Well, yes why? You’re making his point, pretty much.

BTW, even on the YF-23s some panels were serrated, preferably those which might open and close in flight (are we seeing a pattern yet?), look at the recessed attachment point in the top right of that photo, or the following examples:

http://data.primeportal.net/hangar/bill_spidle/yf-23/YF-23_87-0801_003.JPG

http://data.primeportal.net/hangar/bill_spidle/yf-23/YF-23_87-0801_013.JPG

As you can see from the X-35 pictures though (pretty much no such treatments at all), there is a smooth spectrum of LO sophistication from demonstrator to production. So depending on where in its development an aircraft is, this type of feature is a poor indicator of the ultimate goals in RCS reduction. Not completely irrelevant, but pretty unreliable.

alot of this discussion around RCS details is missing the point.

you can approach the problem in two ways, go in all at once/with alot of testing backing it up, or go step by step and have easiler time hiting the milestones…. if one goes the second route:

external contours for RCS etc are external moldline issue, which for an initial aerodynamic/ flight controls / systems demonstrator… is essential. it shows you have a reliable tool to integrate your aero with RCS shaping.

most of the “6th gen stuff” that comes out now(wooden mockup notwithstanding) (and T-50) is at this point.

all the seregated tooth stuff can later on #2/#3 etc article as it doesn’t change the aero by a whole lot.

J-20 obviously has had more time to develope (in this regard) they are not at comparable stage.

80’s design, check better the F-35 or this

The Raptor is old, is a old design based on old technology and old tolerances

And as the Yf-22 zigzag panels decreased when they went to the F-22, and decreased again when they went to the F-35, they decreased on every new design

people can’t realize it because their raptor fetish, but such thing has happened, the F-22 and the J-20 are old engineering

The F-35 and the Pakfa are modern engineering

I happened to had a chat once with the guy who designed the fbw law on this thing. sounds great, but not much confidence after the chat.

Konnichiwa 😀

What I am trying to say is that no one in fyjs actually sees two j-20s at the same time, some people guess there are two for the same reason that you have said about the different nozzles, and some one joking about the numbers on the body of J-10 (2 20 may indicate 2 J-20, these of course are irrelevant)

Original story came from the live microbloggers.

we shall see.

Well, in fyjs, what they are talking about are the numbers on the body of J-10(see pic) 2 20, some one says that may indicate there were 2 J 20 by these numbers
http://pic.yupoo.com/emfire/AKSWKohP/SP4Y4.jpg

exciting isn’t it.

the global blog sphere merging into one big swamp.

After about hundred photos of ground test trials, I`m wondering why I havent seen at least one time the J-20 prototype with control and high-lift surfaces deployed on the wing leading/trailing edge…..:confused: . Anybody noticed the same with me? What I`m thinking now is that the trailing edge is havng one piece flaperon almost full span instead of aileron/flaps combo shown in some J-XX drawings here.

its a two piece. notice the two bulge hosting the actuator components.

dig around there is a picture with its flaps deployed.

WOW!!!!!!!!!!

That is a good picture!!!!!!!!!!!

Lots of detail for both aircraft!

yup,

confirmed holographic hud.

Finally, where have you been last several hours? Do not say you were sleeping. bcs we`re all desperately waiting for new pictures….:)

supposily you could see Mr. Lei Qiang the AF test pilot who was the program pilot on original j-10. in that giant photo.

And may be Wu Bangguo the head of National Congress. ( supposily a fan boy himself.) 😎