超级军网转帖自龙腾 也来自百度 鹰家纯军迷对2002 2003二机之评 ...
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/28 20:43:54
标题:J-20... The New Generation Fighter III
原文链接:http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/j-20-new-generation-fighter-iii-280-5600.html
作者:众网友
译者:忘了怎么办
背景：前些日子，网上出现了J20的新图，而新图清晰的显示出这架J20是灰色的雷达罩。不知是新机2003还是2002安装了雷达，而近几天陆续流出的图片有力的支持了后者。译文既是照片出来后的部分内容
-------------------------------华丽分割-----------------------------------------------------
AssassinsMace ：This might be disappointing a bit.
这可能会有点令人失望。
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
plawolf ：Why would this be disappointing?
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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. 龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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.
这为什么会令人失望呢？
如果他们还需要空速管，就不会去除它，这也让我们了解了一些他们已经到达的测试阶段。他们会给2002装上雷达（可能是全航电状态）的这件事，只会强化我早前的观点：J20的原型机会更进一步的改良她的设计，并且比第一批X-Planes.【译者注：(X-planes)是一系列的美国试验飞机和直升机（及部分火箭），以用于测试尖端新技术】更接近与量产型。
他们决定让2002脱机一段时间去装好雷达也暗示着距第三架原型机的出现还有一段路。从那里可知如果他们愿意的话，资金或成飞建造更多原型机的能力是没有问题的，我相信这可能是一个信号：为2003重大的改变做准备。再次，那是一个很好的信号，从早期就做如此大的改变，她就会用更少的时间最终定型。
从开始我们就知道现在的J20不是预期的量产型，我希望在2003可以看到采用新的隐形喷嘴设计，或者甚至是WS15s，虽然都知道，不久就能实现那是不现实的，迄今为止我们很少听到WS15的消息。
Deino：For me actually surprising ....
实际上对我是一个惊喜
airsuperiority ：
Originally Posted by Deino
For me actually surprising ....
so much for 2003
2003到此为止
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.
这真的有关系么？更重要的是他们已经转移到了航电测试方面。最重要的是我们测试到哪里，而不是有多少架飞机。
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.
我认为重要的原因plawolf 已经写了，我同意你不在于有多少飞机，但正如他所说的，这最新的发展被发现于，在哪一架飞机上正在试验什么技术，然而由于限制（使我们没有什么信息），而飞机给了我们观察发现的机会，看到什么程序正在进行，可能甚至进行到哪一阶段，这就让那（有多少飞机）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.
我保留对“更多飞机=更多科目”的意见。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.
没有啊，很高兴知道至少我们还有一个公主在成都，我们还可以不时的看到她，这让我认为研制进展会慢下来，很像我们自己的F35，小批量试生产已经缩减，使之适应那些把完全新的飞机发展到成熟飞机的正常详细的工作。有无数琐碎和苦恼的必须做的事，不是只是生产出飞机，而是用不与已经完成的工作相矛盾的方式下集成一架飞机，这些情况对于J20会有很多，但你会记得，我已经事先预测（进展）会减慢由于那些琐碎的东西。
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，事实上，我对自己有点失望在我想这一点时，我也高兴看到2002气动外形的工作还在继续，这是一个好的信号，看起来没有大的问题，航电测试是一个向定型前进的积极步骤。
Lion ：THis means 2003 still has chance of WS-15 with 2D nozzle. I am infact happy!
这意味着2003还有机会装二维喷嘴的WS15。我着实高兴！
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...
它将可能还是三维矢喷口（译者注：TVC ：Thrust vector control的缩写，意为推力矢量控制，以下译为矢喷口）
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?
希望你是对的，这将巩固我一向所说的，但正如我在别处说的，对于五代机来说，超机动的定义现在还没有确定？我们不会看到J20在航展上站在自己的尾巴上而没有矢喷嘴，这是不会发生的（译者注：想看到什么叫做站在自己尾巴上么，请点击http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDY3NDMwNjQ0.html）。美国已经给了F35出色的机动能力但不用矢喷口，我不会感到惊讶说J20也没有它就已经投入生产，这项工程也许是对的，毕竟他准备有很多其他的东西。在我看来，J20现在的目标是隐身、快速、有超音速巡航能力、出色的机动性、先进的航电和武器系统。F22在生命维持系统出现问题，是因为其机动能力极限远超许多飞行员的承受，还有我并不认为解决的办法是（使用）无人机，我认为那是为什么很多更新的飞机有它们的今天。这也是中国航空没有倾心于推力矢量控制的主要原因，不然我们会看到一类变形的侧卫？
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不打算拥有超级机动性，他们不会如此设计，所以不会的，我不认为要求（译者：即超级机动性）会被废除。
我认为他们没有采用矢量发动机在侧卫上是因为没必要。安装矢量喷嘴在侧卫上意味着更多的飞行测试在刚开始谨慎起步的发动机上(WS-10A)。有很多理由说明了任何飞机的最佳表现都会被制约于潜在的后勤问题。
工程师评估他们可以用一个与WS15不同的发动机开始生产不是我不赞成的事情，但那是在方案已经充分考虑到坏的情况：WS15出现像WS10研制过程中出现的问题。有一些好的机会那不会出现这种情况，所以我认为仍然有可能当J20投入正式生产时，飞机的每个零件都会做好，包括发动机。现在我们仍不能认为是哪一种情况，因为我们没有WS15的任何信息。只有偶尔微小的信息直到J20揭秘。不再有什么。我还认为说，推力矢量控制的要求不仅仅是为了机动性，他们还需要推力矢量控制来使飞机巡航时，最大限度的减小表面变化。
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对侧卫的以外。有如果么？他们事实上在发展TVC，他们会将之测试在侧卫上，因为侧卫已经被证明在配备了TVC后机身与表现非常漂亮！谦虚点说，但同样记得我是空军基地人员，我也有勇气做一个真正的飞行员！所以，以我之拙见，他们对TVC不是很感兴趣，然后很有可能J20会批量生产而没有TVC。。。。但，如果罗姆尼胜了，并如果罗姆尼让F22重新投入生产，甚至一个更大的如果呢？然后，一切都将会改变！会有那么多如果么？
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.
