J20三號機出現...
J-20... The New Generation Fighter III
作者:忘了怎麼辦 發布日期:2012-10-28 瀏覽:17563
譯文簡介:
背景：前些日子，網上出現了J20的新圖，而新圖清晰的顯示出這架J20是灰色的雷達罩。不知是新機2003還是2002安裝了雷達，而近幾天陸續流出的圖片有力的支持了後者。譯文既是照片出來後的部分內容
譯文來源:
原創翻譯：龍騰網
背景：前些日子，網上出現了J20的新圖，而新圖清晰的顯示出這架J20是灰色的雷達罩。不知是新機2003還是2002安裝了雷達，而近幾天陸續流出的圖片有力的支持了後者。譯文既是照片出來後的部分內容
AssassinsMace ：This might be disappointing a bit.
這可能會有點令人失望。
plawolf ：Why would this be disappointing?
They would not have removed the pitot tube if they still needed it, that could give us a little insight into how far along the testing stage they have reached now. The fact that they were able to retrofit a radar (presumably with full avionics as well) into 2002 only reinforces my earlier point that the J20 prototypes are far more refined designs and much closer to the production model than the first X-Planes.
The fact that they decided to take 2002 offline for some time in order to effect this installation of the radar would also suggest that the 3rd prototype is some way off. Since there can be no question about funding or CAC's ability to build more prototypes if they so wished, I believe this might be an indication that significant changes are planned for 2003. Again, that is a good sign since the earlier such big changes are made, the less time it would take ultimately to certify the plane.
We all knew from the start that the J20 as it is is not the intended production model, and I am hopeful that 2003 may see the introduction of a new stealthy nozzle design, or maybe even Ws15s, although admittedly, the later is a bit of a long shot since we have heard so little about the WS15 thus far.
這為什麼會令人失望呢？
如果他們還需要空速管，就不會去除它，這也讓我們了解了一些他們已經到達的測試階段。他們會給2002裝上雷達（可能是全航電狀態）的這件事，只會強化我早前的觀點：J20的原型機會更進一步的改良她的設計，並且比第一批X-Planes.【譯者註：(X-planes)是一系列的美國試驗飛機和直升機（及部分火箭），以用於測試尖端新技術】更接近與量產型。
他們決定讓2002脫機一段時間去裝好雷達也暗示着距第三架原型機的出現還有一段路。從那裡可知如果他們願意的話，資金或成飛建造更多原型機的能力是沒有問題的，我相信這可能是一個信號：為2003重大的改變做準備。再次，那是一個很好的信號，從早期就做如此大的改變，她就會用更少的時間最終定型。
從開始我們就知道現在的J20不是預期的量產型，我希望在2003可以看到採用新的隱形噴嘴設計，或者甚至是WS15s，雖然都知道，不久就能實現那是不現實的，迄今為止我們很少聽到WS15的消息。
Deino：For me actually surprising ....
實際上對我是一個驚喜
airsuperiority ：
Originally Posted by DeinoFor me actually surprising ....
so much for 2003
2003到此為止
latenlazy： Originally Posted by airsuperiority
so much for 2003
Does it really matter? The more important story is that they've moved onto avionics testing. The bottom line is where we are on the tests, not how many airframes there are.
這真的有關係麼？更重要的是他們已經轉移到了航電測試方面。最重要的是我們測試到哪裡，而不是有多少架飛機。
kyanges ： Originally Posted by latenlazy
Does it really matter? The more important story is that they've moved onto avionics testing. The bottom line is where we are on the tests, not how many airframes there are.
I think it matters for the reasons plawolf posted. I agree with you that it isn't about how many airframes there are, but as he said, this latest development sheds light on what's being tested in which airframe, which gives insight, however limited, into how the program is being run, maybe even what stage it's at, and that makes it matter.
我認為重要的原因plawolf 已經寫了，我同意你不在於有多少飛機，但正如他所說的，這最新的發展被發現於，在哪一架飛機上正在試驗什麼技術，然而由於限制（使我們沒有什麼信息），而飛機給了我們觀察發現的機會，看到什麼程序正在進行，可能甚至進行到哪一階段，這就讓那（有多少飛機）很重要。
latenlazy ： Originally Posted by kyanges
I think it matters for the reasons plawolf posted. I agree with you that it isn't about how many airframes there are, but as he said, this latest development sheds light on what's being tested in which airframe, which gives insight, however limited, into how the program is being run, maybe even what stage it's at, and that makes it matter.
