Page 4 – Key Publishing

zhengpao33

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 77 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 →

Author

Posts
February 27, 2013 at 9:51 pm in reply to: F-35 debate thread. #2319541

zhengpao33
Participant

J-20 looks good when it’s flying.

j20 is very beautiful and good looking. first airplane since f22 to have really full on stealth design and everything put internally. j20 only weakness is engine but production version will fix that.

it should be
1 j20
2 f22
3 j31
4 f35

t50 i am not sure if it is in the same generation

February 22, 2013 at 11:20 pm in reply to: Tornado IDS vs JH-7 series #2325731

zhengpao33
Participant

Why does this need its own thread, couldn’t it be contained in that ridiculous chinese Su-34 discussion?

Answer to both questions:
1: No. China doesn’t need Su-34 clones, they have J-16 up and coming, their roles would overlap. A stealthy striker in Su-34 or F-111s weight class, otoh would be very useful though.
2: Tornado IDS is generally compared to JH-7/A because it’s the closest comparable plane in terms of role and weight, not exactly because they have tit for tat performance specs I think.

… And I think at this point we’re all unanimously ignoring zhengpao’s posts, right? It’s remarkably more chest beating than most posts on this particular forum.

you are too antichinese and unaware of chinese airplane
jh7 is not same as tornado
jh7 is over 22m and tornado is 16m!!!!!!
jh7 can carry up to 9 weapons but tornado only 7

February 22, 2013 at 10:20 pm in reply to: MiG-29 Fulcrum #2325741

zhengpao33
Participant

Russia and China – are allies? “I beg of you…”
The Soviet Union and the Third Reich were also allies, right before the war, were friends 😉
Russian made jet engines for almost 70 years, so that China can teach them? The engine has a J-31 power 11000 – 11500 kg., The single-engine LMFS will stand with the power engine izd.30 – 17500 kg.

lmfs engine do not exist. easy to say paper vs real plane

February 22, 2013 at 10:19 pm in reply to: Tornado IDS vs JH-7 series #2325743

zhengpao33
Participant

jh7 is much bigger and much more pwerful than tornado! tornado is expensive too because it is swing wing

February 22, 2013 at 10:18 pm in reply to: Chinese Su-34 FULLBACK Copy? #2325852

zhengpao33
Participant

why china need su34 copy? su34 is 1990s bomber just like jh7. no need for two. jh7 can carry more

February 18, 2013 at 11:40 pm in reply to: MiG-29 Fulcrum #2331338

zhengpao33
Participant

This is speculation.
There’s also two-engine version, but it’s not the optimal solution, especially for the variant with a short takeoff and vertical landing. For a single-engine fighter is no need to create a new engine izd.30 – by that time will be in mass production.
It is known that LMFS compartments will accommodate four air-to-air missiles.

http://paralay.com/lmfs.html

thank you for the link. seem like russia wan tto build single engine j31. maybe easier to just buy j31. china and russia are allies, it can be done and china can allow russians to license produce it.
but for export maybe we need to split it. china can export to venezela, pakistan, north korea, and russia can export to kazakistan and belarusia

February 18, 2013 at 6:20 pm in reply to: Pak-Fa News Thread part 22 #2332038

zhengpao33
Participant

That is basically information cut and pasted directly from the thesis of the guy who wrote the POFacets software.

Why would I need to provide similar when I’m using exactly the same software (except Kopp got one of his developer buddies to rewrite it in C++ to increase performance)

The 3d model used was a 50cm wide axial cross section of the underside of the engines, the model is shown on the image with the graphs. Its an RCS test of a shaping feature, not a whole aircraft, I thought that was pretty clear. RCS is all to do with angles, I was looking at areas where the angle of incidence of a threat radar with the surface is very low (ie, bad for RCS).

I believe APA’s analysis covered 8GHz and 12GHz? There is little difference between those and mine (all x-band) and mine demonstrates exactly the same 5 lobe pattern APA observed.

You’re either not looking at the right place or not understanding the implications of what you’re looking at with APA’s charts…

Beam aspect RCS at 8GHz

J-20

PAK FA

yes yes we know j20 is more stealth than pakfa, no need to rub salt in that wound because china made stealth number one goal. russia wanted more speed and manuverability. just two different goals so we should not compare them all the time.

February 18, 2013 at 6:18 pm in reply to: MiG-29 Fulcrum #2332041

zhengpao33
Participant

Actual advantage of MIG-29K is its nose and engine power relative to
F-18C/Rafale. for twin seater that advantage gets even more.
It is not just width of nose but length. see relative to cockpit size.

yes i agree..some one say rafael is good but its not that good because it has a very small radar in a half size nose. in that way i think j10 and mig29 are superior in radar. f16 nose is also small.
if ranking nose size and radar power of this kind of size fighter it will be j10b > eurofighter > mig29 > f16 > rafael

February 16, 2013 at 5:59 pm in reply to: Winner of India's light helicopter competition is? Kamov? Eurocopter? #2369249

zhengpao33
Participant

indians dont like indian stuff thats why they always love to import weapons.

February 16, 2013 at 5:49 pm in reply to: China's Red Flag #2369252

zhengpao33
Participant

You mean SGW or whatever?

That guy was hilarious. Did not understand the concept of media.

j10 can carry sd10

February 16, 2013 at 5:48 pm in reply to: Rafale vs F-16b52+ and J-10 #2369267

zhengpao33
Participant

Even some of the oldest AESA types used in fighters lack such antenna arrangement, thats why I doubt it really is an AESA radar.

As far as I’m aware, IFF duties are integrated into the array itself in AESA radars, so it doesn’t make much sense for it to have them if it really is an AESA radar.

your bias against China is so strong

February 16, 2013 at 5:47 pm in reply to: Pak-Fa News Thread part 22 #2369269

zhengpao33
Participant

how come Russians an make engines but they cannot make it stealthy like this

February 14, 2013 at 10:09 pm in reply to: Shenyang J-21/31/F-60/AMF thread part 1 #2369989

zhengpao33
Participant

With the recent downgrades in F-35 performance targets, to what degree should we expect the J-31 to underperform as a maneuverable fighter?

j31 is superior because it has two engine not one and it does not have to worry about vertical take off problems, so it will not have the same problem as f35. i read one article that j31 is basically what the f35 should have been.

February 14, 2013 at 10:02 pm in reply to: China's Red Flag #2369996

zhengpao33
Participant

In terms of RCS the J-10 is not that much smaller than the J-11, certainly not enough to make a giant radar detection difference.

Somehow I feel you are being biased here though 😉

j10 and j11 are very two different aircraft in size. if you cannot see that you need to get glasses.

February 14, 2013 at 10:00 pm in reply to: Rafale vs F-16b52+ and J-10 #2370015

zhengpao33
Participant

The radar installed on the J-10B looks more like PESA radar than an AESA one, at this point.

no proof it is pesa. do not accuse china of having pesa and contain jealousy.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 77 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 →