tailfins, I now think there's a good chance it is genuine and this is a fresh stealthy upper-class (strike?)fighter...

 

[RSF]

It looks really long, although the dimensions still look fairly balanced. The twin tails are widely spaced, and they are on the small side. Does this plane have 3-D TVC? The large single lower DSI intake from the mock-up CG art that hit the net two years ago has been replaced by more realistic intakes on each side.

The long chines that appeared in the earlier nose section and cockpit simulator posted by Foxglove appear in this image.

 

[windingroad]

rumour says the weapon bay of J20 is much larger than F22,even can carry air to surface missile

 

[seruriermarshal]

Seems like huge , it must be a bomber .

 

[Foxglove]

Assuming Photoshop hasn't been used extensively here, please note the very long main gear legs, YF-22-style main gear bay door and, possibly, double-wheel blocks, slightly reminiscent of the Su-24 gear. The intakes from this distance seem blended indeed, which poses questions on how the boundary layer problem was solved. The tailfin shape is an evident F-117 rip-off.

 

[Trident]

The front views, if genuine, would suggest a single wheel per MLG leg.

 

[seruriermarshal]

any information about left wheel ? strange

 

[Deino]

...

 

[Foxglove]

Well, the aircraft for sure is either CGI, Photoshop, the real thing or a mockup- note the unnatural sheen of the cockpit canopy.

 

[Otaku]

Gotta be a striker. Very impressive statement of intent, clearly they've come on leaps & bounds, China's neighbours will be nervous.

 

[flateric]

Why I think I can bet that Chinese aircraft industry can't currently build frameless canopy transparency of *that* size?

 

[LowObservable]

I wouldn't bet against it. Done 20 years ago on F-22, lots of how-to and how-not-to data floating around, and I will bet that not every USB port in PPG Aerospace was superglued shut in 2008.

 

[Trident]

Why would they not be able to?

 

[frank]

What gets me is that 'Soviet star' on the vertical(s). Why would they put a star like that rather than their own smaller insignia?

 

[flanker]

What gets me is that 'Soviet star' on the vertical(s). Why would they put a star like that rather than their own smaller insignia?

PLA first august star.

 

[flateric]

well, we still trying to make moderately sized 1525x805 mm frameless canopy glass for T-50...well, Chinese were always good with their porcelain ;D

 

[Mike Pryce]

This is an impressive looking plane. Assuming it is real, which I do, otherwise I wouldn't keep checking forums every hour to see if it has flown!

Interesting thought from Bill Sweetman, on AvWeek Ares blog, that it is possibly derived in part from the MDC JAST/X-36 studies, e.g 'lambda' wing. http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=2392.0. Would be great to discover it's big in order to get all the required lift jets/gas driven lift fans in!

Anyway, it does look like it has long range in mind. Damn, maybe Carlo Kopp has been right all along - 'they' are coming for the Aussies. Well, for what's left of the Aussies after they lose the Ashes! ;D

 

[JFC Fuller]

Ha ha, I had forgotten about Crazy Kopp- whether this is real or not it is going to send him into fits of rage! Ha!

 

[sferrin]

I almost hope it is real if only to keep the F-22 line open or incentivize it's replacement.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

PLA first august star.

Except all PLA aircraft wear this star inside a pair of red bars. So why would they decide to stop this practise now? Would be like USAF rolling out the YF-22 with just a white star in a blue circle or the RAF the first Typhoon with a red dot. There are many highly dubious issues with these photos. The “I want to believe” crowd is out in force but one really should wait until there is a public announcement. Military investment is part of the CCP’s media strategy so they won’t keep it secret as soon as they have a new aircraft to show off.

 

[Trident]

Except all PLA aircraft wear this star inside a pair of red bars. So why would they decide to stop this practise now? Would be like USAF rolling out the YF-22 with just a white star in a blue circle or the RAF the first Typhoon with a red dot. There are many highly dubious issues with these photos. The “I want to believe” crowd is out in force but one really should wait until there is a public announcement. Military investment is part of the CCP’s media strategy so they won’t keep it secret as soon as they have a new aircraft to show off.

Yeah, the star is a bit baffling ??? On the other hand, why would somebody who is proficient enough at image manipulation to fake convincing, geometrically consistent pictures of an aircraft from multiple perspectives make such a basic mistake? I mean, other than this I haven't been able to spot a single smoking gun here that couldn't be explained by low resolution after cropping photos taken from afar.

Maybe CAC is having us on and they omitted the bars to discredit any leaked photos Hell, I don't know, but I have to confess that my scepticism is waning as time goes on. Clearly, *something* is up!

