Chengdu next gen combat aircraft (?J-36) thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Do we have any lawyers here? Is it too late to copyright (trademark?) the term?
This is actually one of the best (English-language) articles yet on the J-36. Except for the typo where Sweetman refers to the PL-15 not fitting in J-20 IWBs, when he clearly meant PL-17s.
Another interesting point is the FB-22 / NG’s FB project exploring the launch of cheap glide munitions at mach 2, for a 170km range. It would seem that you might be able to increase that range with a small change in munition design (shape, wings, weight, perhaps a small booster), or in release altitude. Would be huge if the J-36 could achieve a 250 to 300km range on glide bombs. I suppose you could always have a loitering munition in a break away bomb casing - but then you’re just reintroducing cost and complexity.
Last edited:
Huge indeed as glide bomb's range is directly proportional to Height of drop and L/D. Typical JDAM have like 2-3, so 10k m altitude drop will yield 30 km range. Winged and lifting body bomb tho can have higher some 5-6. 300 Km tho i wonder if it can be achieved without form of propulsion, maybe a rocket motor like French Hammer.
Has he been reading this forum?
Most of his point imo has been discussed here. Although, I think his article is still well worth reading.
I would say he is still thinking too much on solo platform and not the sensor fusion, command & control + EW that will be expected for this aircraft to carry out.
The threat posed by DF26 against US carriers is significantly enhanced by J36 EW pressure coordinated with its CCAs. That’s something never really mentioned anywhere.
In the spirit of speculating about the timing and form of NGAD, I think it is useful to make some speculation about the different sub-systems about who is ahead (U.S. versus China). I will give it a go here with the preface that it is speculation on my part based on reading of various sources. Please chime in and invalidate my assumptions as you see fit.
1. Engines
1.1 normal turbofan. There is no question in my mind that the U.S. is ahead here, however, the difference maybe in the range of 10-15% power. It may even be very close between the two.
1.2 VCE. I think the U.S. is still ahead here. However, it is most likely the case that technology is not yet mature for either side at this point. NGAD, being ten or so years behind J-36, may benefit from the late comer advantage and actually be able to field this.
1.3 TBCC. The U.S. has longer development time here, but unfortunately, we don't have a test vehicle to test this in. The hypersonic glide vehicle programs have not gone well for the U.S. due to the lack of wind tunnels for hypersonic flight. I would say both sides are not ready with this for now.
2. Hypersonic glide vehicle, the Chinese are ahead here. We can see this via DF-17 and the lack of its counterpart for the U.S. From what I understand, the wind tunnels are a decisive factor here. The Chinese has wind tunnels that will do mach 30 and we don't even have one that can do mach 5.
3. avionics
3.1 radar, I would say both are at the same level. However, the Chinese have a decisive advantage in their control of rare earth metals and thus the cost advantage.
3.2 EO/IR, I would put the U.S. ahead here given that we have been at it longer. My guess is that the advantage is marginal.
3.3 flight by wire, I believe the U.S. is ahead here, but since the Chinese have had this since the J-10 days, the differences may be small and that the U.S. may have better coverage of the corner cases due to longer operation time.
3.4 early warning/IFF. Both sides should have functional ones by now. The edge goes to the U.S due to long operating time, since it won't change the trajectory of the NGAD, I will leave it at that.
3.4 Quantum Radar, The Chinese have had publications of this a while back so I think they maybe ahead here, but at this point, the system is not mature enough to go on an aircraft.
4. Structure/new material. The Chinese has a decisive advantage here due to their extensive use of 3D printing for civilian use and the need for new materials for their industrial use as well as having the plethora research centers in their universities. While the U.S. also have research, the need from industries is limited.
5. missile tech. I think the Chinese is decisively ahead of the U.S. here given the array of missiles that they are already fielding.
6. Cooling system at supersonic flight. I think this is a new problem and both are at the same starting line.
7. Aviation manufacturing and assembly. The U.S. used to enjoy a decisive advantage here due to our civilian aviation industry, but the Chinese are catching up as they copy the successful models pioneered by the U.S. and having an extensive manufacturing eco-system to draw from. I would call this a draw.
The Chinese, with their current state of technology, opted to have a fighter jet with three engines, doing Mach 2.5(marginally better then the J-20), but significantly larger size with significantly longer range and quantum leap in power generation and avionics as well as the ability to carry much larger weapon in its internal weapon bay. At first look, I find it a very smart move. It has a huge impact on their entire network of systems and it bypass some of their weakness, for example in engine tech. In fact, with the three engines system, they can optimize for two different flight regimes. For example, the middle engine could be tuned to optimize for lower Mach numbers where as the two side ones for higher speed.
