Chengdu next gen combat aircraft (?J-36) thread

[Gloire_bb]

It’s funny all this talk about how it’s not a 6th Gen fighter because of how big it is where it won’t be able to dogfight. I thought being 6th Gen was in part suppose to being able fly high altitudes where shooting them down won’t be easy especially for other fighters. It makes dogfighting moot then. That’s why it’s suppose to be about air dominance because they can’t shoot you down but it can shoot you down.

All of that is completely beyond the point. Last time flying high for the sake of self-protection was seriously meaningful was in very early 1960s, and even then it rapidly came to everyone that it's hopeless.

There's only one modern aircraft that can do that for self-protection (mig-31), and there it is a side effect of a different, interceptor-specific requirement. No one seriously cares because it's a rare capability, mostly operating at the edge of the world.

Between two jets China has shown, one probably can't maneuver to win a dogfight. Another probably can, and quite likely it can do it very well.
I don't see reasons to get fixated over this, when it just doesn't matter for generation talk.

 

[reservior dogs]

IF the B-21 generates less or as much power as something like a J-36, then it will be obsolete by 2037.

It also sorely needs IRST, and also not sure how the (forward) conformal arrays stack up against the cheek AESAs on the J-36.

The B-21 is built from the ground up as a subsonic bomber. It is not intended to tangle with a fighter like the J-36. Its main feature being stealth, not all the electronics. The only reason people bring them up for discussion after the unveiling of the two planes from China is to have a "we were here first" kind of claim. Other than the fact that it is a stealth plane with similar shape as the J-36, there should be no comparison between the two. As a bomber against China, it was already on the edge of obsolescence given that the Chinese can already attack Guam with their DF missiles followed by carriers. Also once it unleash its cargo, given all the assets the Chinese have in their backyard, how survivable would such a plane be?

 

[taxiya]

Yes I understand using fuel as a heat sink, but do not understand the original assertion that preheated fuel is actually beneficial in any way other than dumping heat.

It is the same principle as heat recovery in some gas turbines such as WR-21. To increase GT efficiency, one want to 1) lower the inlet air temperature as much as possible and 2) increase thermo-energy as much as possible after the compression. The 1 can be done by pre-cooler. The 2 can be done by heat exchanger/sink (recuperator in WR-21), in our discussion the fuel is that conductor.

By returning the heat from exhaust (otherwise dumped), more thermo-energy is used to heat up the combustion mix. This addition would have been made by consumting more fuel in a simple loop. So the benefit is the higher effeciency, or lower fuel consumption.

In the following diagram, the red line is where the heat goes.

 

[tphuang]

Eh, I think in the simplest terms the best gauge for how quickly the US can keep pace depends on where they are with component technologies and subsystems, especially in the cost performance dimension. If they’re at parity or ahead their pace is purely dictated by organizational questions. If they’re behind on the component tech then their schedule worsens considerably.

I don't think I'm exploring whether or not US can keep pace, but just when NGAD might be ready. I do expect NGAD to have certain higher specs than J-36 when it enters service.

What is price tag after all those aggressive updates on NGAD? Kendall thought $300m is an unacceptable price. How about $1b for each new NGAD manner fighter? that’s not a joke since b21 already has a price tag of $800m

We will see. I think it's quite obvious the light NGAD proposal floated around is not sufficient. What's the point of developing an aircraft that will join service later and be worse than your peer adversary?

F-35 have not even ended its systems checklist....service entrance in 2015-2016 and first prototype flight in 2006.

20 years and it don't have all its capabilities and have not overcome its shortfall.

If they don't have something already in the hangar, I cannot see them achieving it before 2040 for a steady working system even if they push hard for it.

B-21 morphing into a loitering AAM turret is their best counter for the 2030s. J-36 is clearly pulling the carpet under their feet.

It's best not to underestimate US MIC getting their act together. B-21 with AAMs is not going to work.

Maybe unpopular opinion:The primary reason for the prolonged development cycles of new weapons like the F-22 and F-35 in the U.S. military post-Cold War is the lack of pressure from peer competitors.

Therefore, it is reasonable to anticipate that we will witness a swift response from the U.S. military (in panic): perhaps expediting new tests and modifications on the already test-flown NGAD (though this is uncertain) to quickly propose a new solution ( with minor differences) for production. Or, they might take a bit longer to introduce a more competitive new design.