I meant the idea that more airframes=more progress. Otherwise completely agree.
我保留對“更多飛機=更多科目”的意見。其他的完全同意。
Air Force Brat ：This might be disappointing a bit.
Not really, its nice to know that at least one of our girls is still at Chengdu, and we are still able to see her on occasion, it does I think bear witness that things may have slowed down a bit, much like our own F-35, where lrip has been scaled back to accomodate the very normal detail work of bringing an entirely new aircraft to developmental maturity. There are myriad details and tweaks that must be not only made, but integrated into the aircraft in a way that does not compromise what you have already accomplished, which in the case of the J-20 is a great deal, but you will recall that I have previously forcast such a ramping down for these chores.
沒有啊，很高興知道至少我們還有一個公主在成都，我們還可以不時的看到她，這讓我認為研製進展會慢下來，很像我們自己的F35，小批量試生產已經縮減，使之適應那些把完全新的飛機發展到成熟飛機的正常詳細的工作。有無數瑣碎和苦惱的必須做的事，不是只是生產出飛機，而是用不與已經完成的工作相矛盾的方式下集成一架飛機，這些情況對於J20會有很多，但你會記得，我已經事先預測（進展）會減慢由於那些瑣碎的東西。
Air Force Brat ： Originally Posted by airsuperiority
so much for 2003
Actually air, I am dissapointed myself after I thought about it a bit, I am still glad to see 2002 and that air ops continue, and that is a good sign, looks like no Major trouble, and the avionics testing is a postive step toward certification.
air，事實上，我對自己有點失望在我想這一點時，我也高興看到2002氣動外形的工作還在繼續，這是一個好的信號，看起來沒有大的問題，航電測試是一個向定型前進的積極步驟。
Lion ：THis means 2003 still has chance of WS-15 with 2D nozzle. I am infact happy!
這意味着2003還有機會裝二維噴嘴的WS15。我着實高興！
latenlazy ： Originally Posted by Lion
THis means 2003 still has chance of WS-15 with 2D nozzle. I am infact happy!
It'll still probably be a 3D TVC...
它將可能還是三維矢噴口（譯者註：TVC ：Thrust vector control的縮寫，意為推力矢量控制，以下譯為矢噴口）
Air Force Brat ： Originally Posted by latenlazy
It'll still probably be a 3D TVC...
I hope you're right, and it will reinforce what I have said all along, but as I have stated elsewhere the supermanueverability qual to be fifth gen is now up in the air? We're not going to see the J-20 standing on its tail at airshows without TVC, ain't gonna happen. US has given the F-35 outstanding manueverability but left off the TVC, I wouldn't be surprised to see the J-20 go into serial production without it either, the Eng may be right after all as he is about lots of other stuff. In my opinion the J-20 objectives as of today are stealthy, fast, with the ability to supercruise, outstanding manueverability, advanced avionics and weapons systems. The F-22 has issues with life support because its capability to manuever is beyond that of many pilots to tolerate, and no I don't think the answer is UAV, I do think that is why many of the newer aircraft are where they are today. Its also the main reason that Sino Air is NOT enamored with TVC, otherwise we would have already seen it on one of the Flanker variants?