将TVC用于侧卫产生的一个后勤问题将是得编写新的火控系统。单独进行这个可能使这件事变得不值得。我们知道中国已经有了ＴＶＣ技术。他们在２００６年验证了一台ＴＶＣ可行的ＷＳ１０。并独立验证喷嘴运行在不带机身的情况下。此外，用可行的ＴＶＣ发动机在异于打算要使用的飞机的机身上做飞行试验显得无意义。再次声明，我不是专家。
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.
我的意思是他们并没有把兴趣放在那里，否则的话侧卫上会装有的。。。！侧卫依然是中国空军和海军的重要角色，它是非常优秀的，他们在不久的将来。同时我预测J20将最终成为空军最顶层的飞机，F60会成为海军隐形战机，J11，J15，J16都验证了我的说法、不，我保证我没有忘记J10.
J20到了全面进展的阶段并取得了出色的进步。而我希望我是错的，我非常严重的怀疑J20将可能整合那些技术进到飞机中，或者它会在另外一个平台上全面发展。我可以几乎可以向你保证那不行，我希望我是错的，实际我也会，但毕竟我是一名空军基地人员。
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.
谁有关于原型机大致测试阶段的任何资料么？
比如，首先测试气动外形，然后是传感器，再然后是武器系统等。。我觉得这是公开的资源。
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 ....
只有一个关于2002的问题！有谁知道最近一次确定飞行在什么时候或看到原型机是在什么地方。
我必须承认即使有这些最新的照片，我对机身还是有奇怪的感觉，这几天出现的飞机不同于我们的“老”朋友2002.这可能是成飞确实拖出了2003并同时准备给2002换雷达/天线罩？？
我不认为更换天线罩+雷达（如果确实安装了）会如此简单。
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 ....
Deino
I 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，当原型机造好时所有的子结构已经被安装，甚至线束或可能连座舱显示器都已安装，也有可能原先在雷达罩里的压载物是要安装的雷达和天线的复制品。即使都知道飞机会带着压载物试飞直到安装航空电子设备，但正如你所知道的重量和平衡对所有飞机
是很重要的，不过特别的，原型机是建立操作参数的，为了建立那些安全的参数范围，操作可能会超出飞机正常时的极限。我认为比如当要建立重心极限时，为了得到误差的范围，飞机会飞过那些极限的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.
话说我有点失望因为这减少了我们看到飞行的两架J20在一起的照片的机会。
这有可能是他们在恶作剧么？还记得他们在第一批两艘052C的编号上是如何戏弄大众的么？那编号是涂在一块面板上的，然后就拿走了，让人推测有更多的正在建造。先前流出的所谓“2003”是没有编号在通常的位置的（面板被拿走了），之后出现现在这个灰色雷达罩的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.
我觉得我们可以看看几个星期后，黑色雷达罩的2002是否回来。如果是，那么我们就可以确定有两架不同的2002.如果几个星期过去，依然只看到灰色雷达罩的2002，然后即可确定只有一架2002而那样做只是为了安装真正的雷达。
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 see***ike 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2002一直是有雷达的，那为什么刚开始的时候不是灰色的？对我来说，这看起来是额外的麻烦：又要造出另一个雷达罩而老的那个没有地方去了。我不是说现在出现的飞机不是2002，而是我要再等待观望一下。
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.
中国不会插入每一样将可能会值得的、设想的东西在设计上，即使侧卫是中国空军的主力，也会对成本利益进行分析。带有TVC的侧卫将如何帮助抵御合理的威胁？额外的机动性对有超视距能力的（F22）没有帮助，没有TVC设计已经可以对抗任何4.5代对手。再说了，TVC真的可以对现在的侧卫机身性能有帮助么？这毕竟不是万灵药。TVC效果如何取决于知道不同的飞机外形在什么时候TVC会帮助或削弱机身性能，很确定你不会找到适合J20的数据通过在侧卫上使用TVC。
你的观点取决于认为从侧卫可以启示J20将会用到的新的技术，但情况不总是这样的。去花费额外钱去测试一些东西，而这些东西的大部分测试结果不会告诉你任何有关你真正感兴趣的数据，而这些数据正是你为之行动的，则这是不明智的。此外，J20也有原型机。中国采取非常保守的测试标准，他们没有如此的冒险，相反，他们在理解前不会采取冒险行动。原型机的整个要点就是风险管理。同样需要记住的是，J20比侧卫更需要TVC，既是为了超机动能力，也是为了在巡航时最大限度的减小表面变化。我们没有见到在目前的空气框架下的TVC，但我们也没有看到最终的发动机。
最后，中国不会花费人力物力去发展可行的TVC发动机如果他们不准备使用的话。但也不是说他们有这个技术，然后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 see***ike 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.
可能他们做了模块化的，然后想先进行基础的测试完全后，再将昂贵的雷达放进去。
唔，最后把翻译原作者最后一句话列出来~~~保持原文面貌~~
-------------------------------------------分割线------------------------------------------------------------------------
这只是一页多的内容，初次翻译，水平有限，望多指教。
另外，由于对军事不是很在行，很多术语不清楚，看得懂的同学就好，不用解释；看不懂的同学，那就这样了。。。
最后感谢某人的支持鼓励！标题:J-20... The New Generation Fighter III
原文链接:http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/j-20-new-generation-fighter-iii-280-5600.html
作者:众网友
译者:忘了怎么办
背景：前些日子，网上出现了J20的新图，而新图清晰的显示出这架J20是灰色的雷达罩。不知是新机2003还是2002安装了雷达，而近几天陆续流出的图片有力的支持了后者。译文既是照片出来后的部分内容
-------------------------------华丽分割-----------------------------------------------------
AssassinsMace ：This might be disappointing a bit.
这可能会有点令人失望。
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
plawolf ：Why would this be disappointing?
