Shenyang next gen combat aircraft thread

[Alfa_Particle]

I don't think this one can carry the PL-17 internally at all.

I guess it's 8 PL15, PL17 is too long for the rear fuselage of this fighter jet.

Actually, not really. I roughly ran the numbers and assuming a total length of 21-ish metres, it is completely doable if the midsection of the IWB is longer as roughly indicated. Internal PL-17s are simply too much of a force multiplier over 5th gens to ignore, even if it's only one or two. The leap in A/A capabilities is simply too temping - it enables ULR engagements against HVTs or even gives an opposing fighter something to think about before it can even shoot back. Finish it off with a PL-15/16 once it cashed in all its energy evading the PL-17.

I've said it already:

Carrying and lobbing multiple PL-17s obviously isn't its main job, but I think it makes sense doctrinally for it to carry just one or two of them to enhance its air superiority capabilities.

Edit: there's even more space assuming the same length as the J-15.

 

[Kich]

Actually, not really. I roughly ran the numbers and assuming a total length of 21-ish metres, it is completely doable if the midsection of the IWB is longer as roughly indicated. Internal PL-17s are simply too much of a force multiplier over 5th gens to ignore, even if it's only one or two. The leap in A/A capabilities is simply too temping - it enables ULR engagements against HVTs or even gives an opposing fighter something to think about before it can even shoot back. Finish it off with a PL-15/16 once it cashed in all its energy evading the PL-17.

I've said it already:

People put too much stock on VLAAM missiles like PL-17 and AIM-174. You will still need to be able to detect and track whatever that's flying at those extreme ranges meaning something else needs to be close by to detect those targets.

But those targets in turn can destroy those frontline assets providing sensor and cueing data for shooters way back.

Even though air-sea battles will absolutely be networked sensors driving, in a peer to peer conflicts most air engagements will probably end up falling to close range duels again

 

[CVNisCV]

Attention!!!A F-47 Prototype.100% Boeing & 100% MADE IN USA.

 

[CannedFish]

People put too much stock on VLAAM missiles like PL-17 and AIM-174. You will still need to be able to detect and track whatever that's flying at those extreme ranges meaning something else needs to be close by to detect those targets.

But those targets in turn can destroy those frontline assets providing sensor and cueing data for shooters way back.

Even though air-sea battles will absolutely be networked sensors driving, in a peer to peer conflicts most air engagements will probably end up falling to close range duels again

That's what the CCAs/loyal wingman are for.

If the 'actual' 6th gens get too close to each other, the battle has been practically decided at that point.

 

[Alfa_Particle]

You will still need to be able to detect and track whatever that's flying at those extreme ranges meaning something else needs to be close by to detect those targets.

Larger HTVs like tankers and AEW/C are easier to detect, and even moreso with friendly AEW/C. You don't have to have something close (of course closer is ideal, but if everything is ideal then we wouldn't have this conversation here. The internal PL-17s are exactly for non-ideal situations - better to have the choice to carry them than not being able to choose at all, especially when it's doable).

 

[THX 1138]

This is how big the J-XS would have to be... if its internal bay was as large as the J-36's main internal bay:












This is how big the J-XS will be... if its internal bay was only as large as the J-20's main internal bay:






If we assume the J-XS is only as large as a J-20, then its internal bay is not going to be any larger than the J-20 internal bay. Expecting the J-XS to carry PL-17 is not realistic. In fact, I don't think the J-XS can even replace a J-15T. It will not be able to internally carry large missiles that are mounted externally on a J-15T.

 

[CannedFish]

I'm guessing 2x PL-17 and 4 x PL-15/16 makes the most sense. Have we got anything tangible to show if the J-50 will have sidebays for SRAAMs?

There has been talk of J-50 having visible side bays on the Chinese sites, but until we get better quality photos they are at best speculation.

Also, as a general question, some days ago Hurin from X hinted (no doubt based on chinese fora talk) that the next generation of AAMs, no doubt intended for J-36 and J-50, will have revolutionary propulsion. What kind of propulsion that could be?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Kich]

That's what the CCAs/loyal wingman are for.

If the 'actual' 6th gens get too close to each other, the battle has been practically decided at that point.

And like I wrote, those CCA drones can be destroyed by whatever targets they are tracking.

The kill-chain for PL-17 and other very long range AAMs can easily be disrupted or broken.

And if you are going to fly in CCA close to the frontlines to detect targets, why not arm them with missiles to get the job done.

The point is if your CCAs are destroyed and the target/boogie is still flying and closing in, are you going to turn around and high-tail from the battle?
I hope not because then why would you even exist and carry MR-AAM and SR-AAM.

Air battles will be more complex and have more tactics than what I'm making it to be but this is just the basics.

 

[Kich]

Larger HTVs like tankers and AEW/C are easier to detect, and even moreso with friendly AEW/C. You don't have to have something close (of course closer is ideal, but if everything is ideal then we wouldn't have this conversation here. The internal PL-17s are exactly for non-ideal situations - better to have the choice to carry them than not being able to choose at all, especially when it's doable).

Regardless of how detectable HVTs are by friendly AWACS, I think in many situations, most HVTs will not be placed at ranges to really threatened them. They might be kept 500 miles or more away from the front.

The big benefit of VL-AAM is that they will stretch the logistic and support lines for the opposing side. No one is going to be flying non-stealthy tanker 300 miles near potential enemy fighters.
And with more powerful transceivers modules being made, AWACS from all sides (with their giant flashlight sensor) will still remain far back behind the frontlines.

Range--away from the frontlines--will protect most HVTs, limiting the number of kills VL-AAMs might achieve. But I guess that alone is success for these missiles.

I don't want to derail this thread anymore.

 

[totenchan]

There has been talk of J-50 having visible side bays on the Chinese sites, but until we get better quality photos they are at best speculation.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

View attachment 149962

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

View attachment 149963

If there is no reference to any actual "china fora talk", this is as good uninformed speculation (worthless). Something which that particular twitter user loves to do.