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

latenlazy

Brigadier
The value of the aircraft, imo is exactly why it won't be operating at the tactical front, at least not at the early phases of a high end air war when both sides are at their "full strength".

In that context, its stealth and endurance and sensor and weapons set will be to act as a loitering force multiplier for every other asset rather than itself directly entering the fray at the frontline.

Certainly, if the initial stages of the air war occur in favour of the PLA, then J-36 could be risked to operate at greater distances against what remains of the adversary where aircraft like J-20 and J-35A cannot easily accompany it due to shorter combat radii. But in such a scenario it would require the PLA to "win" the first few rounds of aerial warfare to credibly secure air superiority, and that is what's more difficult imo and if is where the value of J-36 will first be felt in an air campaign.
Hmm, I think you need to think more in terms of maximal effects rather than maximal preservation. If your most capable penetrating offensive asset isn’t being used to get the most penetrating offensive effects you might be doing something wrong.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Until I have confirmation that the J-XXX use a GaO radar I am going to assume GaN.
There is in fact no confirmation for a lot of things we are saying here and won't be for a long time.

There is in fact no evidence that it can carry any of the anti-ship/ground missiles that you stated in your chart.
There is nothing theoretically preventing a new fifth generation aircraft from having a XXL weapon bay.
More importantly, having XXL weapon bay is a design requirement, not a necessary feature of 6th gen.
First, I am not saying these are "requirements." I am saying these are features. Not every aircraft/drones will have all these features but I expect the high end manned component of the 6th gen family to meet most of them, as the J-XXX does. Also no 4th gen is anywhere close to supercruising above Mach 2.

Not mutually exclusive with the J-XXX performing these missions.

No, thats ridiculous. The engineers at Chengdu made immense sacrifices to put that giant internal weapons bay on the J-XXX. It is meant to be used.
My point is to drop your hyperboles. Design attributes on J-36 are not all necessarily things we will see on other "6th gen" aircraft, which in itself is a marketing term.

You'd be better off just comparing J-36 to existing 5th gen aircraft.

The most important part of 6th gen, which is AI and collaboration with UCAVs for missions, you are not even talking about all.

How I expect the J-XXX will be used, part 1. Yes, I am aware that the PLAAF will also have CCAs. Not included because the star of the show is the J-XXX and because I don't know what it looks like and how it fits the PLAAF's current doctrine. #stopamericanscopingJ-XXXisabombernotatruesixgen
View attachment 142002

We here at SDF is a forum that should be calmly analyzing facts and discuss some. This it not meant to be a flag waving forum.

So, If you keep up with hash tags like #stopamericanscoping, those posts are going to be deleted.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I think you are somewhat stuck in the B-21's combat framework.
Is it reasonable to sacrifice so much performance for such an obvious 2.5+Mach high-speed assault design and just linger in the rear, conduct lateral assaults "if the initial stages of the air war occur in favour"?

I do think it is, because if you are operating a system of systems like the above echelon, and the enemy is as well, the last thing you want to do is to expose your most high value aircraft in a position where an enemy CCA/UCAV can get a potshot at it.

The benefits of having a high speed for this aircraft, during the early phase of an air war is to be able to reposition itself in the intermediary bridging space as well as defeat any adversaries that leak through. Its large combat radius will be exerted through endurance/loiter time in this scenario.

If they're able to win the first phase of the air war (which is likely to be the most complex and most difficult), then sure J-36 could be used a bit more liberally at longer distances where J-20s and J-35As can't accompany it, and its speed and range will of course be useful there as well.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Hmm, I think you need to think more in terms of maximal effects rather than maximal preservation. If your most capable penetrating offensive asset isn’t being used to get the most penetrating offensive effects you might be doing something wrong.

To effectively use your most penetrating offensive effects you need to be able to create openings in the enemy's echelon to begin with, and that will have to be done with a system of systems fracas.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I think you are somewhat stuck in the B-21's combat framework.
Is it reasonable to sacrifice so much performance for such an obvious 2.5+Mach high-speed assault design and just linger in the rear, conduct flank assaults "if the initial stages of the air war occur in favour"?

I do think it is, because if you are operating a system of systems like the above echelon, and the enemy is as well, the last thing you want to do is to expose your most high value aircraft in a position where an enemy CCA/UCAV can get a potshot at it.

The benefits of having a high speed for this aircraft, during the early phase of an air war is to be able to reposition itself in the intermediary bridging space as well as defeat any adversaries that leak through. Its large combat radius will be exerted through endurance/loiter time in this scenario.

If they're able to win the first phase of the air war (which is likely to be the most complex and most difficult), then sure J-36 could be used a bit more liberally at longer distances where J-20s and J-35As can't accompany it, and its speed and range will of course be useful there as well.

@bsdnf I would suggest that you read carefully what @Blitzo wrote here and also this entire thread.

J-36 is not lingering in the rear. It is the most important node(s) in your strike force. If you lose J-36, your entire group of aircraft breaks down.

Nothing else in your group of aircraft have the ability to consume all the data, provide one whole picture, coordinate electronic warfare and direct actions.

There is a lot more to combat than getting from A to B and then lobbing missiles.

Also just in terms of employment of missiles, it's not clear to me why you think it is so important for an aircraft to be cruising mach 2.5 in the front line of combat theater. What are you using that speed for? Why can't a slower aircraft accomplish the same task up front?
 

Ringsword

Junior Member
Registered Member
yes every big ticket items from submarine to b21 is costing them a hell alot of money. With a trillion budget defense they can only procure a small number of them each year.

Most defense workers demand 6 figure income and also expensive education is not helping.
Yes all of this costs money sweat and pain ..but ask the Chinese during the late Qing and subsequent 100 of humiliation /blood if this is worth it and how really expensive it is NOT to have it!!!!
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
To effectively use your most penetrating offensive effects you need to be able to create openings in the enemy's echelon to begin with, and that will have to be done with a system of systems fracas.
geography and numbers in aerial warfare work in such a way that you usually have this opportunity by default.
 

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
I think discourse about the need to always stay in cooperation with CCAs has probably been influenced too much by US doctrines, which is not a negative indictment towards anyone for talking about it, because US is by far the loudest talking about 6th gen air combat. So it's natural that they affect the discourse a lot.

However, what US says are controlled by their practical limitations. They are in the 6th gen CCA/MUMT race but so far not shown that they have progressed far in the 6th gen aerodynamics race.

A mach 2.5+ supercruising combat aircraft does not have to be constrained in the back line or always surrounded by CCAs. In fact, not operating solo can hold it back in an air war because it is surrounded by more easily detectable targets and the enemy can infer it's position based on nearby CCAs/5th gen.

In an air battle, J-36 could operate alone, penetrate the contact line unseen and position itself on the flanks of the enemy main air formation. From there, it would exploit the non-all aspect stealth of adversary 5th gens and cue in fire from J-20/35s in the main friendly air formation confronting the enemy head on, giving the first look at first shoot advantage.

The J-36 would not even need to fire a shot by itself and risk revealing it's position. Alternatively, it would join in on the chase after the initial volley sends the enemy formation running back to friendly airspace, using its massive speed to catch low supercruising 5th gens trying to escape combat.

This isn't something a B-21 can do.
 
Top