EDIT: Then again, should we really be surprised that a first prototype (a very significant one no less) would wear non-standard markings? I suppose your first 5th generation fighter would qualify as justification for applying special insignia. Having looked around at a.net, there is something of a precedent with the PLAAF:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/China---Air/Chengdu-J-7GB/1711718/L/

What say you?

 

[LowObservable]

"On the other hand, why would somebody who is proficient enough at image manipulation to fake convincing, geometrically consistent pictures of an aircraft from multiple perspectives make such a basic mistake?"

Ha! That's what they want you to think! ;D

 

[sferrin]

I mean, other than this I haven't been able to spot a single smoking gun here that couldn't be explained by low resolution after cropping photos taken from afar.

Did you mis QuadroFX's pic on post #38? It's pretty damning evidence that this is a fake.

 

[LowObservable]

Really? I think the fact that the back end superficially resembles the Su-47 and the front end looks like an F-22 could be explained by requirements and technology, rather than those being the sources for fake photos.

 

[mz]

The background indeed has distinct parts and makes it look like it's chopped and glued from multiple aircraft shots...

 

[Trident]

I mean, other than this I haven't been able to spot a single smoking gun here that couldn't be explained by low resolution after cropping photos taken from afar.

Did you mis QuadroFX's pic on post #38? It's pretty damning evidence that this is a fake.

I concur with LO. There is a great deal of similarity in the lines between the supposed J-20, the F-22 nose and the Su-47 rear - but no indication that the image (the one I first posted here) is actually a composite. No image artifacts or interruptions in the noise pattern where the "source pictures" join, no lighting mismatches, no alignment/perspective errors, no occlusion (or lack thereof) where it isn't supposed to be. I'll grant you that the low resolution would be a great help in hiding this type of defect, but even so it would take good source material and absolutely *mad* skills to pull it off, IMHO. And that's just one photo, there are now multiple that clearly show the same "aircraft" from several (often radically different) angles with no obvious inconsistencies. Some established fakes released concurrently by freeloaders not withstanding, it seems unlikely to me that you'd be able to find enough matching source images to produce so many good composites.

 

[sferrin]

I mean, other than this I haven't been able to spot a single smoking gun here that couldn't be explained by low resolution after cropping photos taken from afar.

Did you mis QuadroFX's pic on post #38? It's pretty damning evidence that this is a fake.

I concur with LO. There is a great deal of similarity in the lines between the supposed J-20, the F-22 nose and the Su-47 rear - but no indication that the image (the one I first posted here) is actually a composite. No image artifacts or interruptions in the noise pattern where the "source pictures" join, no lighting mismatches, no alignment/perspective errors, no occlusion (or lack thereof) where it isn't supposed to be. I'll grant you that the low resolution would be a great help in hiding this type of defect, but even so it would take good source material and absolutely *mad* skills to pull it off, IMHO. And that's just one photo, there are now multiple that clearly show the same "aircraft" from several (often radically different) angles with no obvious inconsistencies. Some established fakes released concurrently by freeloaders not withstanding, it seems unlikely to me that you'd be able to find enough matching source images to produce so many good composites.

Hardly requires "mad" skills. Start with a 3D model of your lashup and you're 85% there.

 

[fightingirish]

Here are a few more "leaks" + a nice painting (actually by the artist, who "painted" the PLAAF-J-7 review ...)
Deino

Another painting

Source: CHINA DEFENSE BLOG - Chinese Stealth in Plain Sight: The Curious Emergence of the J-14 Fighter

 

[sferrin]

Would be hilarious if it were actually real. All those fools who said "why do we need an F-22, Russia and China are decades from anything like that" would be choking on crow. ;D

 

[Trident]

Hardly requires "mad" skills. Start with a 3D model of your lashup and you're 85% there.

That's a completely different issue, in that case the picture in post #38 has precisely zero relevance as evidence for the photo being fake or not : So take your pick, is it fake because it resembles the Raptor and Su-47 or is it fake just because?

 

[sferrin]

Hardly requires "mad" skills. Start with a 3D model of your lashup and you're 85% there.

That's a completely different issue, in that case the picture in post #38 has precisely zero relevance as evidence for the photo being fake or not : So take your pick, is it fake because it resembles the Raptor and Su-47 or is it fake just because?

It's fake because it's a lashup. The point of a 3D model is for checking perspective in one's image lashup. I'd have thought that would be obvious. If they had "mad" skills we'd be looking at something more like the attached than something that needs it's flaws camoflaged by a ton of noise and blurring.