:eagerness:

so far all j16 prototypes featured the old radome seen on both j11b and j15. there was one j11 test aircraft featuring a new radome that might be sporting an el. steered array. So it does seem plausible at least j16 will get such an array at one point. perhaps j15 will get it too, but seeing how the demand for j15 might not be more than 24 or so planes for the next 7-8 years, it might be awhile until newlybuilt j15 get such an array. of course, retrofit of radar on already produced planes is always possible, but that could possibly include even j11b.

I have a different theory, pertaining rather to the colour of the radomes.

Basically, grey radome = AESA. The J-11 we saw with the revised radome is for AESA retrofit onto existing flankers.

Of course, J-15 tips this idea on its head because it has a grey radome and doesn’t have AESA supposedly. And of course, the idea of colour reflecting array type is laughable as well. However I do doubt the J-11 radar test plane reflects J-16 necessarily, given it only appeared well after J-16 already reached advanced testing and was beginning to enter initial service (again, supposedly).

A dedicated testbed for refitting older flankers with AESA also makes sense, given older flankers will likely retain an air to air exclusive avionics suite, meaning they won’t use J-16s radar. It would make more sense for a J-16 prototype to test its own radar anyway.

Cool — I like flying boats. :eagerness: Modern airframe design compared to 1960s US-2 also.

The nose mock up certainly looks nice, but the overall plane doesn’t look that different to the US-2. Amusingly. JL-600 is to the SH-5 what US-2 was to the US-1.

I wonder what kind of engines JL-600 will use. The Y-9s WJ-6Cs should serve it nicely

the primary goal of any government should be social harmony. I believe the arab proverb is “better to have a thousand years of tyranny than one day of anarchy.” corruption is a problem is any society. but despite the corruption, the Chinese government has clearly done more for its people than the US governemnt. the life of Chinese people is clearly better, that’s evident to every Chinese people. the same cannot be said about the US government. real income has been falling for decades in the US. the American working people are suffering while the US is waging wars around the world.

You know, you really aren’t doing that good a job to defend your points.

I mean maybe you could have said that chinese levels of income have been growing faster than the US, but in average living standards clearly the US is much better and will remain so for decades if not forever.

However there is some tangential anecdotes relevant to your statement, such as support for government polls which china is actually better than a lot of western countries in (I forget which international agency administered it might have been pew, but don’t quote me on it)

I wonder why this thread isn’t locked yet, clearly it descended into the manure pile a page or so ago.

I meant 2011 had the features. I don’t see EODAS, but it does look like an EOTS. The T-50 clearly has EODAS features. They don’t seem to be present on the J-20. Maybe I’m missing them.

The clipped wings and tails of the 2011 is new, too.

It’s pretty difficult to spot the actual positions of the apertures, isn’t it, even looking at F-35 itself. But I’d like to see where you think the T-50s EODAS are. I know it has some top side on the nose which could work, and there is the IRST ball sitting behind the cockpit looking back, but I don’t see much else.

I think the relatively small profile of EODAS “features” makes it next to impossible to discern in the first place.

Anyway, I’m relieved they included an IRST on J-20, and especially that it is faceted. They’ve shown they had attention to detail with the existing prototypes it is good that it translates to the IRST too.

Given the Compass Arrow style of wing, the acute angle of the V-tail and the shape of the nose, don’t expect much regarding range. It’s high alt, yes, but not sure if it carries the needed sensors for that. And I wld expect a lot of trim drag.

WZ-2000 doesn’t exist. The article from WCT is bull, and its source is bull as well.

And what has angle of V-tail and nose shape got to do with range in this case… Even if it were real, the major signifiers of range should be overall size, and wing geometry depending (but that may vary in importance)

PLAN thread without any good pic of LiaoNing group is boring. The pictures of the outing was awesome.

CG showing how it will look with its airgroup. It looks good, but m view is that their chose of a larger aircraft based on Su-33 was a bad decision. The perfect size was the MiG-29K class.

The first picture is a CG, just to clarify.

And I think PLAN made a deliberate decision choosing Su-33 over Mig-29, they wanted the flankers range and payload