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

[vincent]

But this air cruiser can also attack land objectives so its multirole heavy fighter bomber

So can F-22 and F-35

 

[Blitzo]

But this air cruiser can also attack land objectives so its multirole heavy fighter bomber

Its primary role is an air to air combat aircraft oriented to operate within next generation aerial warfare concepts, with multirole capabilities that include strike that all modern aircraft have.


The best way to approach things, is to accept that an air superiority fighter for the future does not need to be particularly nimble, and instead view things like networking, EW, power generation, command capabilities, payload, stealth and persistence/range/endurance as more important instead.

 

[EmoBirb]

But this air cruiser can also attack land objectives so its multirole heavy fighter bomber

The Su-57 is a very big jet which most successful combat missions included blowing up a thermal power plant with an internally carried cruise missile.

Is it a bomber or fighter-bomber (hehe)?

No, it's a multirole fighter.

The F-35 is similar, in fact the program was named "Joint STRIKE fighter", with the entire aircraft being optimized for A2G missions, hunting SAMs, TELs, dropping bombs, you name it. It's still a fighter and by most undoubtedly considered a multirole fighter.

The J-36 is big because it needs to be, it most likely features, like the Su-57, at least three sperate radar arrays. However most likely much larger and more powerful. On top of that come more sophisticated avionics, other sensors like EOTS and who knows what else. All of that requires energy and cooling. And all of that has to come or go somewhere. On top of that comes range, that thing is designed (most likely) to establish air superiority in the western pacific. So it needs long range, which means lots of fuel. However it should also be able to carry large air-to-air missiles to get the most out of it's advanced radar and engage targets at long ranges. Also it should be able to carry ALCMs or even ALBMs. Currently the Su-57 is the only stealth fighter that can carry ALCMs internally. However it's doubtful it will be the last. That ability is so incredibly useful, I am 100% there will be supersonic ALCMs for the J-36.

All of the above lead to a large aircraft. When you have superior radar, missiles and avionics, as well as being able to work with CCAs...well then maneuverability becomes secondary at best. It's simply not nearly as important as any of the above.

And that seems to be the trend. None of the notional concepts of any 6th Generation fighter from the US, Europe or China look to prioritize maneuverability. It's simply not important for fighters of the next generation.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The Su-57 is a very big jet which most successful combat missions included blowing up a thermal power plant with an internally carried cruise missile.

Is it a bomber or fighter-bomber (hehe)?

No, it's a multirole fighter.

The F-35 is similar, in fact the program was named "Joint STRIKE fighter", with the entire aircraft being optimized for A2G missions, hunting SAMs, TELs, dropping bombs, you name it. It's still a fighter and by most undoubtedly considered a multirole fighter.

The J-36 is big because it needs to be, it most likely features, like the Su-57, at least three sperate radar arrays. However most likely much larger and more powerful. On top of that come more sophisticated avionics, other sensors like EOTS and who knows what else. All of that requires energy and cooling. And all of that has to come or go somewhere. On top of that comes range, that thing is designed (most likely) to establish air superiority in the western pacific. So it needs long range, which means lots of fuel. However it should also be able to carry large air-to-air missiles to get the most out of it's advanced radar and engage targets at long ranges. Also it should be able to carry ALCMs or even ALBMs. Currently the Su-57 is the only stealth fighter that can carry ALCMs internally. However it's doubtful it will be the last. That ability is so incredibly useful, I am 100% there will be supersonic ALCMs for the J-36.

All of the above lead to a large aircraft. When you have superior radar, missiles and avionics, as well as being able to work with CCAs...well then maneuverability becomes secondary at best. It's simply not nearly as important as any of the above.

And that seems to be the trend. None of the notional concepts of any 6th Generation fighter from the US, Europe or China look to prioritize maneuverability. It's simply not important for fighters of the next generation.

High AOA knife fighting, probably not. You still need decent thrust to weight and supersonic maneuverability to enhance your launch envelope.

 

[charles18]

....
The best way to approach things, is to accept that an air superiority fighter for the future does not need to be particularly nimble, and instead view things like networking, EW, power generation, command capabilities, payload, stealth and persistence/range/endurance as more important instead.

