Shenyang next gen combat aircraft thread

[Alfa_Particle]

Are we sure this isn't CGI? I've seen another non-color-inverted version of this, and it looks exactly like a CGI image.

It's CGI, here is the Artist and he has more renderings on a carrier too.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The point is, the clearer ones are clearly CGs, but I‘m not sure if the recently posted image is a CG or - that’s how I understand it - if he re-does the few known true Images with his CGs to show them in the same position?

From what I can tell he indeed re-does the few known true Images with his CGs to show them in the same position.

You can notice the lack of a pitot tube in the render and you can barely see the wingtips in the actual one.

 

[AndrewJ]

Are we sure this isn't CGI? I've seen another non-color-inverted version of this, and it looks exactly like a CGI image.

Another difference between real image & CGI is canopy visibility. You can see the canopy from CGI (see above), but nothing from the real one (see below).

Here, the real deal. Still low quality though.
View attachment 149480

Still can't see the cockpit even from this angle? It is very very recessed....or no cockpit? Either way SHAD is something crazy

Such a recessed cockpit has to impact visibility, going to need some sort of see through cockpit AR tech

IMO this one is indeed a real photo. Others are CG simulations by artists.

 

[enroger]

From what I can tell he indeed re-does the few known true Images with his CGs to show them in the same position.

You can notice the lack of a pitot tube in the render and you can barely see the wingtips in the actual one.

No groove as well

 

[tankphobia]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Really wasn't sure if this was posted previously or not, short video of the J-XS in flight, doesn't look CG to me.

 

[Schwerter_]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Really wasn't sure if this was posted previously or not, short video of the J-XS in flight, doesn't look CG to me.

This is the origin of one of the earlier images from January I think, and also the earliest source of the underside groove

 

[Mearex]

No groove as well

the real one also doesn't have a groove... I hope... :copium:

 

[Mearex]

This is the origin of one of the earlier images from January I think, and also the earliest source of the underside groove

I still don't think it's the same plane. Just look at the nozzles:


vs

 

[enroger]

the real one also doesn't have a groove... I hope... :copium:

I'm afraid the groove is quite real.... My personal copium is that it doesn't have a negative impact on internal bay volume, many people just assumed the groove implies two separate bays but that is not necessarily true, it could still be a single bay with bay doors extend into the groove (which is actually a pretty shallow groove)

 

[AndrewJ]

I still don't think it's the same plane. Just look at the nozzles:

View attachment 149589
vs
View attachment 149590

Is it possible that they're some different prototypes?

 

[Mearex]

I'm afraid the groove is quite real.... My personal copium is that it doesn't have a negative impact on internal bay volume, many people just assumed the groove implies two separate bays but that is not necessarily true, it could still be a single bay with bay doors extend into the groove (which is actually a pretty shallow groove)

my worry is it negatively impacting stealth. Also I just see no reason for there to be one, like what's even the upside?