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

[another505]

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.

That's how I see it too. Until new supersonic stealth drones with the range, stealth, and speed to follow the j36. It will drag down the j36.

Someone else replied that drones can go fly first which j36 later catches up. But it still means the speed advantage is not fully utilized as the initiative is slower for the planning must be done earlier before to compensate for their slower speed.

J20S with twin seat and the shengad can be flying with cca but I imagine j36 will be flying solo or with other j36 doing deep strike, target cueing, and flanking, and then dash out to refuel and rearm to repeat.

 

[siegecrossbow]

What about an air based drone carrier that can fly fast and deploy CCAs? In fact isn’t this something the J-36 can do with large weaponsbay? Carry four CCAs in the bay and let them go forth into enemy territory while loitering from behind.

 

[Atomicfrog]

PLAAF J-5 could easily down an SR-71 in a low speed dogfight. How cowardly of the SR-71 pilots not to engage. Where’s maverick?

Yep, to compare the J-36 in his worst scenario case against an opponent like J-16 in it's best it's just nonsense.

A-10 is the best anyway... F-22 and F-16 kill !

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[SanWenYu]

View attachment 142045

From this angle it indeed kind of look like that rabbit with ears folded.

 

[Blitzo]

What about an air based drone carrier that can fly fast and deploy CCAs? In fact isn’t this something the J-36 can do with large weaponsbay? Carry four CCAs in the bay and let them go forth into enemy territory while loitering from behind.

CCAs will not be that small, nor will they have the planform that will be compact enough to fit in a weapons bay like a folded cruise missile.

It is likely that true higher performing CCAs will have the footprint of anywhere between a light trainer (think JL-10 sized) up to a medium weight fighter (J-10, legacy hornet sized).

 

[Blitzo]

That's how I see it too. Until new supersonic stealth drones with the range, stealth, and speed to follow the j36. It will drag down the j36.

Someone else replied that drones can go fly first which j36 later catches up. But it still means the speed advantage is not fully utilized as the initiative is slower for the planning must be done earlier before to compensate for their slower speed.

J20S with twin seat and the shengad can be flying with cca but I imagine j36 will be flying solo or with other j36 doing deep strike, target cueing, and flanking, and then dash out to refuel and rearm to repeat.

The point of UCAVs and CCAs is to have greater mass and persistence in the relevant operational area so that they are "always there," as they and accompanying friendly manned tactical aircraft will be able to apply constant pressure and degrade the enemy's own equivalent system of systems/echelon at the frontline of contact.

When your pressure begins to create openings in the enemy's defenses, that is when you send in your longer range and higher speed J-36s as well as your already forward deployed UCAVs/CCAs to move into the openings to attack the enemy's rear and high value targets to seek and exploit.

I.e.: think soviet deep battle, but in the air, and instead of seeking to create "envelopments" you are seeking to strike at high value targets in the enemy's rear both in the air (tankers, AEW&C, command etc) and on the surface (air bases, high value vessels, etc).


Sending in your penetrating long range assets like J-36 or long range UCAVs/CCAs without first creating weak points in the enemy's defenses just means your J-36s and UCAVs will have their effectiveness reduced at best, or outright lost in unfavourable or unnecessarily risky engagements at worst.

Remember -- both sides will have a complex formations and echelons of CCAs/UCAVs, high end manned tactical fighters, with support from their own AEW&C and EW assets, and both sides will be trying to keep their own system of systems coherent and structured while trying to degrade the enemy's system of systems echelons.

 

[Jason_]

CCAs will not be that small, nor will they have the planform that will be compact enough to fit in a weapons bay like a folded cruise missile.

It is likely that true higher performing CCAs will have the footprint of anywhere between a light trainer (think JL-10 sized) up to a medium weight fighter (J-10, legacy hornet sized).

I expect a high performing CCA will have a footprint of a J-35 or J-20 and up to the Shenyang 6th gen. Apparently, this is the PLAAF thinking as well. The PLAAF doesn’t believe in “low cost,” “attritable” drone designs for air superiority. Per Shilao & co, the PLAAF actually flight tested low cost n*CCA+J-20 vs. 2*J-20 and 2*J-20 came up on top. The conclusion is that a drone complement to a high performance aircraft must be a high performance aircraft. To quote Yankee: “The only difference between a drone air superiority platform and a manned air superiority platform is that the drone is unmanned.”

This of course doesn’t preclude low capability drones from being used in other roles.

 

[Neocloud]

Another view of the J-36 and J-20, posted by 三叔的装备空间 on Weibo, some people in the comments are saying this is fake.

 

[sunnymaxi]

Another view of the J-36 and J-20, posted by 三叔的装备空间 on Weibo, some people in the comments are saying this is fake.

View attachment 142059
View attachment 142060

this is from a game .. LOL

 

[Blitzo]

I expect a high performing CCA will have a footprint of a J-35 or J-20 and up to the Shenyang 6th gen. Apparently, this is the PLAAF thinking as well. The PLAAF doesn’t believe in “low cost,” “attritable” drone designs for air superiority. Per Shilao & co, the PLAAF actually flight tested low cost n*CCA+J-20 vs. 2*J-20 and 2*J-20 came up on top. The conclusion is that a drone complement to a high performance aircraft must be a high performance aircraft. To quote Yankee: “The only difference between a drone air superiority platform and a manned air superiority platform is that the drone is unmanned.”

This of course doesn’t preclude low capability drones from being used in other roles.

I fully expect the PLA to adopt at least one high end CCA/UCAV type, probably more, and are likely to be the size of manned tactical aircraft. The idea of them having a footprint of a J-35 or J-20 is not unreasonable either.

However I also expect them to pursue more attritible CCA/UCAVs that are smaller and exist more as expendable decoys or expendable sensor nodes.

It's not an either/or proposition -- to fight the full air campaign, I expect they will pursue CCAs/UCAVs of multiple levels of capability and cost, with differing roles depending on their echelon and depending on the stage of the air war.

Another view of the J-36 and J-20, posted by 三叔的装备空间 on Weibo, some people in the comments are saying this is fake.

View attachment 142059
View attachment 142060

Doesn't look right to me, the entire silhouette of the J-36 here is inconsistent with everything else that we have of it.