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

[Deino]

Can we stick to the topic please and even more ignore this dumbass Musk?

 

[Aval]

I don't know where else to post this, but this is IAF discussing about China's 5th and 6th gen fighters.

Adds to India also believing that the flown airframes are 6th gen.

Small point but it seems the name "J-50" has caught on with major organisations (e.g., IAF) as well. "J-36" is self-explanatory given the photo with number prefix, but from what I recall the name "J-50" was always very speculative and we're not quite sure where it comes from.

Anyhow, so the roundup is that the US, Chinese and Indian air forces have all directly referred to the J-36 (and probably J-50 too) as "6th-gens" rather than the more nebulous "next-gens" (implying a divergence in thought/interpretation), which not only suggests a consensus forming on the future of aerial warfare but also tacit acknowledgement that China is currently leading it. This will influence decision-making for their indigenous future aircraft designs and doctrine. We're just missing the Russians now, and I suppose member nations of FCAS and GCAP as well.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Overbom]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Nothing new imo but good to see some discussion about EW and risks of only relying in distributed capabilities

The direction that electromagnetic warfare (EW) is taking in both US and Chinese development provides a third reason why the value of crewed next-generation fighters, compared to uncrewed distributed options, is more apparent in the Indo-Pacific than in Europe. The long-range missile capabilities that both countries are developing and fielding require complex, often cross-domain sensor-shooter-missile cueing and command-and-control networks to function.

As weapon range is increasingly outstripping the effective range of the sensors carried by the aircraft, ships and land-based assets that fire them, both US and Chinese forces’ EW development is increasingly heavily focused on disrupting and denying cross-domain datalink and network communications capabilities to break these long-range kill-chains.

This EW trend significantly increases the risk of relying entirely on distributed capabilities such as the collaborative combat aircraft (CCA)-type uncrewed systems envisioned by many to replace the capabilities associated with NGAD or J-36 at lower cost. In theory, by distributing the sensors, weapon carriage and EW effectors that would otherwise need to be carried by one large combat aircraft among many smaller uncrewed systems, militaries can achieve the same effects with CCAs that are much smaller and cheaper for a given range.

The theory undoubtedly has significant promise and could enhance combat mass when working as intended. However, if an adversary can deny or badly degrade the datalinks between such distributed assets in combat – a risk that is impossible to avoid at all times – then each element of the distributed uncrewed system will be unable to fulfil the mission required.

In a heavily contested EW environment, at the front-end of power projection efforts over great distances where each available airframe and weapon counts for a huge amount, there is likely to be outsized value in having even a relatively small number of NGAD or J-36-style crewed combat aircraft with all the sensors, weapons and systems needed to fight effectively, even when temporarily isolated from other force elements.

 

[Ringsword]

Nothing new imo but good to see some discussion about EW and risks of only relying in distributed capabilities

These recent aticles are an "acceptance" that China has indeed demonstrated a true developed,tangible 6th gen fighter(s) with all of its advances and geostrategic implications.Well done China,well done-JiaYou,JiaYou!!!!BTW please have it out and ready within 3 years or less PLAAF-I can't wait!!!