sure buddy you think im making up the numbers sure w/e bro.
There is no info about J-20 and it’s stealth to begin with that is official, however there are documents from Chengdu Researchers themselves, so I have no idea where you got that from.
And if you want the document, it talks about RCS reduction for stealth/canard aircraft, so it is guaranteed stealth. Please send this “it isn’t even stealth” source, unless it is just some assumption due to someones bias
If you don’t have a source stating this, then no need to reply, as this is off-topic (or should be, as this thread is about the Su-57 against F-22, just wanted to point this out and ask)
Also, to spare time, size, while it does normally increase RCS, has been calculated to be negated further for canard aircraft like the J-20, in case RCS data just from the dimensions of it will be used, completely forgetting about stealth coating at that too.
3 Likes
You’re just posting links with guesses, the same anyone would get by typing “f22 rcs” on search engines, those are in no way primary sources, and they even contradict each other.
“0.0001 - 0.0005”. So which one is it? 1 or 5? What frequency? What angle? Where’s the rest of the information? Where’s the document to prove that number? If a document exists why do different sources give different numbers? f-16.net isn’t a source, secretproject.uk isn’t a source, stealthflanker/aircraft101 isn’t a source, your uncle Bob that worked for LM isn’t a source, and PDFs talking about general principles on stealth aren’t either.
By now I think we have heard the “real RCS is super easy to find” from you for at least a week, with nothing to support to it on.
1 Like
send the link, not a picture of something in another language,
The J-20 was detected by the Radars of other planes.
Air Chief Marshal B.S. Dhanoa’s statement that Indian Su-30MKI fighters’ radars detected Chengdu J-20s near the Tibetan border in 2018"
I dont have a bias, but when it comes to chinese tech, im sorry the chinese tech is sub-par to both the U.S and Russia. I dont care about people feelings in this matter, time and time again the chinese have caught stealing and copying everything from everyone. They dont understand how to develop their own tech, everything they have is either a Russia Rip-off or a U.S rip off, their tanks are all from soviet design, their planes are all from U.S and Russian Designs.
I talk to people who actually work and worked in companies/firm, that make tech / parts for stuff in the U.S Military.
no point getting personal
Nobody knows the real RCS anyway, and it can’t be summed up by a single number. Depends on aspect and radar band
You’re just going to get the hammer from moderation with this behavior
6 Likes
I assume you got this from IAF's Sukhoi Su-30 MKIs can detect and track Chinese Chengdu J-20 stealth fighters | India News | Zee News (business insider linked them in their article), whom is already unreliable, stating that the MKI has a AESA radar, which they don’t even have, let alone on a MKI, only the planned Super Sukhoi does. And how would it know that it’s tracking a J-20 to begin with? Not to forget that this is an Indian source, and I don’t think I have to say that India and China will try anything to prove who is better.
“Not a picture in another language” this is the entire pdf, written by Chengdu, a Chinese company, so of course it is a different language? I cannot share on forums due to it not supporting it, the only thing I have left out is the end part, which gives a summary of the document, and that is literally everything.
This will be my last comment about this, as it is going no where
3 Likes
People do that on these forums all the time, esp the russians, the mods dont do a damned thing, you got these people openly mocking the u.s and Americans, nothing happens. People make " bingo cards " when ever anyone puts up a post about something about u.s vehicles the mods do nothing. People come at me on here like qu rahn, i’ll come right back at them the same way.
We do not have our eyes everywhere, as a good amount of things are removed due to reports. If you see something that is innappropriate or in general breaks some rule, then feel free to report it. And “mockery” is here and there, it is not limited to a single side.
1 Like
i was using a.i for that to find the name of the guy, :D , the Indians have lied, and the Chinese have lied about stuff in the past as well. Nothing the chinese say is taken seriously by anyone in the Defense industry. Let alone the Military.
i’ve sent direct links to these people, nothing is done, the posts are even named " americans need to stop complaining " and none of you did anything, i can find numerous posts / threads of people outright trash talking americans. Hell gaijin staff themselves have been found talking about about Americans and we have the screenshots to prove it.
i’ll even send you proof of a Senior forum mod completely changing the definition of a word to mute me for a week.
If you want to, you can link them to me via PM (as this is long off-topic ngl), preffered as links, as things can be edited with inspect element and whatnot. As for the direct links, just report them, it’s the best and quickest way of action.
2 Likes
I’m far from being the only person that asked you for those sources when you said you had proper RCS plots.
We’ve gone through numerous RCS simulations, dug through old articles from all sorts of people, books, etc., to try finding reliable info on the matter. I even compiled some of my stuff on the other thread (Is the Su-57 really worse than the F-22? - #440 by Qu_Rahn)
You come in and say to us all that the numbers are easily found online, and when asked to produce those sources, you just evade for weeks with replies like “ez pz just google bro”, before finally posting that image and links – which really is the same old guessed/regurgitated numbers that we’ve all seen before.
I guess we’re being really mean to you by wanting you to back up your claims.
5 Likes
you have no sources, vs sources that have been put out and been out for years.
Ok, one of the officials stated the rcs of the f22 is like a marble, now comes the problem
- which marble?
marble comes in sizes of radius of 0.6 cm to 2.5cm, for which rcs is from 0.00011m2 to 0.0019m2
- what frequency?
RCS varies a lot with frequencies due to the nature of how these EM wave reflect from different sized objects, literally no value of the frequency was given in the statement
- what angle?
RCS varies a lot, even with a change of a degree in angle for stealth jet
so the “marble” figure, is it all aspect(this one is literally impossible btw)? or frontal average? or just some specific angles (highly likely)
a vague idea of the frontal aspect was given for f35 tho
So the “0.0001m2” rcs figure you have given us is like a pixel from a 4k picture, tells barely anything, if you do get rcs value (which are not sekrit documents) do mind us giving in THIS FORMAT BELOW WITH A FREQUENCY
(this is just for example)
and incase if you send us some simulations, do mind simulations give rcs value lower than IRL, however it would be helpfull if it is compared to some other jet like Su-57(which comes under this topic) under SIMILAR CONDITIONS.
2 Likes
F-22
3 Likes
F-35
2 Likes
can you translate it for me? I don’t understand Russian, but I’m still interested
For F-22, the grid is 128921 fasts, in the first graph on the Y-axis, the RCS m^2 on the X-axis is the irradiation angle. Monostatic scattering
in the second graph is bistatic scattering
F-35 124584 grid
3 Ghz and 10 Ghz lines
3 Likes
The POFACETS program gives accuracy depending on the number of cells in the grid. If you take a better grid, the results may vary. The objects are completely metallized
3 Likes
Ausair powers POFACETS simulations of su-57 also had similar resualts
its not very detailed but its way more “detailed” than the f22 and f35 given in these simulations
4 Likes