Talk:Chengdu J-20

fuel in kg?....2400 L x tank external?,...really?....19.000kg?=25.000 liters,THIS IS UNREAL.....
25.000 l of fuel ,imposible,false.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.223.15.103 (talk) 22:30, 26 October 2017‎

The empty weight of Chengdu J-20
The empty weight of Chengdu J-20 in English language is wrong. 19391kg is the empty weight of earlier model, later its empty weight reduced to 17000kg then reduced to about 15000kg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldlwang (talk • contribs) 03:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Do you have a source for this. I was able to find where the 17000kg claim claim from but not the 15000kg one. also the source for the 17000kg reads like propaganda. YEEETER0 (talk) 00:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
 * 《歼20的空重为何比F22轻30% 原来用了这三项"黑科技"》 https://mil.news.sina.com.cn/zhengming/2021-02-01/doc-ikftpnny3170535.shtml
 * You should know the author of the article is “Ordnance industry science technology” magazine, it is a national periodical officially approved by the State Press and Publication Administration, and is publicly issued at home and abroad. "China Journal Network" and other databases include full-text journals. The magazine integrates authority, theory and professionalism, has high academic value, and is the authoritative basis for the author's scientific research and promotion. Ronaldlwang (talk) 14:06, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This article makes a couple of provably false statements especially about the F-22's construction methods. It also again reads like a propaganda piece. finally it cites public information but doesn't provide a source for that at all. YEEETER0 (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Stealth of Chengdu J-20
Chengdu J-20 is the first stealth aircraft using meta-material as stealth technology. China built the world's first production line of meta-material, and applied meta-material on its stealth aircraft. Its stealth technology leads the US one generation. It can also be seen from the stealth coating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldlwang (talk • contribs) 03:59, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The only articles that I was able to find about this were speculative about possible effects if meta-materials were used. YEEETER0 (talk) 00:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Ronaldlwang -- your comments are nonsensical. First, you have no idea whether or not "China built the world's first production line of meta-material" for the simple reason that strategic materials used in critical defense applications are not announced by nations whose industries make and use them. For all you know, the US, UK, Japan and other nations are already producing such materials for defense applications. Nor do you have the slightest idea whether or not China "leads the US by one generation". In order to know such a thing, you would have to be privy to the highest security intelligence in both nations, and we both know you aren't. Second, "meta-material" isn't a material. A metamaterial is any material that is engineered to have a property not found in naturally occurring materials. And third, your claim that "It (metamaterial) can be seen from the stealth coating" is absurd. WHERE can we see "the stealth coating" in question, and how can we know that it is a metamaterial? Metamaterials aren't visibly any different from any other material. Try again with your CCP propaganda, and next time try to make it more believable. Bricology (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * What I said here is from the video clip of CCTV state media. You treat me as an idiot who doesn't even know what meta-material is.  What I said the production line is commercial industry, not national defense military small production.  This news is also from CCTV state media.  I am really sorry that you know little about China new development and most updated China official news.  At least, China state media officially reported that meta-material was applied on China stealth fighter, did you hear any similar report about US stealth fighter?! Ronaldlwang (talk) 14:20, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 * CCTV is widely considered to be a propaganda outlet. you need to find something better than this. YEEETER0 (talk) 18:38, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
 * If you know nothing about the authority of CCTV state media in China, please watch more CCTV. 《大国重器（第二季）》 第八集 创新体系   CCTV财经  41:11.  It's similar about GaN factory, do you know the world's largest gallium nitride plant is in China? I think you have to be humble to refresh your knowledge about China. Ronaldlwang (talk) 14:48, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

About top speed again
One of the pilot of Chengdu J-20 once talked on the state media about the maximum speed of Chengdu J-20 is 52km/s, which means the top speed of Chengdu J-20 is above 2.5469 Mach. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldlwang (talk • contribs) 04:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * You cannot use Propaganda as a source. YEEETER0 (talk) 00:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

false information
It says that the dual canards wouldn't interfere with stealth, and uses the YF-23 as an example to attempt to prove this point. However, why link to that source, which is offline? The article on the YF-23 has photographs of the craft; it doesn't have the canards in question! There is a some peculiar propaganda mixed into this article.71.63.160.210 (talk) 01:58, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Do you have any conflicts of interest you'd like to disclose? 2600:387:15:917:0:0:0:B (talk) 06:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


 * YF-23 has vertical stabilizers, which are protruding vertical tail fins in rear. Dual canards are just rear horizontal stabilizers/fins in a different position, yet nobody says YF-23's vertical stabilizers or F-22's vertical+horizontal stabilizers interferes with stealth. Plus, canards that are locked in horizontal plane with rest of aircraft at max cruise speed can significant minimize reflection. Canards are helpful at close engagements where AoA matters, so stealth matters little in WVR combat.Rwat128 (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Wrong link in references?
I noticed a reference with a "cite journal requires journal=" error: Heath, Timothy R.; Gunness, Kristen (17 March 2018). "Understanding China's Strategy". RAND Corporation. Retrieved 17 March 2018. Looking closer, I found that the URL goes to a completely different article "The PLA and China's Rejuvenation" with a different date and 2 of the 3 authors the same. I suspect the URL is wrong, but I don't know, so I'll leave the fix for someone else. KenShirriff (talk) 05:48, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Comparable stealth to F35/F22 Claim
"while being more comparable to the American F-22 and F-35, and its stealth profile could be further enhanced as the program matures." neither of the sources provided back up this claim; they only speculate that it would be better than the su57. Claim should be removed or a new source should be found. YEEETER0 (talk) 17:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Noted and changed. It seems the author Alex Hollings also altered his article sometimes after the publication (without mentioning on the PopSci website), which now included substantially different languages comparing to his original stored on the archive. Loned (talk) 06:40, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2023
Operational History > Deployment > 6th Paragraph > Correct "portal" to "patrols"

In April 2022, Chinese state media reported J-20 started regular patrols in the South China Sea. Stealpoint (talk) 03:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

NATO name confirmation
https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/1a9360fae727a181597777e7a82d0dbb Aircrew12345 (talk) 03:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

source for stats is really bad
his source (https://guofang.tsinghua.edu.cn/info/1017/1523.htm) is what it seems like most of the statcard has come from and it is really bad. It makes some wierd claims and also some provably false ones such as that the J-20 has a cannon and that it's nato name is "fire fang." I don't know though it could just be google translate wierdness. Also this could be an issue on my end but i can't access the other source. YEEETER0 (talk) 22:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)