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

[Tomboy]

Why are they that illogical anyways.

You think when China drops H-20 billed as stealth anti West Coast infrastructure, will they conversely say its a really large F-22 designed to throw 30 BVRs at once?

Is because US has been a bit doctrinally confused so Americans might mistakenly think China is too?

It's probably because people cannot accept that other countries eclipsed the US in terms of progress. So they cope with that J-36 will be a bomber so US still retains the lead with B-21.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The opinions of online forumites is a stupid thing to do. The USAF (or at least the intelligence portions of the organization) had probably known from the very start that the J-36 was an air dominance platform since the time when the first miniature sized aerodynamic models were being assembled and tested in Chinese wind tunnels. On the other side there'll be commentators who would be bleating ignorantly about how the J-36 is a bomber/strike aircraft/etc until decades after the last J-36 is retired from service and is sent to the scrapyard. The information is more accessible and more thoroughly documented than ever. Those enthusiasts who don't know are those who are too lazy to want to know, or those who don't want to know, by this point.

USAF is only accurate when they talk smack about Chinese capabilities. Otherwise they are just seeking higher defense budget.

 

[dasCKD]

Why are they that illogical anyways.

It's not illogical, it's prejudice alongside a very surface level interest in their subjects. Something I've learnt in defense enthusiast spaces is that a lot of people are more interested in weapon systems as an extension of their sense of nationalism than in actually learning about the system itself as a subject of study. When they see something new that they don't recognize they'd relate it to something they kind of understand and have a cursory knowledge of.

You think when China drops H-20 billed as stealth anti West Coast infrastructure, will they conversely say its a really large F-22 designed to throw 30 BVRs at once?

Considering that the B-21 is being talked about as a node for air dominance that might end up happen. It's not the worst use for a platform either if that 2000 km AAM becomes a thing.

 

[dasCKD]

USAF is only accurate when they talk smack about Chinese capabilities. Otherwise they are just seeking higher defense budget.

This isn't about what the USAF is realizing as public statements but about their internal intelligence. There's a reason for the USAF to lie both ways, both hyping up and downplaying China's capabilities, but when it comes to their internal intelligence the incentive is to be as accurate as possible because if they aren't then they, including many of the people sitting in those rooms, are going to die.

 

[siegecrossbow]

This isn't about what the USAF is realizing as public statements but about their internal intelligence. There's a reason for the USAF to lie both ways, both hyping up and downplaying China's capabilities, but when it comes to their internal intelligence the incentive is to be as accurate as possible because if they aren't then they, including many of the people sitting in those rooms, are going to die.

My comment is on the hypocritical way Western defense enthusiasts cherry-pick data to reinforce their own biases.

 

[Iron Man]

It's not illogical, it's prejudice alongside a very surface level interest in their subjects.

I do think there's been ALOT of cope regarding the J-36, which on the surface at least seems to represent a very prominent example of the Chinese MIC equaling if not besting the US MIC. We don't know the details of the J-36 of course but even just the optics of the situation is something alot of Western military fanbois are having a very hard time dealing with based on my experience on other sites. There is so much butthurt it's unreal LOL

Something I've learnt in defense enthusiast spaces is that a lot of people are more interested in weapon systems as an extension of their sense of nationalism than in actually learning about the system itself as a subject of study.

To be perfectly honest that happens alot on this site as well.....

Considering that the B-21 is being talked about as a node for air dominance that might end up happen. It's not the worst use for a platform either if that 2000 km AAM becomes a thing.

I think it would be utterly stupid for the USAF to NOT use the B-21 in an anti-air capacity. A rotating canister launcher holding 6-8 rounds of the new AIM-174 ultra-long range AAM is easily imaginable for the B-21 as a potential payload.

 

[Aval]

I do think there's been ALOT of cope regarding the J-36, which on the surface at least seems to represent a very prominent example of the Chinese MIC equaling if not besting the US MIC. We don't know the details of the J-36 of course but even just the optics of the situation is something alot of Western military fanbois are having a very hard time dealing with based on my experience on other sites. There is so much butthurt it's unreal LOL


To be perfectly honest that happens alot on this site as well.....


I think it would be utterly stupid for the USAF to NOT use the B-21 in an anti-air capacity. A rotating canister launcher holding 6-8 rounds of the new AIM-174 ultra-long range AAM is easily imaginable for the B-21 as a potential payload.

The biggest point I've noticed with online anti- J-36 discourse is that all criticisms completely ignore the existence of the J-50.

Even aside from treating warfare as a nation vs nation affair, far more than just a single model of weapon, they don't even take into the account another weapon of the same type and generation that is expected to be fielded alongside it, and more importantly the doctrinal and technological reasons behind why the additional weapon exists in the first place and was revealed at the same time.

Every weakness of the J-36, perceived or actual, if not covered by itself is instead covered by the J-50.