I think it is reasonable to expect faster dev cycle for NGAD after this. And I don't think my timeline is unrealistic. You simply can't expect a compressed development and test cycle like for 4th generation because the test program for modern aircraft is just so much more complicated. F-15 wasn't expected to also act to have C2 capabilities or EW capability of a dedicated large EW platform against ground/sea/air target.

 

[tphuang]

However, I don't believe it will take that long (though the budget will undoubtedly be larger).Maybe achieves IOC on 2032-35.

NGAD still hasn't picked a winning program. And this will definitely force some tough decision making on aircraft capability vs price. What was flown a couple of years ago was likely a YF plane. It has no real relevance with updated requirements.

It would be better if you can provide your own timeline and explain how you came up with it.

 

[latenlazy]

I don't think I'm exploring whether or not US can keep pace, but just when NGAD might be ready. I do expect NGAD to have certain higher specs than J-36 when it enters service.

Yes but I’m suggesting that’s another way to gauge timelines. Look at the component tech stack to see how likely they are to field something they’re actually happy with.

 

[tphuang]

Yes but I’m suggesting that’s another way to gauge timelines. Look at the component tech stack to see how likely they are to field something they’re actually happy with.

I think the tech stack may be ready much sooner, but the development and testing cycle will need to take some period of time regardless of how mature the tech may be. Block 4 F-35 is kind of a good example of that. Its dev cycle is kind of just dragging on and on. None of the tech should be all that complicated.

 

[latenlazy]

Minimum 2x PL-17+4x PL-15. Depending how deep the bays are it can carry another 2x PL-17.

Max load out IMO is 4x PL-17 and 4x PL-15 with the PL-17 stacked on top of each other.

Some artistic illustrations on exploring how the J-36 may be armed in the future, with the possibility of dual-stacking the AAMs inside the J-36's main IWB. Posted by @Hurin92 on Twitter.

If this arrangement is possible, then a max loadout of 8x PL-17s and 6x PL-15s should be viable (or perhaps swapping the PL-15s with 12x tandemly-arranged micro-AAMs for self-defense).

View attachment 142477
View attachment 142478
View attachment 142479
View attachment 142480

So I’m still waiting on better estimates but if the central bay is long enough I actually think a max load out might look more like PL-17 sized missiles *in the side bay* and two rows of PL-15 sized missiles in the central bay. So if the side bays could fit 2x PL-17s each that would be 4x PL-17s+8x PL-15s, or potentially even 4x PL-17s and 12x PL-15s. At minimum this idea would be 2x PL-17 and 8x-PL-15s. But this is still a very aspirational speculation.

 

[latenlazy]

Maybe unpopular opinion:The primary reason for the prolonged development cycles of new weapons like the F-22 and F-35 in the U.S. military post-Cold War is the lack of pressure from peer competitors.

It's important to note that the U.S. military's air superiority has remained unchallenged since the end of World War II (even the German jet aircraft during WWII did not exert significant competitive pressure on the U.S. due to insufficient production numbers). Broadly speaking, since the Wright brothers invented the airplane, Americans have consistently held a dominant position in the field of aviation. This is the first time that Americans have lost this crown.

Therefore, it is reasonable to anticipate that we will witness a swift response from the U.S. military (in panic): perhaps expediting new tests and modifications on the already test-flown NGAD (though this is uncertain) to quickly propose a new solution ( with minor differences) for production. Or, they might take a bit longer to introduce a more competitive new design.

Regardless, we are on the brink of a new arms race in this century. While this may be detrimental to the world at large, But for us military enthusiasts, it presents an unprecedented opportunity.

If the tech capability and industry is still there to support a rapid ramp up of cadence then yes. The question is how much atrophy factors have kicked in. When you start picking at the details I think there are a lot of questions that don’t look very good for the US right now.

 

[antwerpery]

It’s funny all this talk about how it’s not a 6th Gen fighter because of how big it is where it won’t be able to dogfight. I thought being 6th Gen was in part suppose to being able fly high altitudes where shooting them down won’t be easy especially for other fighters. It makes dogfighting moot then. That’s why it’s suppose to be about air dominance because they can’t shoot you down but it can shoot you down.

The J36 will be at the center of China's combat web and will only be used in large scale conflicts. In a large scale conflict, it's gonna to be surrounded by hundreds of other aircraft and probably personally always be escorted by a squadron of drones. Kinda like a carrier strike group. Asking why it can't dogfight is like asking why an aircraft carrier doesn't have anti-submarine and anti-missile capabilities like a destroyer or frigate.