watch the debate for a while,
jumping in to make a point on pure technical point

typically for fighters AOA control law is active at all mach upto max dive speed, what a well designed AOA command/limiter law gives you is the ability to take the aircraft to the edge and squeeze every ounce of lift with out loosing control.
what this give to the pilot is the confidence to push very close to the edge and know that the system would protect you against it.
what it also gives you is to relax some of the normal margins you have while designing airframe. i.e. relax some wing twist.
===

But,
FCS is not a cure all.

it is only going to add that one layer of flexibility in your design space that can help you to manage some very conflicting requirements otherwise has to be in the traditional tradoffs.

FCS still has to live under the design space provided by basic airframe layout.
i.e. higher wingloading would mean at lower speed your G is capped. vs a lower wingloading.

====

Also on the sustained g.

aircraft like these all have speed stability, what is that mean.
that means g would bleed off means you can’t sustain High Gs. for the longer term, and for longer term your speed comes down to some point.
realistically you can only sustain about 2-3 gs.
The high g-s are pretty much transient phenomenom.
this is where the big engine helps.

Well those pictures put paid to any idea that they might be fitting a catapult to Varyag. They have porta-cabins exactly where they would have to put a trench for a waist catapult. .

Yeah but what’s underneath those porta-cabins!:diablo:

Its not who taught them that matters but what they do for themselves. A nobel winning engineer can teach hundreds and thousands of students over his career. There is no guarantee that any one of them will also win a nobel prize. OTOH, there is nothing stopping someone from winning a nobel prize just because he was not taught by someone who won one before.
.

How do you think people learn in Aviation industry?
working under/with experienced people.

don;t ever underestimate the importance of right leadership in this industry.

Aircraft are designed by people not countries you know. The people who designed the great soviet fighters of old are no long around. The current crop of Russian designers have done nothing but come up with endless mods and re-hashes of existing designs before the PAKFA.

The current generation of Chinese designers working on the J20 have the J10 and JF17 under their belts. Both of which showed far greater ingenuity and innovation.

Not really,

current crop of Russian Engineers are led by men worked under the tutelage of the greats.

If you look at the current top people in CHina, what was their experience before JF-17 and J-10?

J-10 was really a learning series that built the foundation for 611.

btw, both 611 and 601 has quite a bit of Russian engineers on its payroll.

actually its the opposite
its a “mines is shorter than yours” debate as some people feel uncomfortable with the large size of the J-20 and claims that because of it, its more of a bomber.

in an ideal world people want their fighter jets to have the long range radar and flight radius of a large fighter, in a profile of a smaller air frame… in the end they get compromises.. ala Typhoid and Rafale.

yeah this is really a silly debate.
technical specification really is derived ultimately from operational requirements.

If you want long range, 2 pilots, Mach-2.3, and shoot missiles you will get F-4 Phantom II,
If you want to dog fight at low speed you will get a Mig-17.

The more I see the J-20 the more it reminds me of several other aircraft. It has a tail reminiscent of a McDonnell-Douglas design, the canards of the Rafale, the nose of the Raptor, the engine size of the Foxhound, the intake bumps of the JF-17, and the wing form of the J-10. It’s a ‘Frankenjet’.

…and I might add the canards concept is clearly borrowed from the Wright Flyer.

I don’t care how long it is. I want to know how much that thing weighs!!

well, you just have to carry a big scale and walk into CAC.

just for fun. 😀

oh no those Chinos are cloning f-16s!
😉

relax it is just some foreign technology analysis work.