That's a bold claim, why do you think it's a strategic bomber? What characteristics of the plane we've seen makes you think that?
Shenyang next gen combat aircraft thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Yes, your wild idea is wrong.
This is even more wrong compared to those trying to equate the J-36 as some kind of a fighter-bomber successor to the JH-7.
Last edited:
The A3 was more of a tactical bomber but the weapons carrying capacity would most likely be equivalent... point is it was a carrier based bomber of some sort
You didn't answer the "why" or "what" of my queries so I'm going to dismiss your bold claim, like ACuriousPLAFan above.
Can someone explain in simple language what major advantages this new plane has over the J-35A again? I mean apart from looking cooler subjectively, why would Shenyang develop this new plane instead of pouring new technologies into its J-35A which has only really started rolling out. Only possible reason I can think of is that they want to export the J-35A and want to keep the latest hardware secret in the next gen which will not be for sale.
This aircraft is of the same size and weight class as the J-15/J-16. IMO the main reason for designing this jet is to develop a stealthly heavy naval fighter as a successor to the J-15T, which can conduct missions which require longer range and heavier payload than what the J-35 can offer. In the long run I expect this new jet to operate alongside the cheaper J-35 in the PLANAF.
No it is a generation ahead, being a tailless aircraft.
As of now, we still can't even be sure of whether there is singular large weapons bay on the J-XDS (like those on the J-20 and J-35/A), or a dual split smaller weapons bay on the J-XDS (like those on the F-35A/B/C).
That is to say, without knowing the dimensions and rated load capacity of the weapons bay(s) on the J-XDS, it's rather pointless to make such a claim.
Nope. In contrast to the A-3, which is very much a carrier-based bomber from the get-go - The J-XDS is designed and engineered to become a land-based and carrier-based fighter in the first place. Only if the weapons bay(s) is/are large enough, then the anti-ship or land-attack capability would come as an added bonus.
The differences in terms of how both warplanes were designed, engineered and used are pretty massive, so it's pretty much useless trying to equate them together.
Last edited:
Yes but I don't understand why that would matter operationally. I mean it might reduce the RCS by a little but the J-35A is already very low I assume. It doesn't look like it could carry much more weapons internally than the J-35A. I just don't get why Shenyang can't pour their money into upgrades for the J-35A.
If you have vertical slabs you can’t have all aspect stealth. From the sides you’d be luck to get it below 1 sqm with loads of treatment. See the place where the wings meet with the vertical slabs? That’s acute angle and what is commonly called a “corner reflector”. Don’t let claims of Reddit fan boys fool you.