• "They couldn't use two engines so they had to use three, ergo bad Chinese engines" -> J-50 has two engines
• "Its massive and won't be maneuverable" -> J-50 is similarly sized to J-20 and its shaping suggests enhanced maneuverability vs J-36
• "It won't fit on a carrier so can't project power globally" -> See above
• "Its can't dogfight" -> See above, not to mention 5th-gens and CCAs, not to mention dogfighting may be historical now
• "It will be (extremely) expensive" -> See above

You can tell if someone is approaching a J-36 discussion with an anti-China nationalist bias in mind if they have a gaping knowledge hole where the J-50 should be.

The fact that the USAF revealed NGAD (uncertain if original or just the "mini" variant) was going to be an F-22 replacement is a shocking admission. The J-36 was not built as a competitor to the F-22 (that's the J-20) or its replacement. The real mirror to NGAD is the J-50, which makes you wonder what F/A-XX is and if America has a counter (or even doctrinal concept) to the J-36 altogether. Critique of the J-36 seems to come down to trying to fit it into the F-22/NGAD's role, which it isn't trying to do.

Aside from the little rant, my prediction is that the actually smart folks over at the Pentagon will redesign NGAD to be a J-36 competitor and leave the F-22 replacement to the F/A-XX (which might need a name change). Assuming Musk doesn't pull the funding rug from under their feet.

 

[zyklon]

This isn't about what the USAF is realizing as public statements but about their internal intelligence. There's a reason for the USAF to lie both ways, both hyping up and downplaying China's capabilities, but when it comes to their internal intelligence the incentive is to be as accurate as possible because if they aren't then they, including many of the people sitting in those rooms, are going to die.

You're correct that the USAF and the DoD in general has a habit of exaggerating adversarial capabilities to lobby for additional funding while simultaneously dismissing adversarial capabilities to inspire confidence, or if we're to be more cynical, to fuel a sense of superiority.

However, the problem is while DoD's general and flag officers are able to maintain a degree or semblance of objectivity internally, they're awful at telling Congress or the White House: "no, that's not going to work," never mind "no, that's actually a really bad idea."

It's how the US wasted two decades in Afghanistan: American generals kept on telling Congress that some sort of "victory" was achievable and within reach, when it clearly wasn't given the resources availed, because that's what the elected officials above them wanted to hear.

I think it would be utterly stupid for the USAF to NOT use the B-21 in an anti-air capacity. A rotating canister launcher holding 6-8 rounds of the new AIM-174 ultra-long range AAM is easily imaginable for the B-21 as a potential payload.

You're starting to make the J-36 sound appealing as a strike platform, perhaps especially against high value and well defended maritime targets.

 

[00CuriousObserver]

The biggest point I've noticed with online anti- J-36 discourse is that all criticisms completely ignore the existence of the J-50.

Even aside from treating warfare as a nation vs nation affair, far more than just a single model of weapon, they don't even take into the account another weapon of the same type and generation that is expected to be fielded alongside it, and more importantly the doctrinal and technological reasons behind why the additional weapon exists in the first place and was revealed at the same time.

Every weakness of the J-36, perceived or actual, if not covered by itself is instead covered by the J-50.

• "They couldn't use two engines so they had to use three, ergo bad Chinese engines" -> J-50 has two engines
• "Its massive and won't be maneuverable" -> J-50 is similarly sized to J-20 and its shaping suggests enhanced maneuverability vs J-36
• "It won't fit on a carrier so can't project power globally" -> See above
• "Its can't dogfight" -> See above, not to mention 5th-gens and CCAs, not to mention dogfighting may be historical now
• "It will be (extremely) expensive" -> See above

You can tell if someone is approaching a J-36 discussion with an anti-China nationalist bias in mind if they have a gaping knowledge hole where the J-50 should be.

The fact that the USAF revealed NGAD (uncertain if original or just the "mini" variant) was going to be an F-22 replacement is a shocking admission. The J-36 was not built as a competitor to the F-22 (that's the J-20) or its replacement. The real mirror to NGAD is the J-50, which makes you wonder what F/A-XX is and if America has a counter (or even doctrinal concept) to the J-36 altogether. Critique of the J-36 seems to come down to trying to fit it into the F-22/NGAD's role, which it isn't trying to do.

Aside from the little rant, my prediction is that the actually smart folks over at the Pentagon will redesign NGAD to be a J-36 competitor and leave the F-22 replacement to the F/A-XX (which might need a name change). Assuming Musk doesn't pull the funding rug from under their feet.

They would just view the J-50 as a fifth gen with lambda wings and without vertical stabilizers

 

[siegecrossbow]

They would just view the J-50 as a fifth gen with lambda wings and without vertical stabilizers

But GCAP with vertical slabs is definitely sixth gen. The hypocrisy is unreal.