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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. 龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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.
这为什么会令人失望呢？
如果他们还需要空速管，就不会去除它，这也让我们了解了一些他们已经到达的测试阶段。他们会给2002装上雷达（可能是全航电状态）的这件事，只会强化我早前的观点：J20的原型机会更进一步的改良她的设计，并且比第一批X-Planes.【译者注：(X-planes)是一系列的美国试验飞机和直升机（及部分火箭），以用于测试尖端新技术】更接近与量产型。
他们决定让2002脱机一段时间去装好雷达也暗示着距第三架原型机的出现还有一段路。从那里可知如果他们愿意的话，资金或成飞建造更多原型机的能力是没有问题的，我相信这可能是一个信号：为2003重大的改变做准备。再次，那是一个很好的信号，从早期就做如此大的改变，她就会用更少的时间最终定型。
从开始我们就知道现在的J20不是预期的量产型，我希望在2003可以看到采用新的隐形喷嘴设计，或者甚至是WS15s，虽然都知道，不久就能实现那是不现实的，迄今为止我们很少听到WS15的消息。
Deino：For me actually surprising ....
实际上对我是一个惊喜
airsuperiority ：
Originally Posted by Deino
For me actually surprising ....
so much for 2003
2003到此为止
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.
这真的有关系么？更重要的是他们已经转移到了航电测试方面。最重要的是我们测试到哪里，而不是有多少架飞机。
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.
我认为重要的原因plawolf 已经写了，我同意你不在于有多少飞机，但正如他所说的，这最新的发展被发现于，在哪一架飞机上正在试验什么技术，然而由于限制（使我们没有什么信息），而飞机给了我们观察发现的机会，看到什么程序正在进行，可能甚至进行到哪一阶段，这就让那（有多少飞机）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.
我保留对“更多飞机=更多科目”的意见。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.
没有啊，很高兴知道至少我们还有一个公主在成都，我们还可以不时的看到她，这让我认为研制进展会慢下来，很像我们自己的F35，小批量试生产已经缩减，使之适应那些把完全新的飞机发展到成熟飞机的正常详细的工作。有无数琐碎和苦恼的必须做的事，不是只是生产出飞机，而是用不与已经完成的工作相矛盾的方式下集成一架飞机，这些情况对于J20会有很多，但你会记得，我已经事先预测（进展）会减慢由于那些琐碎的东西。
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，事实上，我对自己有点失望在我想这一点时，我也高兴看到2002气动外形的工作还在继续，这是一个好的信号，看起来没有大的问题，航电测试是一个向定型前进的积极步骤。
Lion ：THis means 2003 still has chance of WS-15 with 2D nozzle. I am infact happy!
这意味着2003还有机会装二维喷嘴的WS15。我着实高兴！
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...
它将可能还是三维矢喷口（译者注：TVC ：Thrust vector control的缩写，意为推力矢量控制，以下译为矢喷口）
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?
希望你是对的，这将巩固我一向所说的，但正如我在别处说的，对于五代机来说，超机动的定义现在还没有确定？我们不会看到J20在航展上站在自己的尾巴上而没有矢喷嘴，这是不会发生的（译者注：想看到什么叫做站在自己尾巴上么，请点击http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDY3NDMwNjQ0.html）。美国已经给了F35出色的机动能力但不用矢喷口，我不会感到惊讶说J20也没有它就已经投入生产，这项工程也许是对的，毕竟他准备有很多其他的东西。在我看来，J20现在的目标是隐身、快速、有超音速巡航能力、出色的机动性、先进的航电和武器系统。F22在生命维持系统出现问题，是因为其机动能力极限远超许多飞行员的承受，还有我并不认为解决的办法是（使用）无人机，我认为那是为什么很多更新的飞机有它们的今天。这也是中国航空没有倾心于推力矢量控制的主要原因，不然我们会看到一类变形的侧卫？
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不打算拥有超级机动性，他们不会如此设计，所以不会的，我不认为要求（译者：即超级机动性）会被废除。
我认为他们没有采用矢量发动机在侧卫上是因为没必要。安装矢量喷嘴在侧卫上意味着更多的飞行测试在刚开始谨慎起步的发动机上(WS-10A)。有很多理由说明了任何飞机的最佳表现都会被制约于潜在的后勤问题。
工程师评估他们可以用一个与WS15不同的发动机开始生产不是我不赞成的事情，但那是在方案已经充分考虑到坏的情况：WS15出现像WS10研制过程中出现的问题。有一些好的机会那不会出现这种情况，所以我认为仍然有可能当J20投入正式生产时，飞机的每个零件都会做好，包括发动机。现在我们仍不能认为是哪一种情况，因为我们没有WS15的任何信息。只有偶尔微小的信息直到J20揭秘。不再有什么。我还认为说，推力矢量控制的要求不仅仅是为了机动性，他们还需要推力矢量控制来使飞机巡航时，最大限度的减小表面变化。
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对侧卫的以外。有如果么？他们事实上在发展TVC，他们会将之测试在侧卫上，因为侧卫已经被证明在配备了TVC后机身与表现非常漂亮！谦虚点说，但同样记得我是空军基地人员，我也有勇气做一个真正的飞行员！所以，以我之拙见，他们对TVC不是很感兴趣，然后很有可能J20会批量生产而没有TVC。。。。但，如果罗姆尼胜了，并如果罗姆尼让F22重新投入生产，甚至一个更大的如果呢？然后，一切都将会改变！会有那么多如果么？
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.
将TVC用于侧卫产生的一个后勤问题将是得编写新的火控系统。单独进行这个可能使这件事变得不值得。我们知道中国已经有了ＴＶＣ技术。他们在２００６年验证了一台ＴＶＣ可行的ＷＳ１０。并独立验证喷嘴运行在不带机身的情况下。此外，用可行的ＴＶＣ发动机在异于打算要使用的飞机的机身上做飞行试验显得无意义。再次声明，我不是专家。
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.
