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

[Tomboy]

I predict that Chinese variable cycle engines are unlikely to enter service by 2035. So in order to ensure the timely service of the J-36, it is reasonable to use WS10 or WS15 first.

That seems rather pessimistic IMO, AECC has been working on VCE technology since atleast 2018 where they verified key technologies. It's been 7 years since technology verification and in 2022 they announced material breakthrough for next generation turbofans. There are already rumors of prototypes already being built, I think it's likely for Chinese VCE to enter service before mid 2035.

 

[latenlazy]

J-36 is projected not only have 50 percent more electrical capacity over the J-20 or even twice the capacity, instead it's projected to have many times the electrical capacity of a 5th generation aircraft. You can't just put a higher bypass turbofan on the J-36 without ruining supercruise efficiency which also is part of the design, VCE could deliver high cooling capacity and efficiency while subsonically cruising while delivering very high supercruise efficiency when needed which is why VCE is called for 6th generation designs.

As for developing tactics, I don't see why not to just push out a few LRIP WS-15 powered J-36 to FTTB units to develop new doctrines and not instead start pushing out hundreds of half-baked J-36s with WS-15s as soon as you can as some members here are suggesting. What I'm suggesting is put J-36 into LRIP with WS-15 for a few test units, but they should not start serial production of this type before it is fully ready like what they did with the J-20.

VCE cooling capacity is not some magical mega multiplier. You are overselling how important VCE is to the overall thermal management system. The overall cooling capacity is not hard limited by the engine but by the total amount of heat transfer rate built into the heat management system. For example, you can employ extra cooling inlets to increase heat transfer capacity, or the engine inlets themselves can collecting excess air that gets bypassed to an heat exchange system for extra heat sinking. Otherwise it would be impossible to more than double the block 4 F-35’s total cooling capacity while keeping the same engine. Besides, a doubling of electrical output does not necessarily mean a doubling of the heat. More efficient electronics will also factor into electrical power output increase.

 

[4Tran]

As for developing tactics, I don't see why not to just push out a few LRIP WS-15 powered J-36 to FTTB units to develop new doctrines and not instead start pushing out hundreds of half-baked J-36s with WS-15s as soon as you can as some members here are suggesting. What I'm suggesting is put J-36 into LRIP with WS-15 for a few test units, but they should not start serial production of this type before it is fully ready like what they did with the J-20.

I don't think that the J-36 needs to be available in vast numbers to be game-changing. Even couple of dozen of planes with interim engines will be enough to change the calculations for all of the players in the West Pacific. And that can hold a lot of value for China's geopolitical position. Besides, China is very used to building planes with interim engines: the J-10, J-11, J-15, and J-20 all saw engine changes.

 

[Blitzo]

As for developing tactics, I don't see why not to just push out a few LRIP WS-15 powered J-36 to FTTB units to develop new doctrines and not instead start pushing out hundreds of half-baked J-36s with WS-15s as soon as you can as some members here are suggesting. What I'm suggesting is put J-36 into LRIP with WS-15 for a few test units, but they should not start serial production of this type before it is fully ready like what they did with the J-20.

Who suggested that "hundreds" of WS-15 powered J-36s should be procured?

To be clear -- comparisons of procuring WS-15 powered J-36s on a similar rationale of Al-31/WS-10 powered J-20s does not mean the absolute amount of WS-15 powered J-36s would be the same as Al-31/WS-10 powered J-20s... after all that would imply that the total production run of J-36 across its variants would be similar to the total production run of J-20 across its variants (likely going to end up being in excess of 1000 when all is said and done), which would be ludicrous.


However I could see them procuring say, up to 100ish WS-15 powered J-36s, while VCE/ACE progress with development. A final total lifetime procurement of say 400 J-36s could thus be done (of which up to 100 are initially powered by WS-15s, which could be re-engined with VCE/ACE if deemed worthwhile from an aerospace resource pov).

 

[AndrewS]

If you're up against a peer opponent then your sparse network will get eaten alive by their full network, which is why you need tankers, forward bases, and/or carriers to project your own full network out to the relevant battlespace. And if you lack sufficient control within FIC to push your vulnerable support assets up that far, then the answer is to focus on securing that control instead of trying to half-ass a sparse SIC network.

"Sparseness" is a relative term

---

By 2030, I expect the First Island Chain to be "secure"

China is producing over 100 5th gen fighters per year, and the indications are that this is ramping to more than 150. So by 2030, that's over 1200.

Combine this with developments elsewhere in the Air Force, Rocket Force and Navy.
So you end up with a comprehensive battle network with thousands? of nodes.

