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

[FriedRiceNSpice]

No flying tailless 6th gen prototype.

You, me and everyone, know that Trump 100% would have shown it off if there was any.
(current US flying/flown 6th gen probably at best demonstrators, might not even be tailless)

Most likely both the Shenyang and Chengdu aircraft flew long before December 24. Did they also not exist before December 24?

If you think Trump would have shown off a classified aircraft for no valid reason, then unfortunately you are just the type of person Trump is able to fool.

 

[lcloo]

One of the major factor that caused problem in F-35 is that they did not complete full flight tests before they rushed it into service.

The major purpose of flight tests is to check if the aircraft performs as designed, any flaw aka screwed-up should be identified during one of the hundreds of testings, and redesign should be made to solve the problem.

If the problem cannot be solved then they will have to abandon the project, example, the J9 and J12 project.

IMO, J35 has gone beyond demostrator stage, and we shall see how the flight tests go.

 

[iewgnem]

To be fair, the US has been developing and testing tailless designs (for future supersonic fighter applications) since at least the 1990s.

The most visible examples being the Bird of Prey and X-36.

Based on what we've witnessed, it's plausible or arguably more likely than not that China has since surpassed the US in this domain, as it has in other areas like HGVs and MaRVs, in part due to years of DoD misprioritizations.

However, unless you have access to highly classified data from SAC, CAC, Lockheed, Northrop and Boeing on the current states of their tailless efforts, we ought to maintain an open mind and a measure of humility until enough information emerges to allow for a reasonably comprehensive comparison of next gen Chinese and American tailless designs.

I don't think Bird of Prey can be strictly classified as tailless.

 

[ougoah]

Bird of prey was an X-plane... not a prototype of anything. It was an empty shell to evaluate designs.

X-36 was a cardboard plane. Shouldn't even call it an X-plane but whatever their standards.

Does the internet even know how large that X-36 is?

China have done hundreds of X-36 equivalents over the decades. Full scale X-planes, there were apparently at least 5 Chinese full scale X-planes that preceded the J-50 and J-36. I'm sure also thousands of computational fluid dynamics assessed and refined models that only existed in digital space. College kids developed RC planes with no rudders and vertical control surfaces. X-36 making aint hard. Whats hard is understanding everything behind it and developing a full model using one experimental planform. China would have studied countless planforms in CFD, RC models like the inappropriately vaunted X36 and full scale X-planes.

The only impressive thing with the Bird of Prey and X-36 is they were playing with the configurations in the 1990s. China would have been playing with this level of aerodynamics in the 2000s. They just don't show it all. How tf does the internet think these SAC and CAC fighters were developed? You can't copy what doesn't exist. The flight control laws and FCS on these aircraft are never seen before and the studies the developed these were of course different to the specific FCS developed for these two fighters.

 

[KFX]

Another question: when J-20 emerged it was in the yellow factory primer, and flew without a colour scheme for some years. Is there a view as to why the J-36 (and J-XDS, for that matter) are in a dark/matte finish? Does it suggest a certain programme maturity?

 

[Blitzo]

Another question: when J-20 emerged it was in the yellow factory primer, and flew without a colour scheme for some years. Is there a view as to why the J-36 (and J-XDS, for that matter) are in a dark/matte finish? Does it suggest a certain programme maturity?

J-20 when it first flew in 2010 (tech demo sn 2001) was not in yellow factor primer, the first prototypes (an 2011 onwards) were not in yellow factory primer either when they first flew.

They were in respective dark paint schemes.

I recommend going back to find the original pictures to refresh your recall.

 

[Deino]

Guys ... back to the topic and no more NGAD, X-planes or Trump BS stuff or I'll need to take action!

 

[donnnage99]

Internet enthusiasts often get impressed with the low hangin fruit like tailless maneuverability, thrust to weight and sustained supersonic flight. I think American planners are more concerned over the power generation required that need a whole 3rd engine and the game changing possibilities that would entail.

In the early 2000s AviationWeek reported on a classified briefing by the air force attended by several Congressmen on the capability of the f-22 to concentrate a microwave beam to fry enemy's radars. True or not, I would imagine 6th gen fighters like J-36 would further explore such capability.

Other possibilities that require massive power generation:

1) Wide frequency EW (high band mid band and low band), allowing for jamming and electronic counter-countermeasures. Basically a Growler in a stealth package. Air superiority? How about electronic superiority against not just other fighters in x-band but lower bands utilized by ground radars?

2) high powered microwave weapon

3) computation that can decipher and overcome frequency hopping low probability of intercept AESA employed in today's fighters.

4) active cooling for Infrared/heat supression

5) laser-induced plasma filament to trick IR homing missiles (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)

6) whatever the fuhhhggg those 2 enormous apertures at the front are. They scare me

 

[burritocannon]

if controlling multiple cca is a core feature of 6th gen, a sophisticated datalink system may also be a part of that power demand.

also id hazard a guess there may be a demand for onboard ai to quickly process massive amounts of information coming in. f-35 already generates massive amounts of data from its eodas for example.

 

[AndrewS]

if controlling multiple cca is a core feature of 6th gen, a sophisticated datalink system may also be a part of that power demand.

also id hazard a guess there may be a demand for onboard ai to quickly process massive amounts of information coming in. f-35 already generates massive amounts of data from its eodas for example.

Datalinks should require minimal power compared to detection.

It's a one-way transmission and the receiver is expecting this.

And if you look at the numbers, megawatt-level electricity generation is more than feasible with just 2 engines. Getting rid of waste heat from the electronics is the bigger problem