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

[siegecrossbow]

At this point in development I can’t imagine the changes will be too drastic.

It’ll be J-20 2001 to 2011 level.

 

[BoraTas]

Well then getting rid of the God-awful-looking caret intakes for our dear CHAD is definitely high on the wishlist. Same for the SHADE's groove (at least smoothen it out to be just subtly visible).

I wonder what could cause the "disappointment."

Edit: Well I guess FIVN vs traditional physical TVN could be a """disappointment""" but I for one prefer an actually moving nozzle wayyyy over a boring, fixed FIVN nozzle.

Edit 2: I would gladly sacrifice the J-36 to look worse as long as my dear SHADE looks as good as the current prototype with 2D TVC (or even better )

I would not expect much changes with the inlets. They are just so impactful to the structure, performance, signature and packaging that an aircraft is designed around them. They will very likely remain mostly the same. We might see changes in control surfaces and things like the nose shape though.

 

[cdj20]

As it seems, it is part of that video:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1151273793208128

Anyway, I'm still not sure if legit or faked!

【做了个视频，被老美当真了啊（I made a video, but Americans took it seriously.）】

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The author has clarified that this clip is from his CG video.

 

[no_name]

This is a quote from the article of the link:

"
...
The J-36 could see China pull even with, or possibly ahead of, the United States in the race to field a sixth-generation fighter.

The US military’s fifth-generation jets – the twin-engine F-22 and single-engine F-35 – are generally regarded as the world’s best at the moment, though China also has two fifth-generation models, the J-20 and J-35. Neither of those Chinese jets has proven combat experience and effectiveness like the two US fighters, however.
...
"

J36 is ahead of J50 which is ahead of F-47 simply because J36 is seen more often than J50 which is seen more often than F-47. Until F-47 shows up in front of public eyes, this fact remains intact.

With regard to F-22/F-35 superior to J20/J35, the above logic applies, simply because F-22/F-35 have flown to "battlefields" but J20/J35 haven't. The story of J20 handling F35 in the East China Sea is meaningless to me because that was a given by design.

I guess nobody really knows which one is better because the probability of comparing in reality is very low, likely remaining that way in my lifetime, for neither side dares not to pitch F22/J20 or F35/J35 in a battlefield simply because the perceived loser would suffer unimaginable losses in various domains.

By F-22's "combat experience" do they mean shooting down that balloon?

 

[Neurosmith]

Early in this video Yankee claimed that after numerous test flights both CHAD and SHADE are testing aerodynamic hypothesis they held during the design phase. There will be changes in future prototypes. Some people will be surprised and others might be disappointed, but they are backed by hard data.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So, the CAC and SAC airframes are in fact demonstrators rather than prototypes? A design freeze would've happened if these were indeed prototypes.

 

[SinoAmericanCW]

So, the CAC and SAC airframes are in fact demonstrators rather than prototypes? A design freeze would've happened if these were indeed prototypes.

No. Other aircraft - the F-22, for instance - saw modifications between prototypes during their EMD phases.

 

[no_name]

So, the CAC and SAC airframes are in fact demonstrators rather than prototypes? A design freeze would've happened if these were indeed prototypes.

The original 2 black J-20s also were modified into the later yellow test planes, but they are all considered prototypes.
I think similar adjustments/fine-tuning will happen on the J-36 and J-50.

 

[Gloire_bb]

So, the CAC and SAC airframes are in fact demonstrators rather than prototypes? A design freeze would've happened if these were indeed prototypes.

That's what testing is for.
Most prominent example in the generation isn't even J-20. It's Su-57, that had to reengineer entire structure anew (supplier failed to consistently ensure quality of the alloy chosen for the main structure, and voila).

Testing isn't a wasteful ritual of coming of age, it's extremely arduous endeavor of making something that potentially can work - actually work. And things go wrong.

 

[by78]

Speaking of the devil.

A Chengdu

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on a variable-camber aileron capable of very large deflection angles. Interestingly, according to the document, these ailerons were specifically designed to meet high maneuverability requirements of a new generation of fighter aircraft.

One more

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

from Chengdu on a variable-camber flap with a continuous bending surface.

This is tangentially related. An academic paper on morphing control surfaces/variable-camber ailerons. Posting it here for. continuity due to previous discussions on this topic.

 

[by78]

(Continued from last post...)