It looks like the Chinese military will have the capability to obtain air superiority over Japan, if required, despite any US actions.
That means Japan would face an indefinite air-sea blockade and see targets everywhere in Japan under attack.
It would not be credible for significant military forces to operate in Japan.

---------

So the First Island Chain is "secure"
Then you have the Second Island Chain, anchored by Guam some 3000km away.
It is impossible to have the same density of Chinese capabilities at this distance.

But the US faces a similar problem in the Guam area
Basically a single, small island plus at most 4 deployed aircraft carriers.
That's a handful of airbases - which are distant and isolated.

In contrast, China has 100? potential airbases which can host aircraft suitable for a Guam contingency 3000km away.

---

So in the Guam area, once there are significant numbers of J-36s (timelines after 2035):

1. I expect the Chinese battle network to be "sparse" compared to what China has in the First Island Chain.
2. But this "sparse" Chinese battle will be far more dense than whatever the US military can bring to an isolated patch of the Pacific Ocean

---

China building a blue-water Navy to outmatch the US Navy - would take a minimum of 15 years, and likely longer.

And you missed the point that converting SAMs for ground attack is different from converting AAMs for the same. S-300 for example has also been used in that role. But aside from some brief experimenting with AIM-9X, nobody uses AAMs as AGMs. USAF did not invest in a very diverse AGM arsenal because they lacked AAMs to convert.

Remember that the USAF operates with the assumption that they will have not just air superiority, but air dominance.
In such an environment, it is way better to use purpose-built AGMs.

As a shift in air combat philosophy, J-36 should be designed to the maximum capability it's intended VCE engines can provide it and not tailored to legacy tech like WS-15.

It would be idiotic to think the J-36 should be tailored to use the WS-15.
Of course it should be designed with VCE in mind.

But if VCE is not available, using WS-15 is a temporary measure.
The worse case scenario for a J-36 with WS-15 engines is merely 50%? extra electricity generation compared to a J-20.
That is still worth it.

Then as soon as VCE are available, it makes sense to swap out the engines.

 

[Wrought]

2. But this "sparse" Chinese battle will be far more dense than whatever the US military can bring to an isolated patch of the Pacific Ocean

In such an environment, it is way better to use purpose-built AGMs.

You contradict yourself.

It's really not that complicated; the use cases boil down to very simple archetypes. If you lack control of the air, then use AAMs to secure it. If you have control of the air, then use AGMs to exploit it. Again, there's a reason every air force makes that distinction in the first place. In neither case is doing some weird AAM->pseudo AGM move desirable or efficient or anything more than trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. Your idea is a solution in search of a problem.

 

[Phead128]

You contradict yourself.

It's really not that complicated; the use cases boil down to very simple archetypes. If you lack control of the air, then use AAMs to secure it. If you have control of the air, then use AGMs to exploit it. Again, there's a reason every air force makes that distinction in the first place. In neither case is doing some weird AAM->pseudo AGM move desirable or efficient or anything more than trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. Your idea is a solution in search of a problem.

I think his point is that stand-off J-36 with pseudo AGM can hold SIC under pressure assuming China has not sufficient count of carriers to project the full network against USN in SIC. You are right that if China has local air dominance, it would preferable to use purpose-built AGMs, but that would require a much larger network and more carriers than present or anytime soon. Practically speaking, there is no perfect situation, and it doesn't need to be 100% effective to be beneficial. Just giving SIC pressure, even its psychological, can force USN to reposition assets to the rear.

 

[a985010812]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

this video is about the performance of j36 and how its built OODA 4.0

 

[vincent]

View attachment 154438

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

this video is about the performance of j36 and how its built OODA 4.0

There is no way the plane flies Mach 3.

 

[drowingfish]

I don't think that the J-36 needs to be available in vast numbers to be game-changing. Even couple of dozen of planes with interim engines will be enough to change the calculations for all of the players in the West Pacific. And that can hold a lot of value for China's geopolitical position. Besides, China is very used to building planes with interim engines: the J-10, J-11, J-15, and J-20 all saw engine changes.

Disagree, you don't have to deploy J-36 in massive numbers to make a difference in battle, but for the PLAAF to wield the J-36 effectively it needs to have many more than what it deploys.

It is quite simple, if you have just a few of this super expensive aircraft, you are going to be super cautious with its use. you also need a number of pilots to rotate through to learn just the basics. any time you want to do a little more, you have to get approval from higher, because you cannot afford to damage or lose a bird. In this phase you are not really finding you what the aircraft is really capable of, and you are not developing effective tactics for its use. But when you are equipped with this aircraft in large quantity, you are more bold in its application, and as you master more of its capabilities you begin to get creative in its application, that's when it really becomes a useful aircraft. I would say from the first J-36 enters service, you need at least another three years to get there.