希望你是對的，這將鞏固我一向所說的，但正如我在別處說的，對於五代機來說，超機動的定義現在還沒有確定？我們不會看到J20在航展上站在自己的尾巴上而沒有矢噴嘴，這是不會發生的（譯者註：想看到什麼叫做站在自己尾巴上麼，請點擊http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDY3NDMwNjQ0.html）。美國已經給了F35出色的機動能力但不用矢噴口，我不會感到驚訝說J20也沒有它就已經投入生產，這項工程也許是對的，畢竟他準備有很多其他的東西。在我看來，J20現在的目標是隱身、快速、有超音速巡航能力、出色的機動性、先進的航電和武器系統。F22在生命維持系統出現問題，是因為其機動能力極限遠超許多飛行員的承受，還有我並不認為解決的辦法是（使用）無人機，我認為那是為什麼很多更新的飛機有它們的今天。這也是中國航空沒有傾心於推力矢量控制的主要原因，不然我們會看到一類變形的側衛？
latenlazy ： Originally Posted by Air Force Brat
I hope you're right, and it will reinforce what I have said all along, but as I have stated elsewhere the supermanueverability qual to be fifth gen is now up in the air? We're not going to see the J-20 standing on its tail at airshows without TVC, ain't gonna happen. US has given the F-35 outstanding manueverability but left off the TVC, I wouldn't be surprised to see the J-20 go into serial production without it either, the Eng may be right after all as he is about lots of other stuff. In my opinion the J-20 objectives as of today are stealthy, fast, with the ability to supercruise, outstanding manueverability, advanced avionics and weapons systems. The F-22 has issues with life support because its capability to manuever is beyond that of many pilots to tolerate, and no I don't think the answer is UAV, I do think that is why many of the newer aircraft are where they are today. Its also the main reason that Sino Air is NOT enamored with TVC, otherwise we would have already seen it on one of the Flanker variants?
If the J-20 weren't meant to be super-maneuverable they would not have gone with the design they did, so no, I don't think that requirement is scrapped.
I think they simply didn't adopt a TVC capable engine in the flanker because it was unnecessary. Installing TVC on the flanker would have meant more flight tests on an engine they only just started cautiously introducing (the WS-10A). A lot of reasons why any marginal gain in performance would have been neutralized by concerns for potential logistical headaches.
Engineer's assessment that they could start production with a different engine from the WS-15 isn't something I disagree with, but that scenario has been thrown around as a worse case scenario in case the WS-15 poses the same problems in its developmental process that the WS-10 has. There's some good chance that that won't be the case, so I'm also open to the possibility that by the time the J-20 moves into production everything about the aircraft will be finalized, including engines. Right now we simply can't presume either which way for sure because we have had zero news on the WS-15. There were occasional trickles of information up till around the J-20's revelation. Then nothing.
I should also say that the TVC requirement is necessary for more than maneuverability. They also need TVC for cruise flight to minimize surface deflections.
如果J20不打算擁有超級機動性，他們不會如此設計，所以不會的，我不認為要求（譯者：即超級機動性）會被廢除。
我認為他們沒有採用矢量發動機在側衛上是因為沒必要。安裝矢量噴嘴在側衛上意味着更多的飛行測試在剛開始謹慎起步的發動機上(WS-10A)。有很多理由說明了任何飛機的最佳表現都會被制約於潛在的後勤問題。
工程師評估他們可以用一個與WS15不同的發動機開始生產不是我不贊成的事情，但那是在方案已經充分考慮到壞的情況：WS15出現像WS10研製過程中出現的問題。有一些好的機會那不會出現這種情況，所以我認為仍然有可能當J20投入正式生產時，飛機的每個零件都會做好，包括發動機。現在我們仍不能認為是哪一種情況，因為我們沒有WS15的任何信息。只有偶爾微小的信息直到J20揭秘。不再有什麼。我還認為說，推力矢量控制的要求不僅僅是為了機動性，他們還需要推力矢量控制來使飛機巡航時，最大限度的減小表面變化。
Air Force Brat ： Originally Posted by latenlazy
If the J-20 weren't meant to be super-maneuverable they would not have gone with the design they did, so no, I don't think that requirement is scrapped.
I think they simply didn't adopt a TVC capable engine in the flanker because it was unnecessary. Installing TVC on the flanker would have meant more flight tests on an engine they only just started cautiously introducing (the WS-10A). A lot of reasons why any marginal gain in performance would have been neutralized by concerns for potential logistical headaches.
