Chengdu next gen combat aircraft (?J-36) thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
You forget that the ground parked photo was taken from a postion higher than the aircraft. This will expose the back of the aircraft more than the photo (in the air).
And more in 3D CGs. Seems small difference in angle and model will make its look changes a lot from the front
I think the yellow part is just a hatch.
Yep, that’s what I mean.
Not at all, one can draw a straight line from the top corner of the intake to the top corner of the exhaust, as per my previous post - which is a straight and lengthy taper. The silhouette is expected to be a straight line, because the outline of a cylinder is a line from any perspective, as long as it is not obscured (and it is not, as we both agree). As I detailed in my last post, the small hump just after the intake will be stretch a few pixels maximum at this angle. I don’t think it gets any clearer than that!
The fundamental assumption in this argument is that the central intake does not widen as it goes towards the exhaust. I.e. it stays as a separate structure and does not fully blend into the fuselage, like some earlier 3D models had depicted. If this is assumed, then we can inscribe the intake with a truncated cone at an incline, which makes my previous arguments valid. I base this assumption on this side-on photo, which shows the visible glare from the left engine nacelle which abruptly disappears (indicating a groove). This makes me believe that the intake is wider initially, and that it gets narrower to fit in between the side engines. Also note that the glare on the central intake has a uniform width throughout the linear portion of the intake. That means that locally, there is no significant flattening or deformation. This is why I believe the line I drew is an accurate representation of how it will look.
I believe you are underestimating the foreshortening, and we should trust geometry rather than intuition. The effect is slightly exaggerated by the intake both tapering downwards, and also narrowing.
The central intake never crosses past the groove. Since we are viewing from the starboard side, anything on our left cannot be obscured by objects to the right (the intake!). If anything is obscuring the groove, it can only be the hump from the starboard S-duct. However, we see this is not necessarily the case, otherwise how would you explain #3317 ? And going by the silhouette I've been proposing, you can see the same "groove" quite clearly in the actual image where the left shoulder levels off and dips a little.
It’s a hatch ! Or signage on the hangar behind it! Or a person’s behind!
I don't believe there is any way to include that darker structure outlined in yellow as part of the intake without contradicting images taken previously! There must be a line going from a few pixels after the intake cowl to the exhaust. Again, the flat portion before the intake starts to taper cannot account for this hump, because that portion is just too short! As I took much effort detailing in my last post, there is very little tolerance for such structures given the extent of the foreshortening which can be calibrated with the IWB doors. Even a short "hump" at this angle would translate to a very long hump when viewed from the side, which we do not see! Something like what you have illustrated would necessitate a flat "hump" around 4 meters long!
(Again, all this is assuming no widening.)
Are you referring to the white blobby parts? Because that is almost certainly just atmospheric thermal effects, like the blurring just above hot pavement or a grill, which blurs some of the slats together. Those engines are probably still hot!
If you pump up the contrast like some have done previously, you can see how the corrugations in the hangar behind actually refract (bend) slightly, exactly what we expect! If this was "added in" by AI as you speculate (already unlikely), it would not take refraction into account. I've attached the contrast-pumped image from @burritocannon below.
Note, especially, the near-white outline due to the high contrast! What this means is that the outline is brighter than the surrounding white areas! How could that be? Because the outline is from surface reflections from where the plane body is nearly level relative to the camera, and not diffuse reflections from the background hangar. You might have noticed that matte surfaces become mirror-like (wood for example) when you look at them at very small angles, and this is that effect. There is no good explanation for this very bright outline if it was just white paint, or glare -- in that case, the outline should not be any brighter than the white splotch itself.
We can't see the rear because we are looking from the front. Just like with the central intake, the left S-duct goes above height of the exhaust which you can see from the glare on the side profile. So, it will likely be blocked from view.
That's a good point. I didn't consider that the distance between the intakes is not the same as the distance between the exhausts. I measure the ratio between the distances is around 0.78 in one of the earlier ventral photos. I measure your illustration to be 202/257 ~= 0.78, you've actually nailed the amount it converges. But there is still freedom to translate all three exhausts -- they could be moved to the right a couple pixels so that the central exhaust lines up more precisely with the line from the intake, and the left is not jutting out.
Attachments
-
006UU68Rgy1i0qou0e0yvj317i0l0afn.jpg
Last edited:
No unfortunately. Weapon bay doors are not in the right place (they should overlap very quickly since theyre next to each other), and the diffusion model is hallucinating all over the place on the bottom as it's moving. The top intake also doesn't change shape like it should
Last edited:
This is a flagship thread. Not one for one-liners and chit chats. Please note I have deleted all the low quality posts and there is no need to wonder why your posts didn't go through.
@mond it's because your original post is low quality one liner. We actually have a policy against one liner on this forum.
@mond it's because your original post is low quality one liner. We actually have a policy against one liner on this forum.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree here -- incidentally, the model posted by Steven D from a similar angle #3373 somewhat reflects my view of what the silhouette from that angle would look like (albeit the intake face itself is a bit different -- a bit wider and sharper, but the dorsal intake ducting/structure is indicative of how I feel it should make the silhouette look).
The central intake doesn't need to pass the groove, from the angle of the photo was taken, the visibility of the groove in the silhouette of the aircraft is not dependent on the aircraft's dorsal most structures (dorsal intake, the actual grooves themselves) but the rearmost fuselage.
Heat from the engines is also possible if they were idling. My point is more that the rear of the aircraft's fuselage is not well captured in the image overall.
Fair enough
-- I think the model in #3373 has the intake blended in with the fuselage, so it widens as it tapers. I suppose we'll resolve this mystery in due time (without endangering more photographers).