The U.S., if we are to have an NGAD, will likely go along the same path. A survey of the different subsystems indicates that, while we do have a fair lead in VCE and normal turbofans, in the other areas where the U.S. do have an advantage, it was mainly in operating the system much longer. The Chinese have their own version of the system that works. While VCE provide longer combat radius, it is difficult to imagine our system being much superior in other ways. It is easy to see our system being significantly more expensive to build.
1. Engines
1.1 normal turbofan. There is no question in my mind that the U.S. is ahead here, however, the difference maybe in the range of 10-15% power. It may even be very close between the two.
1.2 VCE. I think the U.S. is still ahead here. However, it is most likely the case that technology is not yet mature for either side at this point. NGAD, being ten or so years behind J-36, may benefit from the late comer advantage and actually be able to field this.
1.3 TBCC. The U.S. has longer development time here, but unfortunately, we don't have a test vehicle to test this in. The hypersonic glide vehicle programs have not gone well for the U.S. due to the lack of wind tunnels for hypersonic flight. I would say both sides are not ready with this for now.
2. Hypersonic glide vehicle, the Chinese are ahead here. We can see this via DF-17 and the lack of its counterpart for the U.S. From what I understand, the wind tunnels are a decisive factor here. The Chinese has wind tunnels that will do mach 30 and we don't even have one that can do mach 5.
3. avionics
3.1 radar, I would say both are at the same level. However, the Chinese have a decisive advantage in their control of rare earth metals and thus the cost advantage.
3.2 EO/IR, I would put the U.S. ahead here given that we have been at it longer. My guess is that the advantage is marginal.
3.3 flight by wire, I believe the U.S. is ahead here, but since the Chinese have had this since the J-10 days, the differences may be small and that the U.S. may have better coverage of the corner cases due to longer operation time.
3.4 early warning/IFF. Both sides should have functional ones by now. The edge goes to the U.S due to long operating time, since it won't change the trajectory of the NGAD, I will leave it at that.
3.4 Quantum Radar, The Chinese have had publications of this a while back so I think they maybe ahead here, but at this point, the system is not mature enough to go on an aircraft.
4. Structure/new material. The Chinese has a decisive advantage here due to their extensive use of 3D printing for civilian use and the need for new materials for their industrial use as well as having the plethora research centers in their universities. While the U.S. also have research, the need from industries is limited.
5. missile tech. I think the Chinese is decisively ahead of the U.S. here given the array of missiles that they are already fielding.
6. Cooling system at supersonic flight. I think this is a new problem and both are at the same starting line.
7. Aviation manufacturing and assembly. The U.S. used to enjoy a decisive advantage here due to our civilian aviation industry, but the Chinese are catching up as they copy the successful models pioneered by the U.S. and having an extensive manufacturing eco-system to draw from. I would call this a draw.
The Chinese, with their current state of technology, opted to have a fighter jet with three engines, doing Mach 2.5(marginally better then the J-20), but significantly larger size with significantly longer range and quantum leap in power generation and avionics as well as the ability to carry much larger weapon in its internal weapon bay. At first look, I find it a very smart move. It has a huge impact on their entire network of systems and it bypass some of their weakness, for example in engine tech. In fact, with the three engines system, they can optimize for two different flight regimes. For example, the middle engine could be tuned to optimize for lower Mach numbers where as the two side ones for higher speed.
The U.S., if we are to have an NGAD, will likely go along the same path. A survey of the different subsystems indicates that, while we do have a fair lead in VCE and normal turbofans, in the other areas where the U.S. do have an advantage, it was mainly in operating the system much longer. The Chinese have their own version of the system that works. While VCE provide longer combat radius, it is difficult to imagine our system being much superior in other ways. It is easy to see our system being significantly more expensive to build.
Last edited:
True. Wherever in the 1IC and 2IC PLA air assets are, means PLARF have their backs. And PLARF would have precise and realtime targeting data.
Wasn’t there also recently something about HGV or MRBM-ranged SAMs? Admittedly I didn’t spend anytime looking at it. I think it was just before Zhuhai 2024.
Can check traffic from OZ IPs
US has the lead in low orbit constellation: Starlink
I also want to add that US may have some special materials for stealth coating, otherwise B21 can not be that expensive.