Engineer's assessment that they could start production with a different engine from the WS-15 isn't something I disagree with, but that scenario has been thrown around as a worse case scenario in case the WS-15 poses the same problems in its developmental process that the WS-10 has. There's some good chance that that won't be the case, so I'm also open to the possibility that by the time the J-20 moves into production everything about the aircraft will be finalized, including engines. Right now we simply can't presume either which way for sure because we have had zero news on the WS-15. There were occasional trickles of information up till around the J-20's revelation. Then nothing.I agree with everything you said with the exception of my point about the Flanker, IF? they were in fact developing TVC, they WOULD be testing it on the Flanker, because the Flanker is a proven airframe and performs beautifully with TVC! IMHO, but also remember I Am the AFB, and I do have the Heart of a True Birdman! so in my own Humble opinion, they are not really interested in TVC, and it is likely the J-20 will enter serial production without it...........but, if Romney wins, big if, and if Romney did in fact put the F-22 back in production, an even bigger if?, that Will all change! Lots of ifs?
我同意你全部看法除對側衛的以外。有如果麼？他們事實上在發展TVC，他們會將之測試在側衛上，因為側衛已經被證明在配備了TVC後機身與表現非常漂亮！謙虛點說，但同樣記得我是空軍基地人員，我也有勇氣做一個真正的飛行員！所以，以我之拙見，他們對TVC不是很感興趣，然後很有可能J20會批量生產而沒有TVC。。。。但，如果羅姆尼勝了，並如果羅姆尼讓F22重新投入生產，甚至一個更大的如果呢？然後，一切都將會改變！會有那麼多如果麼？
latenlazy ： Originally Posted by Air Force Brat
I agree with everything you said with the exception of my point about the Flanker, IF? they were in fact developing TVC, they WOULD be testing it on the Flanker, because the Flanker is a proven airframe and performs beautifully with TVC! IMHO, but also remember I Am the AFB, and I do have the Heart of a True Birdman! so in my own Humble opinion, they are not really interested in TVC, and it is likely the J-20 will enter serial production without it...........but, if Romney wins, big if, and if Romney did in fact put the F-22 back in production, an even bigger if?, that Will all change! Lots of ifs?
One of the logistical headaches of installing TVC into the flanker would be writing new FCS. That alone probably makes it not worthwhile.
We already know China has TVC technology. They demonstrated a TVC capable WS-10 in 2006. The individual testing of the nozzles can be performed without an air frame. Furthermore, it would seem pointless to do flight performance tests of a TVC capable engine on a different air frame from the one it's intended to be installed in. Then again, no I'm no expert.
將TVC用於側衛產生的一個後勤問題將是得編寫新的火控系統。單獨進行這個可能使這件事變得不值得。我們知道中國已經有了ＴＶＣ技術。他們在２００６年驗證了一台ＴＶＣ可行的ＷＳ１０。並獨立驗證噴嘴運行在不帶機身的情況下。此外，用可行的ＴＶＣ發動機在異於打算要使用的飛機的機身上做飛行試驗顯得無意義。再次聲明，我不是專家。
Air Force Brat ： Originally Posted by latenlazy
One of the logistical headaches of installing TVC into the flanker would be writing new FCS. That alone probably makes it not worthwhile.
We already know China has TVC technology. They demonstrated a TVC capable WS-10 in 2006. The individual testing of the nozzles can be performed without an air frame. Furthermore, it would seem pointless to do flight performance tests of a TVC capable engine on a different air frame from the one it's intended to be installed in. Then again, no I'm no expert.
My point is that they must not be interested in it, or it would be on the Flanker, period, exclamation point! The Flanker is still a big deal to the PLAAF and PLAN, and it is quite capable and their go to bird for the immediate future. While I anticipate that the J-20 will eventually be their top line Air Force bird, and I anticipate that the F-60 will become their stealthy naval fighter, the J11, J15, J16 all say that I'm right. No, I have not forgotten about the J-10, I promise.
The J-20 is in full scale development stage and making outstanding progress, while I wish I were wrong, I doubt very seriously that it will ever incorporate that tech into the aircraft, or it would be on another platform in full scale development, I can almost certainly assure you that it is not, I do wish I were wrong, and in fact I could be, but after all I am the AFB.
我的意思是他們並沒有把興趣放在那裡，否則的話側衛上會裝有的。。。！側衛依然是中國空軍和海軍的重要角色，它是非常優秀的，他們在不久的將來。同時我預測J20將最終成為空軍最頂層的飛機，F60會成為海軍隱形戰機，J11，J15，J16都驗證了我的說法、不，我保證我沒有忘記J10.
