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

S

styx

Junior Member
Registered Member
Given the new photos, I would like to hear opinions on the J-36's cockpit: side-by-side or traditional. In my opinion (looked ad the footages many times) it has a traditional cockpit
 
Schwerter_

Schwerter_

Junior Member
Registered Member
sevrent said:
I think if they value supersonic/supercruise performance for the J-36 then they likely would have to include at least some degree of TVC to deal with supersonic trim drag, and reduce the deflection that trailing edge control surfaces would have to do.

In general though I do think the idea that J-36 is making agility tradeoffs for stealth is true, and these tradeoffs significantly hamper supersonic efficiency. My guess as to why they went with 3 engines was so they could brute force through those inefficiencies and achieve supersonic speeds when they need to.
Click to expand...
We have to remember that thrust isn’t the only thing engines have influence on. Going off what the Guancha trio said and implied back when J-36 was first seen, a large part of the reason that CAC went with 3 engines is that with 6th gen fighters the need for power generation skyrockets, and having a 3-engined layout can help with providing enough electric power to meet the needs. In addition I think the current prevailing believe within Chinese aviation industry is that for the next-generation engines (at least for fighter applications) thrust is no longer the sole performance indicator and power generation is considered to be similarly important.

tldr: 3-engines means less that they’re building a rocket-assisted brick and more that they’re building a flying generator
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
mack8 said:
Just putting this size comparison here so not to lose track of it (wanted to put it in the H-20 thread but that is closed for now).
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1906149078213575053
Click to expand...

Just like what @Deino explained - @louischeung_hk is an idiot sandwich who has been well-known for polluting the PLA-watching discourse.

Also, what's with that H-20 illustration? That illustration is in no way illustrative of what the H-20 actually looked like, given how we have literally zero clues on its general characteristics and performance parameters.
 
sevrent

sevrent

New Member
Registered Member
plawolf said:
Sigh, it’s sad that even with all the evidence to the contrary, people still cling to the old and ridiculous notion that China doesn’t know what it’s doing and have to brute force everything to get results.

Please enlighten us as to what trade-offs the J36 made that ‘ significantly hamper supersonic efficiency’.
Click to expand...
Im not making generalizing statements that China ''does not know what its doing''? Some of you need to not be so sensitive.

What I was guessing, was that the priorities placed on stealth and payload necessitated certain tradeoffs against supersonic efficiency/performance (drag, maneuverability etc) and one way to counteract that could be a third engine at the tradeoff of fuel consumption. For example its likely that a very large IWB tradeoffs area ruling, lack of tailerons or canards means J-36 has to rely on TVC and elevons for supersonic trimming, draggier but stealthier etc. Third engine makes sense here to ''brute force'' through these tradeoffs and achieve supersonic speed when needed, its also a bonus for power generation/cooling.

Schwerter_ said:
tldr: 3-engines means less that they’re building a rocket-assisted brick and more that they’re building a flying generator
Click to expand...
Im saying it can be both
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top