PLA next/6th generation fighter thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
- Status
Good explanation on the choice of intakes:
GT:
A one-time reply to the ever-present question of "Who is more suitable for high speed, DSI or caret intakes?"
Instead of asking "Which is more suitable for high speed, [DSI] or [caret] intakes?"
It’s better to ask “Which one is more suitable for high speed, [non-adjustable] air intake or [adjustable] air intake?”
If both DSI and caret inlets [are not adjustable], then there won’t be much difference in the total pressure recovery coefficients between the two.
But compared to DSI, caret inatkes are [easier] to make an adjustable inlet (such as the Su-57's inlet)
Therefore, the question comes back to "Which is more suitable for high speed, [non-adjustable] air intake or [adjustable] air intake?"
So the key to the question is "[adjustable] or [non-adjustable]"
The simplest example, many people try to use the speed reduction from J-10A to C to prove that DSI is not suitable for high speed. In fact, 10A is an adjustable intake duct and 10C is a non-adjustable intake duct. Even if the answer behind this question is related to the intake duct, it will only be related to adjustable/non-adjustable
GT:
A one-time reply to the ever-present question of "Who is more suitable for high speed, DSI or caret intakes?"
Instead of asking "Which is more suitable for high speed, [DSI] or [caret] intakes?"
It’s better to ask “Which one is more suitable for high speed, [non-adjustable] air intake or [adjustable] air intake?”
If both DSI and caret inlets [are not adjustable], then there won’t be much difference in the total pressure recovery coefficients between the two.
But compared to DSI, caret inatkes are [easier] to make an adjustable inlet (such as the Su-57's inlet)
Therefore, the question comes back to "Which is more suitable for high speed, [non-adjustable] air intake or [adjustable] air intake?"
So the key to the question is "[adjustable] or [non-adjustable]"
The simplest example, many people try to use the speed reduction from J-10A to C to prove that DSI is not suitable for high speed. In fact, 10A is an adjustable intake duct and 10C is a non-adjustable intake duct. Even if the answer behind this question is related to the intake duct, it will only be related to adjustable/non-adjustable
Does the forum show images if you are not logged in? Too many guest users right now!Someone call webmaster for live chat feature
Gotta get some ad funding and finally make dark mode
Lethe
Captain
One of the major budgetary challenges for NGAD is the engine program which is now orphaned from both F-35 and B-21 development roadmaps and consequently has poor prospective economies of scale.
I don't imagine that PLAAF would volunteer itself into a similar situation by pursuing exotic powerplant solutions when a three-engine configuration should allow the aircraft to meet the required thrust characteristics with either existing engines or future developments thereof that are also compatible with other programs such as J-20 and H-X.
I don't imagine that PLAAF would volunteer itself into a similar situation by pursuing exotic powerplant solutions when a three-engine configuration should allow the aircraft to meet the required thrust characteristics with either existing engines or future developments thereof that are also compatible with other programs such as J-20 and H-X.
Last edited:
In something of a stunning development, China appears to already be flying a stealthy, high-performance , imagery of which began to emerge today. At this early stage, we have very little idea about the precise identity of the new aircraft, but many elements of its design are very much in line with what we already knew about Chinese sixth-generation airpower aspirations.
Video and photos that began to circulate today on social media show the previously unseen aircraft conducting a daytime test flight, alongside a , serving as a chase plane. The locations and the dates of the various imagery cannot be verified at this stage, although the presence of the J-20 suggests that the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) factory airfield is a likely candidate.
JayBird
Junior Member
I don't visit sinodefence forum everyday like in the younger days, but this is the place to be when something big happen with Chinese military news. I'm sure many other people are the same.
Some preliminary thoughts on this historic day:
1. We should call the Chengdu 6th gen the J-XXX in honor of its three engines.
2. J-XXX is comparable in length to the J-20 and significantly wider and thicker. This is consistent with rumors that it can have MTOW of >50 tons.
3. Three engines likely reflect a requirement to provide >40 tons of thrust with low-bypass turbofans. For the near future, the WS-15 will be China's premier engine. Thus, three engine is the only viable option.
4. The J-XXX has very prominent shiny apertures on both sides of the chin. This is likely a pair of metalic RAM-coated optical windows (which is why it is shiny) for IR sensors. The IR sensors occupy prime sensor real estate on the J-XXX which indicate the enormous emphasis on IR detection which will be highly useful against B-21, NGAD as well as current 5th gens.
5. There are side facing AESA on the chine. There appears to be two pairs of two RF apertures, one large and one small. These could two arrays of different radar bands or the smaller array may be a datalink. At present, it is unclear if the J-XXX has a radar in the traditional location. Side facing arrays would be very useful for SAR.