我的意思是他们并没有把兴趣放在那里，否则的话侧卫上会装有的。。。！侧卫依然是中国空军和海军的重要角色，它是非常优秀的，他们在不久的将来。同时我预测J20将最终成为空军最顶层的飞机，F60会成为海军隐形战机，J11，J15，J16都验证了我的说法、不，我保证我没有忘记J10.
J20到了全面进展的阶段并取得了出色的进步。而我希望我是错的，我非常严重的怀疑J20将可能整合那些技术进到飞机中，或者它会在另外一个平台上全面发展。我可以几乎可以向你保证那不行，我希望我是错的，实际我也会，但毕竟我是一名空军基地人员。
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.
谁有关于原型机大致测试阶段的任何资料么？
比如，首先测试气动外形，然后是传感器，再然后是武器系统等。。我觉得这是公开的资源。
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 ....
只有一个关于2002的问题！有谁知道最近一次确定飞行在什么时候或看到原型机是在什么地方。
我必须承认即使有这些最新的照片，我对机身还是有奇怪的感觉，这几天出现的飞机不同于我们的“老”朋友2002.这可能是成飞确实拖出了2003并同时准备给2002换雷达/天线罩？？
我不认为更换天线罩+雷达（如果确实安装了）会如此简单。
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 ....
Deino
I 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，当原型机造好时所有的子结构已经被安装，甚至线束或可能连座舱显示器都已安装，也有可能原先在雷达罩里的压载物是要安装的雷达和天线的复制品。即使都知道飞机会带着压载物试飞直到安装航空电子设备，但正如你所知道的重量和平衡对所有飞机
是很重要的，不过特别的，原型机是建立操作参数的，为了建立那些安全的参数范围，操作可能会超出飞机正常时的极限。我认为比如当要建立重心极限时，为了得到误差的范围，飞机会飞过那些极限的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.
话说我有点失望因为这减少了我们看到飞行的两架J20在一起的照片的机会。
这有可能是他们在恶作剧么？还记得他们在第一批两艘052C的编号上是如何戏弄大众的么？那编号是涂在一块面板上的，然后就拿走了，让人推测有更多的正在建造。先前流出的所谓“2003”是没有编号在通常的位置的（面板被拿走了），之后出现现在这个灰色雷达罩的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.
我觉得我们可以看看几个星期后，黑色雷达罩的2002是否回来。如果是，那么我们就可以确定有两架不同的2002.如果几个星期过去，依然只看到灰色雷达罩的2002，然后即可确定只有一架2002而那样做只是为了安装真正的雷达。
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 see***ike 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2002一直是有雷达的，那为什么刚开始的时候不是灰色的？对我来说，这看起来是额外的麻烦：又要造出另一个雷达罩而老的那个没有地方去了。我不是说现在出现的飞机不是2002，而是我要再等待观望一下。
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.
中国不会插入每一样将可能会值得的、设想的东西在设计上，即使侧卫是中国空军的主力，也会对成本利益进行分析。带有TVC的侧卫将如何帮助抵御合理的威胁？额外的机动性对有超视距能力的（F22）没有帮助，没有TVC设计已经可以对抗任何4.5代对手。再说了，TVC真的可以对现在的侧卫机身性能有帮助么？这毕竟不是万灵药。TVC效果如何取决于知道不同的飞机外形在什么时候TVC会帮助或削弱机身性能，很确定你不会找到适合J20的数据通过在侧卫上使用TVC。
你的观点取决于认为从侧卫可以启示J20将会用到的新的技术，但情况不总是这样的。去花费额外钱去测试一些东西，而这些东西的大部分测试结果不会告诉你任何有关你真正感兴趣的数据，而这些数据正是你为之行动的，则这是不明智的。此外，J20也有原型机。中国采取非常保守的测试标准，他们没有如此的冒险，相反，他们在理解前不会采取冒险行动。原型机的整个要点就是风险管理。同样需要记住的是，J20比侧卫更需要TVC，既是为了超机动能力，也是为了在巡航时最大限度的减小表面变化。我们没有见到在目前的空气框架下的TVC，但我们也没有看到最终的发动机。
最后，中国不会花费人力物力去发展可行的TVC发动机如果他们不准备使用的话。但也不是说他们有这个技术，然后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 see***ike 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.
可能他们做了模块化的，然后想先进行基础的测试完全后，再将昂贵的雷达放进去。
唔，最后把翻译原作者最后一句话列出来~~~保持原文面貌~~
-------------------------------------------分割线------------------------------------------------------------------------
这只是一页多的内容，初次翻译，水平有限，望多指教。
另外，由于对军事不是很在行，很多术语不清楚，看得懂的同学就好，不用解释；看不懂的同学，那就这样了。。。
最后感谢某人的支持鼓励！
原文链接:http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/j-20-new-generation-fighter-iii-280-5600.html
作者:众网友
译者:忘了怎么办
背景：前些日子，网上出现了J20的新图，而新图清晰的显示出这架J20是灰色的雷达罩。不知是新机2003还是2002安装了雷达，而近几天陆续流出的图片有力的支持了后者。译文既是照片出来后的部分内容
-------------------------------华丽分割-----------------------------------------------------
AssassinsMace ：This might be disappointing a bit.
这可能会有点令人失望。
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
plawolf ：Why would this be disappointing?
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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. 龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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.
这为什么会令人失望呢？
如果他们还需要空速管，就不会去除它，这也让我们了解了一些他们已经到达的测试阶段。他们会给2002装上雷达（可能是全航电状态）的这件事，只会强化我早前的观点：J20的原型机会更进一步的改良她的设计，并且比第一批X-Planes.【译者注：(X-planes)是一系列的美国试验飞机和直升机（及部分火箭），以用于测试尖端新技术】更接近与量产型。
他们决定让2002脱机一段时间去装好雷达也暗示着距第三架原型机的出现还有一段路。从那里可知如果他们愿意的话，资金或成飞建造更多原型机的能力是没有问题的，我相信这可能是一个信号：为2003重大的改变做准备。再次，那是一个很好的信号，从早期就做如此大的改变，她就会用更少的时间最终定型。
从开始我们就知道现在的J20不是预期的量产型，我希望在2003可以看到采用新的隐形喷嘴设计，或者甚至是WS15s，虽然都知道，不久就能实现那是不现实的，迄今为止我们很少听到WS15的消息。
Deino：For me actually surprising ....