J20到了全面進展的階段並取得了出色的進步。而我希望我是錯的，我非常嚴重的懷疑J20將可能整合那些技術進到飛機中，或者它會在另外一個平台上全面發展。我可以幾乎可以向你保證那不行，我希望我是錯的，實際我也會，但畢竟我是一名空軍基地人員。
jackliu：Does anyone have any knowledge on general aircraft prototype testing stages?
Such as, first they test aerodynamic, then sensor, then weapon integration etc.... I'm sure this is open source information.
誰有關於原型機大致測試階段的任何資料麼？
比如，首先測試氣動外形，然後是傳感器，再然後是武器系統等。。我覺得這是公開的資源。
Deino ：Just a question regarding no. 2002 ! Does anyone know when the last confirmed flight or at least sighting of that prototype was /or took place.
I have to admit even with these latest images I have a strange feeing that the airframe we've seen a few days ago is different to our "old" friend 2002. As such could it be that CAC indeed rolled out 2003 and in parallel prepared 2002 with the radar/radome changes ??
I can't think that it is so simple to change a radome + radar (if installed actually) so quick on a prototype ....
只有一個關於2002的問題！有誰知道最近一次確定飛行在什麼時候或看到原型機是在什麼地方。
我必須承認即使有這些最新的照片，我對機身還是有奇怪的感覺，這幾天出現的飛機不同於我們的“老”朋友2002.這可能是成飛確實拖出了2003並同時準備給2002換雷達/天線罩？？
我不認為更換天線罩+雷達（如果確實安裝了）會如此簡單。
Air Force Brat：
Originally Posted by Deino
Just a question regarding no. 2002 ! Does anyone know when the last confirmed flight or at least sighting of that prototype was /or took place.
I have to admit even with these latest images I have a strange feeing that the airframe we've seen a few days ago is different to our "old" friend 2002. As such could it be that CAC indeed rolled out 2003 and in parallel prepared 2002 with the radar/radome changes ??
I can't think that it is so simple to change a radome + radar (if installed actually) so quick on a prototype ....
DeinoI would imagine Deino that all the substructure was installed as the prototype was being built, even the wiring harness and possibly even the cockpit display, and its also possible that a ballast weight to duplicate the radar and antennae were mounted under the old nose cone. Even certified aircraft fly with ballast until avionics can be installed, as you know weight and balance of all aircraft is critical, but particularly a prototype that is establishing operating parameters, and may be operated outside of the aircrafts normal limits in order to set those safety zones. I believe for instance that when establishing the g limits, the aircraft is flown to 150% of those limits in order to have a margin for error?
Deino ，我可以想象，當原型機造好時所有的子結構已經被安裝，甚至線束或可能連座艙顯示器都已安裝，也有可能原先在雷達罩里的壓載物是要安裝的雷達和天線的復製品。即使都知道飛機會帶着壓載物試飛直到安裝航空電子設備，但正如你所知道的重量和平衡對所有飛機
是很重要的，不過特別的，原型機是建立操作參數的，為了建立那些安全的參數範圍，操作可能會超出飛機正常時的極限。我認為比如當要建立重心極限時，為了得到誤差的範圍，飛機會飛過那些極限的150%
AssassinsMace：Well I was disappointed a bit because it reduces the chance we can see two J-20s up in the air at once in a pic.
Is it possible they're playing tricks? Remember how they were tricking watchers with the numbering of the first two 052Cs? There would be a number painted on the hull and then it was gone having people speculate there were more built. The first pics of the the "2003" did not have a number painted on where it was usually (away from the removed panels) and now you see "2002" with a gray nose cone.
話說我有點失望因為這減少了我們看到飛行的兩架J20在一起的照片的機會。
這有可能是他們在惡作劇麼？還記得他們在第一批兩艘052C的編號上是如何戲弄大眾的麼？那編號是塗在一塊面板上的，然後就拿走了，讓人推測有更多的正在建造。先前流出的所謂“2003”是沒有編號在通常的位置的（面板被拿走了），之後出現現在這個灰色雷達罩的2002
Bltizo ： Originally Posted by AssassinsMace
Well I was disappointed a bit because it reduces the chance we can see two J-20s up in the air at once in a pic.
Is it possible they're playing tricks? Remember how they were tricking watchers with the numbering of the first two 052Cs? There would be a number painted on the hull and then it was gone having people speculate there were more built. The first pics of the the "2003" did not have a number painted on where it was usually (away from the removed panels) and now you see "2002" with a gray nose cone.
I think we should wait it out for a few weeks and see if 2002 with the black nose returns. If it does, then we can confirm there are two 2002s with different noses. If many weeks pass and we only see the 2002 with the grey nose, then we'll have to assume there's only one 2002 and they just waited to fit the actual radar aboard.
我覺得我們可以看看幾個星期後，黑色雷達罩的2002是否回來。如果是，那麼我們就可以確定有兩架不同的2002.如果幾個星期過去，依然只看到灰色雷達罩的2002，然後即可確定只有一架2002而那樣做只是為了安裝真正的雷達。
Engineer ：If 2002 was going to have a radar installed all along, then why did it not have a gray radar dome in the first place? To me, it seems like extra hassle having to create yet another radar dome while the old one has no where to go. This is not to say that the aircraft shown cannot be 2002, but I am going to take a wait-and-see approach.
如果2002一直是有雷達的，那為什麼剛開始的時候不是灰色的？對我來說，這看起來是額外的麻煩：又要造出另一個雷達罩而老的那個沒有地方去了。我不是說現在出現的飛機不是2002，而是我要再等待觀望一下。
latenlazy： Originally Posted by Air Force Brat
My point is that they must not be interested in it, or it would be on the Flanker, period, exclamation point! The Flanker is still a big deal to the PLAAF and PLAN, and it is quite capable and their go to bird for the immediate future. While I anticipate that the J-20 will eventually be their top line Air Force bird, and I anticipate that the F-60 will become their stealthy naval fighter, the J11, J15, J16 all say that I'm right. No, I have not forgotten about the J-10, I promise.
The J-20 is in full scale development stage and making outstanding progress, while I wish I were wrong, I doubt very seriously that it will ever incorporate that tech into the aircraft, or it would be on another platform in full scale development, I can almost certainly assure you that it is not, I do wish I were wrong, and in fact I could be, but after all I am the AFB.
China doesn't just stick every fancy toy onto a design thinking it will be worth it. Even though the Flanker is an important mainstay in the air force China does its cost benefit analysis. What would a Flanker with TVC help against in terms of reasonable threats? That extra maneuverability doesn't help with something that has BVR abilities (the F-22), and the design without TVC is already a counter any other 4.5 generation opponent. Furthermore would TVC really help the current Flanker airframe's performance? It is after all not a cure all. How effective TVC is depends on knowing when it helps and hurts the airframe's performance at different flight envelopes, which is certainly not something you can find for the J-20 by sticking engines with TVC on a Flanker.
Your point hinges on the idea that the Flanker is a tell for new technologies that will show up on the J-20, but that won't always be the case. It doesn't make sense to spend extra money to test something when most of the test results won't tell you anything about what you're really interested in testing for. Furthermore, the J-20 has prototypes too. While China tends to adopt very conservative testing standards they're not so risk adverse that they won't take risk when it makes sense. The whole point of prototyping is risk management. Also keep in mind that the J-20 needs TVC far more than the flanker does, both for supersonic maneuverability and to minimize surface deflections while cruising. We don't see TVC in the current air frames, but we also haven't seen the final engine yet.
Finally, China wouldn't have spent the R&D to develop TVC capable engines if they weren't going to use them. But just because they have the technology also doesn't they will stick it into everything.
中國不會插入每一樣將可能會值得的、設想的東西在設計上，即使側衛是中國空軍的主力，也會對成本利益進行分析。帶有TVC的側衛將如何幫助抵禦合理的威脅？額外的機動性對有超視距能力的（F22）沒有幫助，沒有TVC設計已經可以對抗任何4.5代對手。再說了，TVC真的可以對現在的側衛機身性能有幫助麼？這畢竟不是萬靈藥。TVC效果如何取決於知道不同的飛機外形在什麼時候TVC會幫助或削弱機身性能，很確定你不會找到適合J20的數據通過在側衛上使用TVC。
你的觀點取決於認為從側衛可以啟示J20將會用到的新的技術，但情況不總是這樣的。去花費額外錢去測試一些東西，而這些東西的大部分測試結果不會告訴你任何有關你真正感興趣的數據，而這些數據正是你為之行動的，則這是不明智的。此外，J20也有原型機。中國採取非常保守的測試標準，他們沒有如此的冒險，相反，他們在理解前不會採取冒險行動。原型機的整個要點就是風險管理。同樣需要記住的是，J20比側衛更需要TVC，既是為了超機動能力，也是為了在巡航時最大限度的減小表面變化。我們沒有見到在目前的空氣框架下的TVC，但我們也沒有看到最終的發動機。
最後，中國不會花費人力物力去發展可行的TVC發動機如果他們不準備使用的話。但也不是說他們有這個技術，然後就把它用在每一方面。
Originally Posted by Engineer
If 2002 was going to have a radar installed all along, then why did it not have a gray radar dome in the first place? To me, it seems like extra hassle having to create yet another radar dome while the old one has no where to go. This is not to say that the aircraft shown cannot be 2002, but I am going to take a wait-and-see approach.
Could be that they made the nose modular, and wanted to perform basic flight tests to make sure the airframe was sound before sticking an expensive radar in it.
可能他們做了模塊化的，然後想先進行基礎的測試完全後，再將昂貴的雷達放進去。
j20三號機出現...
·美國的大多數工作已流失到中國
·北京9.18反日遊行示威者毀壞了美國駐華大使駱家輝的車
·東京出現小規模反華抗議活動
·中日爭端：中國希望美國儘管有日美安保條約仍保持中立
·美國福布斯富豪排行榜
·重遊上海被遺忘的猶太人的過去
·俄羅斯告訴美國：我們不需要你的援助資金
·前蘋果老闆用移動技術來改善印度的貧困問題
美國點擊排行榜01.中國為什麼要在沙漠中央建造這些巨型02.華爾街日報：印度不是中國的對手03.美國留學生描述在中國的生活04.美國民眾為《金陵十三釵》強烈批評華05.中國警告美國遠離南海爭端06.為什麼人們怕中國人了？—關於中國的07.70%美國人：放棄日本挺中國08.雅虎問問：倫敦VS北京-你認為哪個開09.中國奪奧運首金-來自CNN網友的評論10.爛番茄：對中國電影《讓子彈飛》的評美國評論排行榜01.江西撫州檢察院等政府大樓發生連環爆02.馬英九宣布競選勝利03.美國倆吃貨EVAN和DAVE中國游04.美國民眾為《金陵十三釵》強烈批評華05.美國雅虎：朝鮮背叛者告訴美國，生命06.中國為什麼要在沙漠中央建造這些巨型07.自然雜誌網站對葉詩文成績的評論及“08.基督教在中國：血色上帝09.美國網民熱議：每個華盛頓人必嘗的410.中國綜合症
友情提醒:龍騰網友發言前,請仔細閱讀 龍騰網全站通用版規(會員須知)，龍騰嚴禁人身攻擊、髒字辱罵等違規行為,請龍騰網友自覺維護龍騰良好的討論氛圍.龍騰歡迎網友對翻譯提出意見和建議，但請勿打擊翻譯積極性，勿對翻譯出言不遜,違者龍騰將不得已做出相應處理.
熱點評論 TOP 5
2012-10-28 13:05:05 來自：廣西自治區桂林市 電信 TOP1
gaffic
解決溫飽
1
這個是02上雷達，明年才有03出來。根據大佬爆料03在外觀上會有變化，尾部要修型。明年底順利的話會裝ws-15上機測試，離2015年這個節點也剛好合適。ws-15是三元矢量發動機，二維矢量中國早有技術了，但是尾部隱身是好了要犧牲部分推力，也不如三元的控制面多。但是三元如何隱身修型是個考驗！
