Shenyang next gen combat aircraft thread

[Schwerter_]

i mean medium bomber for f*ing up big targets like buildings and naval destroyers and heavy bombers for f*ing up whole airport complexes and giant military bases.

fighters are generally for air targets and ground vehicles like tanks... heavy fighter or medium bomber for buildings and big ships...

Sure the J-xx can probably bomb buildings, ships and other surface targets if needed, but that’s really nothing special. You’ll struggle to find a fighter built in the last 40 years without at least some form of multi-role capabilities (okay we don’t have proof that J-20 can do A2G but that’s only if you go super strict and only accept things that are 100% proven and not things that are probably true). Again, with 6th gen defining it as a fighter or a bomber or something else doesn’t make a lot of sense since it can probably do a lot more than any single classification of combat aircraft up to now, so trying to call it a bomber makes not a lot of sense.

 

[Jaym]

Sure the J-xx can probably bomb buildings, ships and other surface targets if needed, but that’s really nothing special. You’ll struggle to find a fighter built in the last 40 years without at least some form of multi-role capabilities (okay we don’t have proof that J-20 can do A2G but that’s only if you go super strict and only accept things that are 100% proven and not things that are probably true). Again, with 6th gen defining it as a fighter or a bomber or something else doesn’t make a lot of sense since it can probably do a lot more than any single classification of combat aircraft up to now, so trying to call it a bomber makes not a lot of sense.

J36 medium bomber it cant do big airfields like H20 is suppose to... H20 is a heavy bomber.... theres different 'levels' of bombers.... just like different levels of fighters... at some point the fighter role becomes a bomber role in the hierarchy

 

[Schwerter_]

J36 medium bomber it cant do big airfields like H20 is suppose to... H20 is a heavy bomber.... theres different 'levels' of bombers.... just like different levels of fighters... at some point the fighter role becomes a bomber role in the hierarchy

For the third time, forcing a bomber classification on a 6th gen aircraft makes no sense whatsoever. Yes it most likely can bomb stuff as a secondary role if needed, no that doesn’t mean it’s defined as a bomber.

 

[Jaym]

For the third time, forcing a bomber classification on a 6th gen aircraft makes no sense whatsoever. Yes it most likely can bomb stuff as a secondary role if needed, no that doesn’t mean it’s defined as a bomber.

semantics... if it looks like a duck and quacks... its a duck... if the fighter has a bunch of bombs on it and it actually bombs... its a bomber... at the very least its a fighter bomber... but some kind of bomber

 

[Schwerter_]

semantics... if it looks like a duck and quacks... its a duck... if the fighter has a bunch of bombs on it and it actually bombs... its a bomber... at the very least its a fighter bomber... but some kind of bomber

Sure, and it has a bunch of A2A missiles and can do BVR so it’s a fighter; and it has scary EW abilities so it’s an EW platform; it has side facing radar arrays so it’s some kind of AEW; has large optical apertures so it’s a reconnaissance aircraft; has high-speed datalink and a second crew for coordination so it’s a command platform, has space behind the ejection seat for like 2 iPads a box of chocolate and a jacket so it’s transport… you get the picture. For the 4th time (and I really hope the last time) it’s so much more than just a bomber that classifying it as one makes no sense. It’s like saying you’re a wheel trolley because you both can move boxes around.

 

[Jaym]

Sure, and it has a bunch of A2A missiles and can do BVR so it’s a fighter; and it has scary EW abilities so it’s an EW platform; it has side facing radar arrays so it’s some kind of AEW; has large optical apertures so it’s a reconnaissance aircraft; has high-speed datalink and a second crew for coordination so it’s a command platform, has space behind the ejection seat for like 2 iPads a box of chocolate and a jacket so it’s transport… you get the picture. For the 4th time (and I really hope the last time) it’s so much more than just a bomber that classifying it as one makes no sense. It’s like saying you’re a wheel trolley because you both can move boxes around.

Again semantics doctrine whatever... if an aircraft can be classified as a medium bomber you are basically saying that it has a high treat level in that it can carry missiles that are meant to fubar buildings and naval destroyers... its a practical thing if you want to classify your treat types and their magnitude.

....and it seems like you are the type that absolutely cant be wrong... it clouds judgement

 

[totenchan]

Again semantics doctrine whatever... if an aircraft can be classified as a medium bomber you are basically saying that it has a high treat level in that it can carry missiles that are meant to fubar buildings and naval destroyers... its a practical thing if you want to classify your treat types and their magnitude.

....and it seems like you are the type that absolutely cant be wrong... it clouds judgement

 

[Virtup]

Again semantics doctrine whatever... if an aircraft can be classified as a medium bomber you are basically saying that it has a high treat level in that it can carry missiles that are meant to fubar buildings and naval destroyers... its a practical thing if you want to classify your treat types and their magnitude.

....and it seems like you are the type that absolutely cant be wrong... it clouds judgement

You asked if it was a medium bomber. The very short answer is yes. The longer and far more correct answer is it's a medium bomber+fighter+EW plaform+drone controller. Satisfied?

 

[Jaym]

You asked if it was a medium bomber. The very short answer is yes. The longer and far more correct answer is it's a medium bomber+fighter+EW plaform+drone controller. Satisfied?

nah... i could be wrong also... watch it just be another air superiority fighter that can only carry bombs for destroying at most large vehicles but not buildings.... though I think im more likely correct....

 

[Schwerter_]

Again semantics doctrine whatever... if an aircraft can be classified as a medium bomber you are basically saying that it has a high treat level in that it can carry missiles that are meant to fubar buildings and naval destroyers... its a practical thing if you want to classify your treat types and their magnitude.

....and it seems like you are the type that absolutely cant be wrong... it clouds judgement

Not sure who’s the guy that absolutely can’t be wrong here but whatever floats your boat man, I just say what we know for facts and what are most likely to be true based on educated guesses and assumptions