实际上对我是一个惊喜
airsuperiority ：
Originally Posted by Deino
For me actually surprising ....
so much for 2003
2003到此为止
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.
这真的有关系么？更重要的是他们已经转移到了航电测试方面。最重要的是我们测试到哪里，而不是有多少架飞机。
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.
我认为重要的原因plawolf 已经写了，我同意你不在于有多少飞机，但正如他所说的，这最新的发展被发现于，在哪一架飞机上正在试验什么技术，然而由于限制（使我们没有什么信息），而飞机给了我们观察发现的机会，看到什么程序正在进行，可能甚至进行到哪一阶段，这就让那（有多少飞机）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.
我保留对“更多飞机=更多科目”的意见。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.
没有啊，很高兴知道至少我们还有一个公主在成都，我们还可以不时的看到她，这让我认为研制进展会慢下来，很像我们自己的F35，小批量试生产已经缩减，使之适应那些把完全新的飞机发展到成熟飞机的正常详细的工作。有无数琐碎和苦恼的必须做的事，不是只是生产出飞机，而是用不与已经完成的工作相矛盾的方式下集成一架飞机，这些情况对于J20会有很多，但你会记得，我已经事先预测（进展）会减慢由于那些琐碎的东西。
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，事实上，我对自己有点失望在我想这一点时，我也高兴看到2002气动外形的工作还在继续，这是一个好的信号，看起来没有大的问题，航电测试是一个向定型前进的积极步骤。
Lion ：THis means 2003 still has chance of WS-15 with 2D nozzle. I am infact happy!
这意味着2003还有机会装二维喷嘴的WS15。我着实高兴！
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...
它将可能还是三维矢喷口（译者注：TVC ：Thrust vector control的缩写，意为推力矢量控制，以下译为矢喷口）
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?
希望你是对的，这将巩固我一向所说的，但正如我在别处说的，对于五代机来说，超机动的定义现在还没有确定？我们不会看到J20在航展上站在自己的尾巴上而没有矢喷嘴，这是不会发生的（译者注：想看到什么叫做站在自己尾巴上么，请点击http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDY3NDMwNjQ0.html）。美国已经给了F35出色的机动能力但不用矢喷口，我不会感到惊讶说J20也没有它就已经投入生产，这项工程也许是对的，毕竟他准备有很多其他的东西。在我看来，J20现在的目标是隐身、快速、有超音速巡航能力、出色的机动性、先进的航电和武器系统。F22在生命维持系统出现问题，是因为其机动能力极限远超许多飞行员的承受，还有我并不认为解决的办法是（使用）无人机，我认为那是为什么很多更新的飞机有它们的今天。这也是中国航空没有倾心于推力矢量控制的主要原因，不然我们会看到一类变形的侧卫？
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不打算拥有超级机动性，他们不会如此设计，所以不会的，我不认为要求（译者：即超级机动性）会被废除。
我认为他们没有采用矢量发动机在侧卫上是因为没必要。安装矢量喷嘴在侧卫上意味着更多的飞行测试在刚开始谨慎起步的发动机上(WS-10A)。有很多理由说明了任何飞机的最佳表现都会被制约于潜在的后勤问题。
工程师评估他们可以用一个与WS15不同的发动机开始生产不是我不赞成的事情，但那是在方案已经充分考虑到坏的情况：WS15出现像WS10研制过程中出现的问题。有一些好的机会那不会出现这种情况，所以我认为仍然有可能当J20投入正式生产时，飞机的每个零件都会做好，包括发动机。现在我们仍不能认为是哪一种情况，因为我们没有WS15的任何信息。只有偶尔微小的信息直到J20揭秘。不再有什么。我还认为说，推力矢量控制的要求不仅仅是为了机动性，他们还需要推力矢量控制来使飞机巡航时，最大限度的减小表面变化。
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对侧卫的以外。有如果么？他们事实上在发展TVC，他们会将之测试在侧卫上，因为侧卫已经被证明在配备了TVC后机身与表现非常漂亮！谦虚点说，但同样记得我是空军基地人员，我也有勇气做一个真正的飞行员！所以，以我之拙见，他们对TVC不是很感兴趣，然后很有可能J20会批量生产而没有TVC。。。。但，如果罗姆尼胜了，并如果罗姆尼让F22重新投入生产，甚至一个更大的如果呢？然后，一切都将会改变！会有那么多如果么？
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.
将TVC用于侧卫产生的一个后勤问题将是得编写新的火控系统。单独进行这个可能使这件事变得不值得。我们知道中国已经有了ＴＶＣ技术。他们在２００６年验证了一台ＴＶＣ可行的ＷＳ１０。并独立验证喷嘴运行在不带机身的情况下。此外，用可行的ＴＶＣ发动机在异于打算要使用的飞机的机身上做飞行试验显得无意义。再次声明，我不是专家。
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.
我的意思是他们并没有把兴趣放在那里，否则的话侧卫上会装有的。。。！侧卫依然是中国空军和海军的重要角色，它是非常优秀的，他们在不久的将来。同时我预测J20将最终成为空军最顶层的飞机，F60会成为海军隐形战机，J11，J15，J16都验证了我的说法、不，我保证我没有忘记J10.
J20到了全面进展的阶段并取得了出色的进步。而我希望我是错的，我非常严重的怀疑J20将可能整合那些技术进到飞机中，或者它会在另外一个平台上全面发展。我可以几乎可以向你保证那不行，我希望我是错的，实际我也会，但毕竟我是一名空军基地人员。
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.
谁有关于原型机大致测试阶段的任何资料么？
比如，首先测试气动外形，然后是传感器，再然后是武器系统等。。我觉得这是公开的资源。
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 ....