I'm okay with that.
In fact let's take it one step further.
Maybe the "air superiority fighter" of the future puts not just less weight but instead absolute zero weight into speed and maneuverability, in regard to survivability. Can an air superiority fighter be as slow moving as a cargo plane and still dominate the air?
Sure of course, so long as it over compensates in other areas.

I think the days of, "He's too close for missiles, I'm switching to guns." is long gone. We can save that for the movies. Aerial combat in the future will involve shooting ultra long range missiles over the horizon instead of getting into some complicated 3 dimensional dance with your opponent.

 

[PiSigma]

I'm okay with that.
In fact let's take it one step further.
Maybe the "air superiority fighter" of the future puts not just less weight but instead absolute zero weight into speed and maneuverability, in regard to survivability. Can an air superiority fighter be as slow moving as a cargo plane and still dominate the air?
Sure of course, so long as it over compensates in other areas.

I think the days of, "He's too close for missiles, I'm switching to guns." is long gone. We can save that for the movies. Aerial combat in the future will involve shooting ultra long range missiles over the horizon instead of getting into some complicated 3 dimensional dance with your opponent.

I don't think that will be the case either. There will always be scenarios of two 5th or 6th or 7th Gen stealth aircraft without support face off each other in a fluke case. In a case that that the section range will be short so dog fighting with short or medium range missiles becomes possible. Maneuverability and speed will be important. It is just the risk or likelihood is going to be much lower than spamming long range missiles.

 

[Wrought]

I'm okay with that.
In fact let's take it one step further.
Maybe the "air superiority fighter" of the future puts not just less weight but instead absolute zero weight into speed and maneuverability, in regard to survivability. Can an air superiority fighter be as slow moving as a cargo plane and still dominate the air?
Sure of course, so long as it over compensates in other areas.

I think the days of, "He's too close for missiles, I'm switching to guns." is long gone. We can save that for the movies. Aerial combat in the future will involve shooting ultra long range missiles over the horizon instead of getting into some complicated 3 dimensional dance with your opponent.

No, that's the exact problem with the B-21. A very capable but subsonic platform in a Pacific environment means that your transit times go way up, your sortie generation goes way down, and you're banking everything on active/passive countermeasures because you have zero ability to run away. Also, any munitions you launch will be slower from the start.

Obviously there are upsides too, especially w.r.t. range, capacity, and loitering time. But the downsides are significant.

 

[latenlazy]

I'm okay with that.
In fact let's take it one step further.
Maybe the "air superiority fighter" of the future puts not just less weight but instead absolute zero weight into speed and maneuverability, in regard to survivability. Can an air superiority fighter be as slow moving as a cargo plane and still dominate the air?
Sure of course, so long as it over compensates in other areas.

I think the days of, "He's too close for missiles, I'm switching to guns." is long gone. We can save that for the movies. Aerial combat in the future will involve shooting ultra long range missiles over the horizon instead of getting into some complicated 3 dimensional dance with your opponent.

Until you have extremely effective point defense lasers you always absolutely need some kind of kinematic performance advantage to survive an A2A engagement, both for defensive and offensive maneuvering purposes. The right way to see kinematics performance for 6th generation fighters is not that kinematics is not important but that the key kinematic characteristics are different from earlier generations. Not all kinematic advantages are about maneuverability, and not all maneuverability is about knife fighting.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

The mainstream posters here have been relaying Weibo/Guancha PLA gossipers. Gossipers who have hearsay but no real inside - Oh, I saw three nozzles, three! - Then, come up with some explanation with which their common sense is comfortable.

The chief designer of J36, Wang haifeng, who is also the chief of the TBCC project, breakthrough in 2019.

Ironic of you to quote the names of the Guancha Trios and especially the chief designer of the J-36 to support your statements - All the while, Wang Haifeng himself (and the Guancha Trios relaying the message) explicitly rebuked the following notions:
1. J-36 is Mach 3-capable, and
2. J-36 uses any sort of ramjet or TBCC-related engines.

