J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI

[Tirdent]

Fortuitous timing - you guys following the current discussion on the Su-57 thread? The Kh-59MK2 cruise missile in question is a 4.2x0.4x0.4m, ~800kg weapon with a ~300kg warhead. Four (a pair per main bay, which are each comparable in size to one half of the J-20's main bay) fit inside the Su-57, range is 290km though flight profile is not specified. Even if it's already at high altitude however, reducing the warhead weight to a more typical value for an anti-ship missile of ~200kg in favour of greater fuel capacity should get it into the ball park.

Swap the guidance system to one suitable for anti-shipping & you're done - a missile meeting the described specs is entirely within the state of the art nowadays.

 

[ougoah]

Range will be greatly enhanced by altitude and initial launch speed of fighter. But all being equal, 500km is a 67% increase in range from an already technically capable missile that achieves a max of 300Km. Under the same circumstances, a 500Km range is pretty much impossible without dramatic improvement in the technologies used.

 

[Tirdent]

These are subsonic missiles, so the launch speed benefit from a fighter platform is no greater than it would be on any other aircraft - similarly, launch altitude only really helps a great deal if the missile stays at altitude afterwards. In any case, both JSM and Kh-59MK2 are air-launched, so there's no advantage for one over the other in this regard.

It all depends on exactly what altitude profile underlies the 290km range figure for Kh-59MK2, really (how much of the total the missile spends at low altitude). Look at Bltitzo's JSM presentation (page 10): having the same missile fly all the way at high altitude rather than in the weeds *triples* its range. Kh-59MK2 carries a much heavier (even proportionately to its higher gross weight) warhead, so that it would outrange JSM at low altitude by a 100km margin takes some believing, but there are reasons why it might. Chief among these is the efficient turbofan engine, where JSM has a simple turbojet (Microturbo TRI40).

For reference, JASSM went from 200nm to 500nm range as JASSM-ER by swapping the turbojet for a turbofan and a modest (~70kg IIRC, on a >1000kg missile with 454kg payload) increase in fuel capacity. Alternatively, scale the 320kg warhead on the 770kg Kh-59MK2 down to the same fraction of gross weight as JSM (120kg in a ~400kg missile) which gives close to the 200kg I suggested earlier. With a more efficient engine and higher wing aspect ratio (lower drag), a Kh-59MK2-based missile would then have *at least* the same range capability as JSM, i.e. >500km at high altitude.

There's also the possibility that the 290km figure refers to a MTCR-limited export variant, the restrictions of which are irrelevant in a missile for Russian or Chinese domestic use.

 

[Jura The idiot]

... Kh-59MK2 ... though flight profile is not specified. ...

the chart in Today at 9:35 AM

Yesterday at 8:06 PM

now IT identified inside

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

just for me:
СНАУ = cистема навигационно-автоматического управления
БИНС = бесплатформенная инерциальная система управления

:

in the upper panel, my loose translation, "... against targets whose coordinates are known at the time of launching the missile, while also terrain features around the target need to be known ..."

further down in Main Features, "a flight altitude above ground level (depending on the landscape): between 50 and 300 meters"

 

[Blitzo]

The volumes of these missiles will be greater than a typical cylindrical AAM as pb said they were akin to rectangular prisms. It'll probably look like a smaller KEPD 350. Missiles like the PL-12 and PL-15 have fixed fins that require significant offset leading to wasted storage volume. A rectangular missile would be able to pack pretty tightly in the weapons bay, leading to something like 80% or more volume utilisation.

One half of the J-20's weapons bay is around 1m wide and 4m long, so two tightly-packed rectangular missiles could have dimensions of ~40cm wide and tall, and ~3.5m long. That's a decently sized missile, around that of the NSM. With long fold-out fins, which it almost definitely will have, it could fly quite a distance.

ABsolutely.

I should add that if J-20 and the 5th gen carrier based fighter are both able to carry four internally in their main bay, then that would wipe out any concerns I had for a FC-31 derivative or a J-20 derivative for the 5th gen carrier fighter's utility, as such an aircraft by design would have to be capable of at least carrying two stand off range AShM type weapons.

If the carrier based fighter can carry four weapons similar in class to JSM, then such an aircraft would have a greater internal weapons bay capacity for long range stand off powered weapons than F-35 and would certainly be a vindication of the configuration that they end up choosing.



That said I also hope such a missile looks a little less cartoonishly square than the Kh-59MK2, though I'm sure it is a very effective and capable weapon.

 

[Tirdent]

The square cross section (along with the wing configuration, flush intake and turbofan engine) is an integral part of what gives it this stellar payload/range performance though. Hard to think of a shape which better maximizes both internal bay volume use for fuel capacity and missile airframe weight/drag characteristics for efficient cruise. If it's a pure anti-ship missile rather than a pure land-attack missile, however - and that is what the Chinese poster suggested - they might relax wing aspect ratio to better accommodate hard terminal phase jinking and end up with something closer to JSM (possibly including the wing folding down rather than back).

 

[Blitzo]

The square cross section (along with the wing configuration, flush intake and turbofan engine) is an integral part of what gives it this stellar payload/range performance though. Hard to think of a shape which better maximizes both internal bay volume use for fuel capacity and missile airframe weight/drag characteristics for efficient cruise. If it's a pure anti-ship missile rather than a pure land-attack missile, however - and that is what the Chinese poster suggested - they might relax wing aspect ratio to better accommodate hard terminal phase jinking and end up with something closer to JSM (possibly including the wing folding down rather than back).

Oh absolutely, the square cross section is certainly very efficient, I just wish it didn't look so much like a block of wood with wings.

It sounds like it will have an anti ship version or an anti ship capability, but not pure AShM.

 

[Klon]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

Another

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

 

[Klon]

A photo and some screenshots via LKJ86

Until the video appears, additional screenshots

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

 

[e46m3]

Looks like the canopy has no glass coating?