只有一个关于2002的问题！有谁知道最近一次确定飞行在什么时候或看到原型机是在什么地方。
我必须承认即使有这些最新的照片，我对机身还是有奇怪的感觉，这几天出现的飞机不同于我们的“老”朋友2002.这可能是成飞确实拖出了2003并同时准备给2002换雷达/天线罩？？
我不认为更换天线罩+雷达（如果确实安装了）会如此简单。
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 ....
Deino
I 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，当原型机造好时所有的子结构已经被安装，甚至线束或可能连座舱显示器都已安装，也有可能原先在雷达罩里的压载物是要安装的雷达和天线的复制品。即使都知道飞机会带着压载物试飞直到安装航空电子设备，但正如你所知道的重量和平衡对所有飞机
是很重要的，不过特别的，原型机是建立操作参数的，为了建立那些安全的参数范围，操作可能会超出飞机正常时的极限。我认为比如当要建立重心极限时，为了得到误差的范围，飞机会飞过那些极限的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.
话说我有点失望因为这减少了我们看到飞行的两架J20在一起的照片的机会。
这有可能是他们在恶作剧么？还记得他们在第一批两艘052C的编号上是如何戏弄大众的么？那编号是涂在一块面板上的，然后就拿走了，让人推测有更多的正在建造。先前流出的所谓“2003”是没有编号在通常的位置的（面板被拿走了），之后出现现在这个灰色雷达罩的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.
我觉得我们可以看看几个星期后，黑色雷达罩的2002是否回来。如果是，那么我们就可以确定有两架不同的2002.如果几个星期过去，依然只看到灰色雷达罩的2002，然后即可确定只有一架2002而那样做只是为了安装真正的雷达。
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 see***ike 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2002一直是有雷达的，那为什么刚开始的时候不是灰色的？对我来说，这看起来是额外的麻烦：又要造出另一个雷达罩而老的那个没有地方去了。我不是说现在出现的飞机不是2002，而是我要再等待观望一下。
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.
中国不会插入每一样将可能会值得的、设想的东西在设计上，即使侧卫是中国空军的主力，也会对成本利益进行分析。带有TVC的侧卫将如何帮助抵御合理的威胁？额外的机动性对有超视距能力的（F22）没有帮助，没有TVC设计已经可以对抗任何4.5代对手。再说了，TVC真的可以对现在的侧卫机身性能有帮助么？这毕竟不是万灵药。TVC效果如何取决于知道不同的飞机外形在什么时候TVC会帮助或削弱机身性能，很确定你不会找到适合J20的数据通过在侧卫上使用TVC。
你的观点取决于认为从侧卫可以启示J20将会用到的新的技术，但情况不总是这样的。去花费额外钱去测试一些东西，而这些东西的大部分测试结果不会告诉你任何有关你真正感兴趣的数据，而这些数据正是你为之行动的，则这是不明智的。此外，J20也有原型机。中国采取非常保守的测试标准，他们没有如此的冒险，相反，他们在理解前不会采取冒险行动。原型机的整个要点就是风险管理。同样需要记住的是，J20比侧卫更需要TVC，既是为了超机动能力，也是为了在巡航时最大限度的减小表面变化。我们没有见到在目前的空气框架下的TVC，但我们也没有看到最终的发动机。
最后，中国不会花费人力物力去发展可行的TVC发动机如果他们不准备使用的话。但也不是说他们有这个技术，然后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 see***ike 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.
可能他们做了模块化的，然后想先进行基础的测试完全后，再将昂贵的雷达放进去。
唔，最后把翻译原作者最后一句话列出来~~~保持原文面貌~~
-------------------------------------------分割线------------------------------------------------------------------------
这只是一页多的内容，初次翻译，水平有限，望多指教。
另外，由于对军事不是很在行，很多术语不清楚，看得懂的同学就好，不用解释；看不懂的同学，那就这样了。。。
最后感谢某人的支持鼓励！标题:J-20... The New Generation Fighter III
原文链接:http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/j-20-new-generation-fighter-iii-280-5600.html
作者:众网友
译者:忘了怎么办
背景：前些日子，网上出现了J20的新图，而新图清晰的显示出这架J20是灰色的雷达罩。不知是新机2003还是2002安装了雷达，而近几天陆续流出的图片有力的支持了后者。译文既是照片出来后的部分内容
-------------------------------华丽分割-----------------------------------------------------
AssassinsMace ：This might be disappointing a bit.
这可能会有点令人失望。
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
plawolf ：Why would this be disappointing?
龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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. 龙腾网版权所有 http://www.ltaaa.com
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.
这为什么会令人失望呢？
如果他们还需要空速管，就不会去除它，这也让我们了解了一些他们已经到达的测试阶段。他们会给2002装上雷达（可能是全航电状态）的这件事，只会强化我早前的观点：J20的原型机会更进一步的改良她的设计，并且比第一批X-Planes.【译者注：(X-planes)是一系列的美国试验飞机和直升机（及部分火箭），以用于测试尖端新技术】更接近与量产型。
他们决定让2002脱机一段时间去装好雷达也暗示着距第三架原型机的出现还有一段路。从那里可知如果他们愿意的话，资金或成飞建造更多原型机的能力是没有问题的，我相信这可能是一个信号：为2003重大的改变做准备。再次，那是一个很好的信号，从早期就做如此大的改变，她就会用更少的时间最终定型。
从开始我们就知道现在的J20不是预期的量产型，我希望在2003可以看到采用新的隐形喷嘴设计，或者甚至是WS15s，虽然都知道，不久就能实现那是不现实的，迄今为止我们很少听到WS15的消息。
Deino：For me actually surprising ....
实际上对我是一个惊喜
airsuperiority ：
Originally Posted by Deino
For me actually surprising ....
so much for 2003
2003到此为止
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.
这真的有关系么？更重要的是他们已经转移到了航电测试方面。最重要的是我们测试到哪里，而不是有多少架飞机。
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.
我认为重要的原因plawolf 已经写了，我同意你不在于有多少飞机，但正如他所说的，这最新的发展被发现于，在哪一架飞机上正在试验什么技术，然而由于限制（使我们没有什么信息），而飞机给了我们观察发现的机会，看到什么程序正在进行，可能甚至进行到哪一阶段，这就让那（有多少飞机）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.
我保留对“更多飞机=更多科目”的意见。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.
没有啊，很高兴知道至少我们还有一个公主在成都，我们还可以不时的看到她，这让我认为研制进展会慢下来，很像我们自己的F35，小批量试生产已经缩减，使之适应那些把完全新的飞机发展到成熟飞机的正常详细的工作。有无数琐碎和苦恼的必须做的事，不是只是生产出飞机，而是用不与已经完成的工作相矛盾的方式下集成一架飞机，这些情况对于J20会有很多，但你会记得，我已经事先预测（进展）会减慢由于那些琐碎的东西。
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，事实上，我对自己有点失望在我想这一点时，我也高兴看到2002气动外形的工作还在继续，这是一个好的信号，看起来没有大的问题，航电测试是一个向定型前进的积极步骤。
Lion ：THis means 2003 still has chance of WS-15 with 2D nozzle. I am infact happy!
这意味着2003还有机会装二维喷嘴的WS15。我着实高兴！
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...
它将可能还是三维矢喷口（译者注：TVC ：Thrust vector control的缩写，意为推力矢量控制，以下译为矢喷口）
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?
希望你是对的，这将巩固我一向所说的，但正如我在别处说的，对于五代机来说，超机动的定义现在还没有确定？我们不会看到J20在航展上站在自己的尾巴上而没有矢喷嘴，这是不会发生的（译者注：想看到什么叫做站在自己尾巴上么，请点击http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDY3NDMwNjQ0.html）。美国已经给了F35出色的机动能力但不用矢喷口，我不会感到惊讶说J20也没有它就已经投入生产，这项工程也许是对的，毕竟他准备有很多其他的东西。在我看来，J20现在的目标是隐身、快速、有超音速巡航能力、出色的机动性、先进的航电和武器系统。F22在生命维持系统出现问题，是因为其机动能力极限远超许多飞行员的承受，还有我并不认为解决的办法是（使用）无人机，我认为那是为什么很多更新的飞机有它们的今天。这也是中国航空没有倾心于推力矢量控制的主要原因，不然我们会看到一类变形的侧卫？
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不打算拥有超级机动性，他们不会如此设计，所以不会的，我不认为要求（译者：即超级机动性）会被废除。
我认为他们没有采用矢量发动机在侧卫上是因为没必要。安装矢量喷嘴在侧卫上意味着更多的飞行测试在刚开始谨慎起步的发动机上(WS-10A)。有很多理由说明了任何飞机的最佳表现都会被制约于潜在的后勤问题。
工程师评估他们可以用一个与WS15不同的发动机开始生产不是我不赞成的事情，但那是在方案已经充分考虑到坏的情况：WS15出现像WS10研制过程中出现的问题。有一些好的机会那不会出现这种情况，所以我认为仍然有可能当J20投入正式生产时，飞机的每个零件都会做好，包括发动机。现在我们仍不能认为是哪一种情况，因为我们没有WS15的任何信息。只有偶尔微小的信息直到J20揭秘。不再有什么。我还认为说，推力矢量控制的要求不仅仅是为了机动性，他们还需要推力矢量控制来使飞机巡航时，最大限度的减小表面变化。
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对侧卫的以外。有如果么？他们事实上在发展TVC，他们会将之测试在侧卫上，因为侧卫已经被证明在配备了TVC后机身与表现非常漂亮！谦虚点说，但同样记得我是空军基地人员，我也有勇气做一个真正的飞行员！所以，以我之拙见，他们对TVC不是很感兴趣，然后很有可能J20会批量生产而没有TVC。。。。但，如果罗姆尼胜了，并如果罗姆尼让F22重新投入生产，甚至一个更大的如果呢？然后，一切都将会改变！会有那么多如果么？
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.
将TVC用于侧卫产生的一个后勤问题将是得编写新的火控系统。单独进行这个可能使这件事变得不值得。我们知道中国已经有了ＴＶＣ技术。他们在２００６年验证了一台ＴＶＣ可行的ＷＳ１０。并独立验证喷嘴运行在不带机身的情况下。此外，用可行的ＴＶＣ发动机在异于打算要使用的飞机的机身上做飞行试验显得无意义。再次声明，我不是专家。
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.
我的意思是他们并没有把兴趣放在那里，否则的话侧卫上会装有的。。。！侧卫依然是中国空军和海军的重要角色，它是非常优秀的，他们在不久的将来。同时我预测J20将最终成为空军最顶层的飞机，F60会成为海军隐形战机，J11，J15，J16都验证了我的说法、不，我保证我没有忘记J10.
J20到了全面进展的阶段并取得了出色的进步。而我希望我是错的，我非常严重的怀疑J20将可能整合那些技术进到飞机中，或者它会在另外一个平台上全面发展。我可以几乎可以向你保证那不行，我希望我是错的，实际我也会，但毕竟我是一名空军基地人员。
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.
谁有关于原型机大致测试阶段的任何资料么？
比如，首先测试气动外形，然后是传感器，再然后是武器系统等。。我觉得这是公开的资源。
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 ....
只有一个关于2002的问题！有谁知道最近一次确定飞行在什么时候或看到原型机是在什么地方。
我必须承认即使有这些最新的照片，我对机身还是有奇怪的感觉，这几天出现的飞机不同于我们的“老”朋友2002.这可能是成飞确实拖出了2003并同时准备给2002换雷达/天线罩？？
我不认为更换天线罩+雷达（如果确实安装了）会如此简单。
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 ....
