@Bacon,

“definitely under 21m” is pretty reasonable, considering the production variant J-20 is indeed 30cm under 21m, and considering the original 200X prototypes which dominated the discussion between 2011-early 2014 (before the 201X variants came out) had much shorter tail booms, and correspondingly shorter length as well.

Using the current latest estimates for J-20’s length, as a basis to rubbish early estimates of J-20’s length, misses the point that early estimates of J-20’s length were for the shorter 200X prototypes, not for the longer tail boom 201X/production aircraft.

since its roughly 21.5m, 22-23m claim is only off by 0.5 to 1.5m
claims of 19m is off by 2.5m, 2m if you say its 19.something m

Actually it’s length is more like 20.6m, and that is for the production variant with longer tail booms…

So a 20m or even 19+m estimate for the original 200X prototype was actually fairly reasonable.

I’m not sure why you’re so interested in the original picture analyses done before we had the satellite pics of 200X prototype. Everyone’s claims were somewhat off in that early stage given the difficulty of getting a known quantity not distorted by perspective, but by the time Deino did his comparison of the J-20 with the J-15, things were basically settled.

Anyone who still believed J-20 was 19m or 22-23m after Deino’s excellent comparison picture, are the ones who should be mocked to no ends. But everyone else who made estimates before satellite pics were available, whether they thought it was 19m or 22-23m, could all be argued to be using poor methodology rather than being numbskulls.

My Apologies. Misread that.

No problem, I think the phrasing of the “equal to J-10, J-11” thing came from SDF, where someone assumed that the “subsonic performance” part of the sentence from the J-20 pilot was somehow in relation to existing fighters.

A quick skim can easily turn things into a different assumption, I know it’s happened to me before as well.

since it is over 21m, 22-23 is not that far off, especially to people saying it was 19m.

but it’s under 21m?

whats more is that when that picture of the flanker clone and j-20 on the same tarmac began circulating, people here were so sure that the j-20 is smaller than a flanker when they are comparable in size.

Well that picture was pretty accurate, because the latest picture shows J-20 is shorter than a Flanker so…

second was how people here vehemently denied china was going to buy the su-35. whats wrong with the su-35?

No idea, you tell me.

ROFLMAO

there were fools here who kept insisting it was 18 or 19 meters, but no more than 20, and that it was the size of the f-22.
Quantum was the only one who also reached a similar conclusion as mines that it was near identical with the Flanker, and his posts above prove it again.
Not sure why having the longest 5th gen fighter makes some chinabots go nuts.

anyways moving on, now that the su-35 is confirmed, which is the PLAAFs best fighter.. the su-35 or j-20?

I think it was pretty common to say it was slightly over 20m, especially after Deino’s wonderful satellite comparison picture done four years or so back. I didn’t read many people argue it was 18-19m, but maybe we read different places.

More roflmao worthy are the people who persisted that it was 22-23m long… it’s amazing they could be that off :eagerness:

my take…

the length of J-20 should be from nose to end of tail booms — not from nose to tip of tail fins. The photo was taken by a drone at a fairly low altitude, meaning the two J-20s on the sides look like the tip of the tail fins extend beyond the length of the tail booms due to perspective, but the most optimal and real view to see J-20’s length as one would judge it from a perfect profile view or plan view, is the J-20 in the middle in the center of the image.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]256756[/ATTACH]

I agree, but that’s how it’s normally reported. CM-400AKG seems to be more like a scaled down Kh-22 type weapon than YJ-12

English language media of Chinese defence developments, including Chinese defence export products, should always be cross checked across a couple of other independent reports to make sure they are accurate, because their record of accuracy is often not the best.

Along with hit points and DPS eh?

And scores for dexterity, strength and intelligence too! :rolleyes: