Chinese UCAV/CCA/flying wing drones (ISR, A2A, A2G) thread

[SinoAmericanCW]

Any hint which one is from CAC and which from SAC?

Based on a satellite picture that was at the time thought to show a tech demonstrator of a manned 6th gen, Type B (diamond wings) is from CAC and, as such, Type A (lambda wings) must be from SAC.

 

[cdcywlau]

Based on a satellite picture that was at the time thought to show a tech demonstrator of a manned 6th gen, Type B (diamond wings) is from CAC and, as such, Type A (lambda wings) must be from SAC.

But TWZ had another satellite photo of SAC showing a huge diamond wing drone, and this drone resembles the "third" large unmanned aircraft which eventually wasn't shown up in the parade.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

1. CAC and SAC were rather surprised that the two UADFs were called to participate in the parade, in their opinion it's a lot earlier than expected

5. Yankee described the UADFs as "not a gram of it was for a strike role, every bit of it is for air superiority". Instead of smaller CCAs (MQ-28, YFQ-42 and YFQ-44 mentioned here as examples) they said given their size and the power of their engine it's more useful to think of them as unmanned J-10.

In that case - Wondering if there will be multirole (and not fully strike-focused only) counterparts to these UADFs (in terms of size, speed, range, capability etc), similar to how the J-35A is a multirole counterpart to the J-20/A/S in the PLAAF?

In addition - Are there/will there be any other concurrent/future CCA-type UCAV projects of similar tier and complexities by the Chengdu and Shenyang ACs (if not by other institutes or companies) which would complement and supplement the ones currently shown in public?

Lastly, any mentions of carrier-based variants for the UADFs?

 

[siegecrossbow]

In that case - Wondering if there will be multirole (and not fully strike-focused only) counterparts to these UADFs (in terms of size, speed, range, capability etc), similar to how the J-35A is a multirole counterpart to the J-20/A/S in the PLAAF?

In addition - Are there/will there be any other concurrent/future CCA-type UCAV projects of similar tier and complexities by the Chengdu and Shenyang ACs (if not by other institutes or companies) which would complement and supplement the ones currently shown in public?

Lastly, any mentions of carrier-based variants for the UADFs?

There are two other CCA with vertical slabs. I’m guessing they are more air to surface oriented.

 

[mack8]

What about the rather overlooked diamond wing tailed one, that apparently does not have a bay? Is that likely to be an ISR/sensor/ECM oriented CCA?

 

[vincent]

In that case - Wondering if there will be multirole (and not fully strike-focused only) counterparts to these UADFs (in terms of size, speed, range, capability etc), similar to how the J-35A is a multirole counterpart to the J-20/A/S in the PLAAF?

Why? Just let each type do the jobs they are best designed for, like GJ-11 for surface strikes.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Disregarding the first question:

In addition - Are there/will there be any other concurrent/future CCA-type UCAV projects of similar tier and complexities by the Chengdu and Shenyang ACs (if not by other institutes or companies) which would complement and supplement the ones currently shown in public?

Lastly, any mentions of carrier-based variants for the UADFs?

What about these?

 

[Tomboy]

Disregarding the first question:



What about these?

We'll simply have to wait until the replay tomorrow

 

[mack8]

6. Shilao described a scenario for their use. Imagine a J-20S (might have been J-36, I forgot) and a F-22 snuck on on each other with their stealth. They get into WVR combat and J-20S takes out a pair of PL-10 while F-22 starts spinning it's gun. Shilao describes using 5th gen this way ("knife fight in a phone booth" as he puts it) as "不体面" or "unbecoming" for high tech fighters. Instead if J-20S had a UADF bodyguard it could just tell it to dogfight and beat the F-22 while it gets away.

I know i keep harking back to comparisons with EDI or terminators and such things, but it's mind-boggling to actually witness a revolution in air combat such as now and consider the implications. I mean this UADF vs F-22 scenario, the UADF not only has incredible performance, but it's a robot, it will not stop until either it or the F-22 are dead, if you tell it to fight until the fuel runs out, it will, if you tell it to crash into the F-22 it will, and if it's likely programmed to try to crash it's opponent if damaged, it will try to the last second. The F-22 cannot turn his back and run away once committed, he can't, the robot will be after him. The robot does not need to return to base or refuel if ordered so. I would absolutely shit myself if i was in the F-22 pilot's place.

 

[siegecrossbow]

3. In experiments with manned fighter pairings it's found that UADFs are particularly fast at reaching for the kill shot compared to human pilots. To the point that human pilots afterwards complain of the AI doing "kill steal" on them. Pilots being highly prideful folks sometimes had to be comforted with words like "yeah but he's a computer, he's never going to get a promotion over you no matter how many kills he score" and "it's not about who gets the kill, it's about winning together as people's air force". Yankee joked that maybe for morale sake they need to figure out a way for AI to toast humans at the dinner afterwards to smooth things over.

How is that comforting? These things are literally gunning for their jobs.