Deino
I 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，当原型机造好时所有的子结构已经被安装，甚至线束或可能连座舱显示器都已安装，也有可能原先在雷达罩里的压载物是要安装的雷达和天线的复制品。即使都知道飞机会带着压载物试飞直到安装航空电子设备，但正如你所知道的重量和平衡对所有飞机
是很重要的，不过特别的，原型机是建立操作参数的，为了建立那些安全的参数范围，操作可能会超出飞机正常时的极限。我认为比如当要建立重心极限时，为了得到误差的范围，飞机会飞过那些极限的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.
话说我有点失望因为这减少了我们看到飞行的两架J20在一起的照片的机会。
这有可能是他们在恶作剧么？还记得他们在第一批两艘052C的编号上是如何戏弄大众的么？那编号是涂在一块面板上的，然后就拿走了，让人推测有更多的正在建造。先前流出的所谓“2003”是没有编号在通常的位置的（面板被拿走了），之后出现现在这个灰色雷达罩的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.
我觉得我们可以看看几个星期后，黑色雷达罩的2002是否回来。如果是，那么我们就可以确定有两架不同的2002.如果几个星期过去，依然只看到灰色雷达罩的2002，然后即可确定只有一架2002而那样做只是为了安装真正的雷达。
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 see***ike 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2002一直是有雷达的，那为什么刚开始的时候不是灰色的？对我来说，这看起来是额外的麻烦：又要造出另一个雷达罩而老的那个没有地方去了。我不是说现在出现的飞机不是2002，而是我要再等待观望一下。
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.
中国不会插入每一样将可能会值得的、设想的东西在设计上，即使侧卫是中国空军的主力，也会对成本利益进行分析。带有TVC的侧卫将如何帮助抵御合理的威胁？额外的机动性对有超视距能力的（F22）没有帮助，没有TVC设计已经可以对抗任何4.5代对手。再说了，TVC真的可以对现在的侧卫机身性能有帮助么？这毕竟不是万灵药。TVC效果如何取决于知道不同的飞机外形在什么时候TVC会帮助或削弱机身性能，很确定你不会找到适合J20的数据通过在侧卫上使用TVC。
你的观点取决于认为从侧卫可以启示J20将会用到的新的技术，但情况不总是这样的。去花费额外钱去测试一些东西，而这些东西的大部分测试结果不会告诉你任何有关你真正感兴趣的数据，而这些数据正是你为之行动的，则这是不明智的。此外，J20也有原型机。中国采取非常保守的测试标准，他们没有如此的冒险，相反，他们在理解前不会采取冒险行动。原型机的整个要点就是风险管理。同样需要记住的是，J20比侧卫更需要TVC，既是为了超机动能力，也是为了在巡航时最大限度的减小表面变化。我们没有见到在目前的空气框架下的TVC，但我们也没有看到最终的发动机。
最后，中国不会花费人力物力去发展可行的TVC发动机如果他们不准备使用的话。但也不是说他们有这个技术，然后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 see***ike 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.
可能他们做了模块化的，然后想先进行基础的测试完全后，再将昂贵的雷达放进去。
唔，最后把翻译原作者最后一句话列出来~~~保持原文面貌~~
-------------------------------------------分割线------------------------------------------------------------------------
这只是一页多的内容，初次翻译，水平有限，望多指教。
另外，由于对军事不是很在行，很多术语不清楚，看得懂的同学就好，不用解释；看不懂的同学，那就这样了。。。
最后感谢某人的支持鼓励！
首先 抢个沙发 第二 全部贴在1楼了 看起来会有点多
隔壁饭香的最好体现，全世界都一样的
很中肯的评论
目前基本全是猜测和臆断，还是静观其变吧！
鹰家不知道兔子试验机三号都是去做静力试验的吗。
鹰家不知道兔子试验机三号都是去做静力试验的吗。
这帖子除了能看到MD军迷所了解的信息以外，还有他们对J20的态度，喜欢飞机，不管来自哪里的
还是比较专业的。
不存在的03也能够评价。
评论挺不错，楼主辛苦了。来自: Android客户端
新疆葫芦穆寂 发表于 2012-10-28 11:26 ![]()
首先 抢个沙发 第二 全部贴在1楼了 看起来会有点多
祝您沙发愉快
首先 抢个沙发 第二 全部贴在1楼了 看起来会有点多
祝您沙发愉快
话说MD的军迷确实专业
LZ辛苦，但我不得不说看译文有点累，语序好飘，好别扭
英文写出来中国人的思想。如果这些美国人真这么思考问题，那跟我们是很一致的。
看得出来美国人很寂寞了，非常渴望能有个旗鼓相当的对手和F22较量一下...........他们也希望J20装山寨119啊
纯技术性讨论的，MD军迷很专业。
新疆葫芦穆寂 发表于 2012-10-28 11:26 ![]()
首先 抢个沙发 第二 全部贴在1楼了 看起来会有点多
抢沙发是要悲剧的！
首先 抢个沙发 第二 全部贴在1楼了 看起来会有点多
抢沙发是要悲剧的！
看起来感觉挺专业的，作为普通军迷水平也够高的，讨论还很理智。
90后男孩儿 发表于 2012-10-28 12:32 ![]()
这帖子除了能看到MD军迷所了解的信息以外，还有他们对J20的态度，喜欢飞机，不管来自哪里的
哎……典型的霸主风范，强者之尊，对于强手是欣赏而不是酸，我们也要迎头赶上啊！
这帖子除了能看到MD军迷所了解的信息以外，还有他们对J20的态度，喜欢飞机，不管来自哪里的
哎……典型的霸主风范，强者之尊，对于强手是欣赏而不是酸，我们也要迎头赶上啊！
重开F22生产线用于出口等于扼杀F35。买得起F35的基本都不差钱。
感谢LZ翻译
感觉都是些纯技术迷，对任何新战机都带有强烈的专业关注。
分析还算专业，不过现在没有数据，都是臆测
还算客观吧
美帝站在技术的顶点就是不一样，和毛子、鬼子、WW神马的比酸水少多了，这样的对手值得尊重！
不是美国人吧。这个好像是sinodefence上的。里面几个ID眼熟。印度人俄国人英国人中国人都有