Mystery aircraft 4th August 2025: CCA vs other

M

mack8

Junior Member
A more professional title would be welcomed for starters. Something like "Mysterious sighting on August 4th, 2025: CCA or manned aircraft? Theories and speculation", or maybe something even shorter.
Also the first two posts in this topic should be moved back to the original as they are way older (July 26) and unrelated.
 
Nx4eu

Nx4eu

Junior Member
Registered Member
Deino said:
Would you post your analysis here? In fact i tried the same - albeit not with calculations and measurement, but just by eye-balling the J-36's front landing gear tyre to a size similar to the unknown type.

I'm well aware this inherits several errors from the beginning since we don't know if the size of the tires are the same, eyeballing itself is far from good ... but at least since we are all fishing in a muddy pond! Here is my try ...

I must admit, my first impression was this "thing" is bigger - or at least longer than a J-36 ... so indeed more something big.
Then I found the image in the bottom left corner and my first thought was, these two are too similar, maybe it is a fake too ... if I wouldn't know better and both images were posted let's say about two years apart, I would say that "thing" from yesterday is a dramatically refined version of the J-36, but that does not make any sense at all!

View attachment 157439
Click to expand...
I first used mplifier's model of the J-36 to roughly determine the sizes of the J-36 wheels and bogeys. I believe it's one of the most accurate models we have currently of the J-36.

The most simple method I chose was to assume this aircraft had a double bogey of the same size as the J-36, of around 2m in length. I measured the length of the aircraft to be around 110 units. While the double bogeys are around 10 units in length. By extrapolating 110/10 to equal 11, multiplied by 2m it equals 22m, the same assumed length I used for the J-36. *Note, that the J-36's main gears appears to be slightly tilted while in the air, I've accounted for that difference and measured in parallel to the length of the mysterious aircraft.

1754423335348.png
1754423369130.png

One crackpot theory I have is, instead of it being a new upgraded variant of the J-36, it could be the unmanned component of the platform, a side development of a CCA based off the J-36 airframe.
 
Last edited:
Neurosmith

Neurosmith

Junior Member
Registered Member
Nx4eu said:
I first used mplifier's model of the J-36 to roughly determine the sizes of the J-36 wheels and bogeys. I believe it's one of the most accurate models we have currently of the J-36. I will do two types of wheel measurements to cross check.

To most simple method I chose was to assume this aircraft had a double bogey of the same size as the J-36, of around 2m in length. I measured the length of the aircraft to be around 110 units. While the double bogeys are around 10 units in length. By extrapolating 110/10 to equal 11, multiplied by 2m it equals 22m, the same assumed length I used for the J-36. *Note, that the J-36's main gears appears to be slightly tilted while in the air, I've accounted for that difference and measured in parallel to the length of the mysterious aircraft.

View attachment 157449
View attachment 157450

One crackpot theory I have is, instead of it being a new upgraded variant of the J-36, it could be the unmanned component of the platform, a side development of a CCA based off the J-36 airframe.
Click to expand...
Another crackpot theory that I have is that this is a newer or competing prototype for the J-36 program, but with ailerons situated near the inner side of the trailing edge instead of near the wingtips, so what we could be seeing is the aircraft in its "flaps down" position (hence the "W" shape).
 
M

mack8

Junior Member
Let's remind ourselves of the rumours from few months back of changes to one or both 6th gens that were said some may like them and some may not. And of the speculative drawings posted back in Nov. 2024 that looked more or less like a J-50 with 3 engines.

Does CAC has the capability to incorporate so many differences so quickly in a new prototype? Perhaps the two configurations were developed almost in parallel. It was certainly possible in the heyday of aviation, like for instance MiG-23PD and Ye-231 being developed and flying almost simultaneously.

As to the changes themselves, i have to say the J-36 is rather simple looking, top intake, simple caret side intakes, simple diamond wing shape etc., compared to the more exquisite aerodynamics and controls of the J-50 for instance. So maybe what we see is a more mature CAC 6th gen.

All this of course is only speculation.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
At present I think the most decisive information we need is something that allows us to accurately gauge its size, followed by confirming whether it has a canopy or not.

Everything else -- whether it is some J-36 derivative or whether it is a large aircraft etc -- imo is jumping the gun a little.

Not helped when the Chinese language side seems to be a bit more quiet than one would expect.



I do think people are getting a bit too caught up about the planform of this aircraft. Specifically, the planform is one that could be for anything, and for any size of tactical aircraft. It is as compatible for a higher end UCAV/CCA (say something the length of J-10) or a full blown manned tactical aircraft. That lack of clarity means we will need to await size +/- cockpit confirmation before deriving anything else.
 
R

REautomaton

New Member
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
According to Yankeesama this might be a school project demonstrator for one of the seven black listed Chinese universities. If true that’s even funnier and a bigger flex than it being a dedicated trainer…
Click to expand...
If this is real, does it mean we might see it in public soon—maybe at events like the Zhuhai Airshow or something similar?
 
zyklon

zyklon

Junior Member
Registered Member
Blitzo said:
Not helped when the Chinese language side seems to be a bit more quiet than one would expect.
Click to expand...

Chinese commentators are probably unusually quiet about this aircraft because they don't know what the story is either.

The 单位 and associated entities behind this aircraft might have refrained from intentional leaks, and/or are even more cautious about OPSEC than their sister entities.

Blitzo said:
At present I think the most decisive information we need is something that allows us to accurately gauge its size, followed by confirming whether it has a canopy or not.
Click to expand...
siegecrossbow said:
According to Yankeesama this might be a school project demonstrator for one of the seven black listed Chinese universities. If true that’s even funnier and a bigger flex than it being a dedicated trainer…
Click to expand...

We'll be in a better position to assess the likely origin of this aircraft once we have a decent idea on its approximate size.

School projects — or at least those that stay school projects — aren't usually resourced to yield full size demonstrators.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top