A senior reporter from the South China Morning Post approached me with some questions on the J-36. Here's the queries and my mildly-informed responses, in case of interest. Apologies if I got anything wrong.
My name is Mr , and I'm not affiliated with any institutions. Now, let's move onto your questions:
1/ The aircraft’s tailless design likely enhances stealth but may reduce manoeuvrability. This suggests it might not be a traditional fighter jet. Do you agree? Some experts have speculated it could be a bomber or an aerial arsenal. Alternatively, might it operate alongside platforms like the J-20 or drones to engage enemies at long range, leaving dogfighting to companion aircraft? Which scenario seems most plausible to you?
Let me first respond to the tailless design. You are totally right that not having vertical stabilisers (i.e. tailfins) will enhance stealth. Tailfins represent large flat surfaces that can reflect radar signals back to the source. Stealth fighters reduce the extent of this impact on stealth by using canted tailfins, but a tailless design will be stealthier all else equal.
The lack of tailfins will negatively affect the plane's stability and manoeuvrability, but there are design features likely aimed at compensating for this to an extent. There are substantial control surfaces on the trailing edges of the plane's delta wings, including five split flap rudders on each of the outboard wing positions. They are likely part of a complex flight control regime aimed to bolster flight performance. Some PLA watchers suggest that two of the three engines may have thrust vector control - if true, this would also boost manoeuvrability.
While I do think the J-36 (tentative name arising from the first two digits of its serial number) is not a traditional fighter jet, this is not because of the tailless design. Modern air combat increasingly takes place outside of the visual range. In my chart below, you can see beyond-visual-range missiles accounting for most of the air-to-air kills in the period from 1990 to 2002, and the proportion should have increased after 2002. Close range dogfighting where manoeuvrability plays the key role is not expected to feature prominently in contemporary air-to-air combat between modern air forces.
View attachment 142535
Source:
.
The J-36 is unlikely to be a bomber aircraft or even a fighter-bomber (with only a secondary air-to-air role), even though some analysts strongly point to that possibility. Analysts who say it's a bomber have been influenced by the emergence of the JH-XX fighter-bomber concept, and the J-36's large size. However, the preponderant view among PLA watchers specifically is that this is a next-gen air superiority aircraft, with a secondary air-to-ground strike capability.
In my view, how the J-36 differs from a traditional fighter is that it's expected to excel in a 'system-of-systems' encounter between two opposing air forces. This is a key feature of other 6-gen fighter programmes like the US Air Force's NGAD. I expect the J-36 to control multiple unmanned collaborative combat aircraft (CCA), coordinate with frontline fighters, gather the data from these assets, and put together a coherent battlefield picture. It should be able to use this information to direct the combat operation of frontline fighters, and enhance their situational awareness.
The J-36 will no doubt excel in independent engagements as well. Its centreline weapon bays are about 7 metres in length, which suggests they could carry the PL-17 extreme-range air-to-air missile. Its smaller side weapon bays at around 5 metres should be able to carry PL-15 missiles. Its large missile capacity allows it to engage many targets in a single engagement. Its advanced stealth capability should enhance its survivability in independent engagements. However, I see the primary strength of the J-36 to be network-centric warfare, to coordinate and control the frontline of an air battle, and to serve as an intermediary between the frontline aircraft and the rear (composing of assets like command and control aircraft and aerial refuelling tankers).
2/ Its size appears larger than the J-20, which could indicate it is not carrier-capable. Does this suggest that a naval variant of this aircraft might be in development?
It's highly unlikely the J-36 is carrier capable, as you pointed out. In my view, it's also unlikely that it will be developed into a carrier fighter, in large part due to its massive size. The J-36 is definitely larger than the J-20. Current estimates of the J-36's dimensions vary, with most PLA watchers putting its length at 22 to 26 metres (without the pitot tube), and wingspan at 20 to 24 metres. This is greater than the J-20 at 21 metres in length and 13 metres in wingspan, and especially regarding wingspan. Aside from the plane's large size, the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation has not designed any of China's carrier fighters, such as the J-15, J-15T and J-35. They have less experience than the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, which designed the aforementioned carrier fighters.
As you might be aware, the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation has flight tested their own next-gen fighter prototype on 26 December, which was also filmed by members of the public. Shenyang's 6th-gen fighter appears significantly smaller than Chengdu's J-36, with only a twin-engine configuration (as opposed to the triple engines of the J-36). Some PLA watchers have speculated that the Shenyang plane could be developed into a future 6th-gen carrier fighter for the PLAN, owing to its smaller size compared with Chengdu's fighter, and the Shenyang Corporation's rich experience in developing carrier fighters for the PLAN.
However, there is at present no substantive evidence of any plans by Shenyang to develop its prototype into a carrier fighter. Rumours around its future navalisation should be treated as (reasonable) speculation. I personally don't have a strong opinion on this - let's wait and see.
3/ The aircraft’s size and potential for carrying a significant payload and powerful radar systems suggest it could function as an aerial command centre, perhaps directing drones. How do you foresee this or next-generation aircraft reshaping the PLA’s aerial combat strategies?
I think 6-gen combat aircraft like Chengdu's J-36, and potentially Shenyang's next-gen aircraft as well, will move the PLA Air Force substantially further to realising the full potential of network-centric warfare. This is about moving the aerial battle away from the encounter between individual aircraft and UCAVs, to a confrontation between two system of systems. I expect there to be multiple layers or echelons within each system of systems, with a frontline, an intermediary, and a rear command element. The 6-gen fighters I expect will act as pivotal nodes of communication, information processing and control, within one of these echelons. This approach leverages the powerful radar systems and information processing of 6th-gen aircraft to enhance situational awareness, coordination, and combat effectiveness of the entire air formation.
There's significant debate between PLA watchers around the exact place of the J-36 within this layered system. Some analysts argue for a relatively aggressive deployment of the plane on the frontline (as opposed to the intermediary or rear). They envision the J-36 to lead the battle from the front, to aggressively support lesser aircraft to punch a hole through opposing ranks. However, I do not find this representation convincing in terms of how the PLAAF will use the J-36, because such aggressive usage will put these valuable 6-gen fighters at greater risk and will expose them to higher loss rates.
I believe the PLAAF will opt for a more conservative strategy in using the J-36, to reflect its high value and its importance as a networking and information processing asset. In my view, the J-36 will probably occupy an intermediary echelon. The J-36 serves as a critical bridge between the frontline (comprising of UCAVs and 5th-gen fighters like the J-20 and J-35A) and the rear echelon (composed of airborne early warning and control aircraft, aerial refueling tankers, and other support assets). The J-36's advanced radar and sensor suite can detect enemy stealth fighters at greater distances than the J-20, enabling the latter to focus its radar cone and therefore extend the J-20's own detection range. The J-36 gathers, processes and disseminates information across the formation, ensuring that all combat elements operate with a unified understanding of the battlefield. Its stealth and survivability make it an invaluable node in this network, and it is well capable of defending itself and engaging enemies independently when the opportunity arises. Basically, in my vision, the J-36 is a force multiplier rather than a frontline combatant.
I hope that rambling answers this question well enough. Hope you found the above responses helpful.