6. We need to popularize the term all-aspect/broad band (A2B2) stealth. All-aspect means stealth from the front, sides and back. Broad band means stealth from Ku band all the way down to VHF. A2B2 stealth will be the defining characteristic of 6th gens. J-XXX, B-2 and the B-21 are A2B2 stealth. 5th gen are relatively frontal-aspect/higher-frequency band stealth.
7. Surprisingly, ventral intakes of the J-XXX are caret intakes similar to the F-22. This likely reflects a very high supersonic speed requirement in excess of Mach 2, which is beyond the efficient speed range for DSI. Its wing sweep angle is around 50 degrees (larger=lower supersonic drag=higher speed design). For reference, the J-20 and F-22 are around 42-43 degrees and the SR-71 was around 60 degrees. The dorsal intake is likely a DSI and cleverly used the cockpit as the bump which also likely reduce RCS.
8. At present, there are no known Chinese drones with the same range and flight performance as the J-XXX. I am therefore very skeptical of claims that close-integration with drones will be a key component of 6th gen aircrafts. I envision the J-XXX to primarily coordinate with other J-XXXs far from the Chinese mainland.
9. My very rough measurement of the weapon bay suggests a wideth of ~4m and a length of ~7m. This is enough for the 5.76m PL-17 but not quite enough for back to back 2*4m PL-15.
10. It goes without saying that the strategic impact of the J-XXX will be immeasureable. It's essentially a death sentence for all existing American battle plans. CSIS needs to rewrite their garbage reports.
1. We should call the Chengdu 6th gen the J-XXX in honor of its three engines.
2. J-XXX is comparable in length to the J-20 and significantly wider and thicker. This is consistent with rumors that it can have MTOW of >50 tons.
3. Three engines likely reflect a requirement to provide >40 tons of thrust with low-bypass turbofans. For the near future, the WS-15 will be China's premier engine. Thus, three engine is the only viable option.
4. The J-XXX has very prominent shiny apertures on both sides of the chin. This is likely a pair of metalic RAM-coated optical windows (which is why it is shiny) for IR sensors. The IR sensors occupy prime sensor real estate on the J-XXX which indicate the enormous emphasis on IR detection which will be highly useful against B-21, NGAD as well as current 5th gens.
5. There are side facing AESA on the chine. There appears to be two pairs of two RF apertures, one large and one small. These could two arrays of different radar bands or the smaller array may be a datalink. At present, it is unclear if the J-XXX has a radar in the traditional location. Side facing arrays would be very useful for SAR.
6. We need to popularize the term all-aspect/broad band (A2B2) stealth. All-aspect means stealth from the front, sides and back. Broad band means stealth from Ku band all the way down to VHF. A2B2 stealth will be the defining characteristic of 6th gens. J-XXX, B-2 and the B-21 are A2B2 stealth. 5th gen are relatively frontal-aspect/higher-frequency band stealth.
7. Surprisingly, ventral intakes of the J-XXX are caret intakes similar to the F-22. This likely reflects a very high supersonic speed requirement in excess of Mach 2, which is beyond the efficient speed range for DSI. Its wing sweep angle is around 50 degrees (larger=lower supersonic drag=higher speed design). For reference, the J-20 and F-22 are around 42-43 degrees and the SR-71 was around 60 degrees. The dorsal intake is likely a DSI and cleverly used the cockpit as the bump which also likely reduce RCS.
8. At present, there are no known Chinese drones with the same range and flight performance as the J-XXX. I am therefore very skeptical of claims that close-integration with drones will be a key component of 6th gen aircrafts. I envision the J-XXX to primarily coordinate with other J-XXXs far from the Chinese mainland.
9. My very rough measurement of the weapon bay suggests a wideth of ~4m and a length of ~7m. This is enough for the 5.76m PL-17 but not quite enough for back to back 2*4m PL-15.
10. It goes without saying that the strategic impact of the J-XXX will be immeasureable. It's essentially a death sentence for all existing American battle plans. CSIS needs to rewrite their garbage reports.
"The current reality of our country's military aircraft industry is that the third-generation (today's fourth-gen) fighters have begun to be equipped, the fourth-generation fighters have just begun to be developed, and the development direction of the fifth-generation aircraft is still relatively vague. How to achieve "leapfrog" development, that is, how can our country's military aircraft industry leapfrog the F/A-22 and develop a fifth-generation aircraft that can compete with the United States' hypersonic unmanned fighter jets when they are successfully developed around 2025, so as to achieve the goal of "defeating excellence with excellence" KONP, a Weibo user who studies aviation history, quote this in a book that may have belonged to the chief designer or a senior researcher maybe 15 years ago.
They do what they say
They do what they say
Last edited:
- Status