Both Wang Haifeng and the Guancha Trios (plus literally every credible and reputable PLA watchers based in China) have stated that VCE or ACE will be the target engine for the J-36.

In the latest talkshow Yankee says:

1) J-36 will not be a Mach 3 capable aircraft.
2) Yankeesama has talked briefly with J-36 Chief Designer Wang Haifeng.
3) Chief Designer care not much about hard specs such as top speed, max thrust, etc. The important criteria of the fighter is instead power generation capability.
4) J-36 can serve as EW and AWAC to some capacity.
5) No pulsed detonation engine or ramjet on J-36. They can’t provide enough power to even existing fighter aircraft avionics, let alone something as sophisticated as CHAD.
6) Engine design no longer focuses on thrust alone. What’s more important is subsystem for power generation under whole flight envelope. Power regulation system is therefore of foremost importance. An example would be NEV vs ICE or F-15 vs MiG-25.
7) Variable cycle engine will conform to J-36’s design.
8) Yankee once again agrees with SDF assessment that the J-36 is not a simple fighter, fighter bomber, bomber, etc. but a new system altogether. It is more akin to an air based cruiser.

Will post the link when it is up on bilibili.

In case you're wondering, that's at page 95 of this thread.

.After 5 minutes of Google image search "NGAD TBCC" and a meditation.
I conclude that both 6-gen are using two TBCC (parallel turbofan + ramjet) engines right now!

"5 minutes of Google image search and a mediation" and I know the J-36 way better than the chief designer, his team of engineers and technicians at Chengdu AC, and the PLAAF!

Two things were revealed weeks before J36 debut.
1. MD-19 MD-22,
2. A 13 years research aims at broadbody hypersonic commercial jet. Test done at 6.56 Mach in 2021. The presentation shows this image.

One - The MD-19 and MD-22 are projects by the CAS Institute of Mechanics and the Guangdong Aerodynamic Research Academy (GARA). How are they even related to the J-36 development efforts of the Chengdu AC?
Two - Care to fill us up on how the MD-19 and MD-22 even look remotely alike to the J-36?
Three - How is the hypersonic commercial jet (which is still mostly in PPT stage and only scaled demonstrators at best) be remotely related or comparable to the J-36?

The Russia 6-gen project PAK DP, the designer claims 4-4.3 Mach, up to 45,000 meters.

SR-72 drawing with tail boom

SR-72 drawing without tail boom

Why did you bring examples that are still very much in PPT stages to compare with the actually-existing and already-flying J-36?

View attachment 144134

Really, dude? You took these graphics from some no-name websites which claimed to have already designed a 7th-gen or 8th-gen warplane? Really?

 

[Deino]

Ironic of you to quote the names of the Guancha Trios and especially the chief designer of the J-36 to support your statements - All the while, Wang Haifeng himself (and the Guancha Trios relaying the message) explicitly rebuked the following notions:
1. J-36 is Mach 3-capable, and
2. J-36 uses any sort of ramjet or TBCC-related engines.

Both Wang Haifeng and the Guancha Trios (plus literally every credible and reputable PLA watchers based in China) have stated that VCE or ACE will be the target engine for the J-36.



In case you're wondering, that's at page 95 of this thread.



"5 minutes of Google image search and a mediation" and I know the J-36 way better than the chief designer, his team of engineers and technicians at Chengdu AC, and the PLAAF!



One - The MD-19 and MD-22 are projects by the CAS Institute of Mechanics and the Guangdong Aerodynamic Research Academy (GARA). How are they even related to the J-36 development efforts of the Chengdu AC?
Two - Care to fill us up on how the MD-19 and MD-22 even look remotely alike to the J-36?
Three - How is the hypersonic commercial jet (which is still mostly in PPT stage and only scaled demonstrators at best) be remotely related or comparable to the J-36?



Why did you bring examples that are still very much in PPT stages to compare with the actually-existing and already-flying J-36?



Really, dude? You took these graphics from some no-name websites which claimed to have already designed a 7th-gen or 8th-gen warplane? Really?

View attachment 144240

Honestly, there is no need to reply to his nonsense!