PLA next/6th generation fighter thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
No, he only described the overall configuration and noted, that a few days ago two high speed taxi tests were done ... it was my gut-feeling however that pointed towards Thursday or Friday, but that was wrong as it seems!
By the way, I showed him this and he said it would fit quite nicely!
In my opinion, there are two key considerations - Cost (in terms of procurement + operational expenses and warfighting capabilities) and carrier-based operations.
One - A J-XD powered by three WS-10C/WS-15/ACE WS-XX engines certainly wouldn't be cheap, given that we already have the J-20 (estimated 70-100 million USD per piece) as a rough reference. Besides, there are other concurrent next-gen projects (H-20, Y-XX, UCAVs of loyal wingman and other types, etc) that are certainly demanding more slices of the allocated budget to the PLAAF.
However, we do know that the 6th-gen aerial combat system puts heavy emphasis on scaling numbers, distributability and attritability.
Of course, plenty of UCAVs of different types (particularly of the loyal wingman types) would be crucial to fulfill this equation. But then, how capable and confident is the PLAAF towards allocating fewer numbers of such J-XDs to control significantly larger numbers of wingman UCAVs in flying formations? Would losing one or few of such J-XDs potentially severely impact the control and command capabilities of large numbers of wingman UCAVs, even with certain degree of onboard AI assistance on the UCAVs themselves?
In the meantime, the USAF paused work on the manned component of their NGAD until the end of 2024 mainly because they believe that the manned component is getting unbelievably expensive and unaffordable for large-scale deployment even with their budgets, and are reevaluating on how to make these platforms affordable while also fulfilling the mission requirements within set limitations (not sure if that's a too tall order for them).
In light of the development across the Pacific, would China's three-engine J-XD run into similar problems, even at a smaller degree and even with a more stellar financial management capabilities and less tolerance for corruption within the PLA compared to the Pentagon? Therefore, in retrospect - Would a high-low pair of J-XD models similar to the J-20/A-J-35A pair which are also paired with UCAVs be more affordable, balanced and effective for the PLAAF, instead of a sole heavy J-XD model paired with UCAVs?
Two - The J-20/A with two WS-10C/WS-15 engines can be considered one of the largest 5th-gen fighters in the world (perhaps only second to the Su-57).
For carrier-based operations, strict dimension and weight limitations apply as there aren't a lot of spaces to park and maneuver around, alongside pre-existing weight limitations of the elevator decks, catapults and arresting gear systems on aircraft carriers.
Speaking of which, the largest and heaviest carrier-based fighter ever designed and made is the F-111B at almost 40 tons MTOW, although the F-111B never entered service with the USN. The runner-up would be the F-14 and followed closely by the J-15. Plus, had the N-ATF program managed to avoid being slashed by the Pentagon, then the hypothetical F/A-23 from the YF-23 will be comparable to the F-14 if not the F-111B in terms of dimension and weight.
Therefore, it is highly doubtful that a three-engine J-XD can fit onboard PLAN carriers without severely impacting the flight deck and hangar deck operations. Moreover, with the USN also pursuing 6th-gen manned fighters that are separate from the USAF's NGAD program, it is also seriously doubtful that the PLAN would be content with operating only J-35s and J-15s into the 2040s, 2050s and beyond, as the PLAN would be the first in line to face against the might of the USN and their allied forces in the Pacific.
All-in-all, the argument being that unless future PLAN carriers grow significantly bigger in dimensions (120-150 thousand tons), size and weight will always be a fixed celling for any new manned fighters aiming to get onboard those carriers. To be frank, I don't quite see how anything larger than a twin-engine J-XD can fit onboard carriers of similar dimensions to the Nimitzs and Fords in such scenarios - Hence the potential and need for a smaller, twin-engine J-XD for carrier operations, in my opinion.
Last-but-not-least, both points also consider that the J-XDs would eventually replace earlier-gen fighters in both the PLAAF and PLAN into the mid and late 21-century.
Pardon my ill-informed blabblings, if any.
Last edited:
It was never a question this alleged fighter was not designed for carrier operations. PLAN had just grasped carrier operations with normal sized planes since not long ago.
the whole point of a large 3 engine plane likely has something to do with flight ceiling and supercruise. my bet is that this plane can fly very far at a very high altitude that protects it from the likes of F-35s. F-35 can operate at around 15000m. If a 6 gen operates at 25000-30000m, and cruises at mach 2 (at a higher altitude naturally it'll have higher speed), then an F-35 won't even be able to hit it. meanwhile, missiles launched from this 6 gen would gain much greater range, coming from a higher altitude and starting at a greater speed.
what this also means that this 6 gen will be much more adept at penetrating enemy air space to take out critical nodes such as AWACs and tankers.
Have some thoughts on cost for 6th gen projects.
A lot of the supply chain are very similar.
The engine will continue to use same engine as J-20.
The meta-material, CFRP and other material will use the same supply chain as J-20 and J-35.
The radar will be produced by the same domestic companies that will use the same T/R modules. The civilian side of things help keep cost of all that down.
The AI chips and other electronics are also going to be cheap as long as they rely on something closer to commercial supply chain.
And then beyond that, final assembly and automation will be able to use the same robots and machineries that use to produce J-20. I don't think there has be significant more capex here when switching production between J-20 to 6th gen.
So, maybe the cost will be 40 to 50% higher than J-20. But I don't think the difference is going to be like 80 million vs 250 million that have been discussed between F-35 and NGAD.
The key is just have a really flexible final assembly line and utilizing well established supply chain.
That configuration is ridiculous based on what we know so far imo.why need 3 engines? One result by doing this is pushing the thrust-to-weight ratio to be close to j20’s, right? If it’s really only just a jh-xx, why bother to add the 3rd engine to mess up the weapon bay? 2 ws15s are good enough to power up a 60-ton level jh-xx with 2 intakes on the back, benefiting the weapon bay capability as well. In other words, to have such a high kinematic performance with so many sacrifices, you don’t put the intakes on the back. BTW, you never put the intakes right behind the cockpit to inhale the pilot during injection. So what your friend described are highly questionable to me
That’s what I am thinking too. If only centerline engine is working with two side engines being off or at minimum operation, aka the max range mode, the plane can have a very high flight ceiling due to redundant intake flow. That’s a pro for 3-engine configuration
Right, it seems it will be sacrificing a bit of subsonic maneuverability compared to fifth gens, while gaining better stealth, speed and altitude. This should ensure complete advantage over fifth gens.
One definition of sixth gens could be that it can easily defeat fifth gens.
Source for the claim that the intake will inhale the pilot during an ejection ? I ran my own Napkin math and a ejection seat would sufficiently have enough acceleration to clear the danger zone of the intake during an ejection.
*Note I just modeled based on the rumors, the model is just to visualize what has been speculated thus far. But I did get a tad bit offended from your comment so I had to run some numbers.
how about the blockage of air flow into intakes in that position right behind cockpit?