Shenyang / Chengdu 6th Gen Demonstrators?

[yeetmahboi]

And an "interceptor with strike capabilities" is a weird type of aircraft that we haven't really had before. (Maybe the French Mirage series is closest?)

Well, at the risk of OT, the F-12B with a second asteroid slingshot role could do that job.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Found on Xtwitter the other day

 

[Scott Kenny]

Well, at the risk of OT, the F-12B with a second asteroid slingshot role could do that job.

Yes, if the F-12B also had the wiring to carry SRAMs it'd be the closest to the concept of a strike-capable interceptor.

 

[Null]

The intake placement behind and over the cockpit and triangle body shape of the aircraft just makes it so damn comparable to the Su-70.

 

[LowObservable]

Yes, if the F-12B also had the wiring to carry SRAMs it'd be the closest to the concept of a strike-capable interceptor.

And a SRAM will fit into that bay.
Funny, dat.
Also, airplanes that every history will tell you were ordered in 2Q1963, with the first flying in Dec 64 (damn that's fast) carry a pre-Oct 62 designation and FY61 tail codes.

 

[djfawcett]

With the weapons bay open.......from .X

Have to add that I can not attest to the reality.

 

[paralay]

However i guess Stealth also plays a role perhaps that is why F-117 has that acute angle.
Could you not consider J-36 also is sweeping the wings and intake based upon stealth?

Subsonic aircraft air intakes are designed according to other criteria. They do not need to reduce the flow rate, it is initially subsonic.
The sweep of the J-36 wing was chosen from the condition of the most advantageous flight at supersonic cruising speed, as was the Su-57 wing.

 

[paralay]

Uhm. . .

Subsonic B-2 is uninteresting
The Griffon has a supersonic air intake with internal shock wave that are not currently in use.

 

[Blitzo]

With the weapons bay open.......from .X

Have to add that I can not attest to the reality.

Those are just doctored images with speculative payloads. The original image has already been posted in this thread and of course does not have the weapons bay open, nor are the colours that saturated nor are PLAAF roundels visible like that.

 

[publiusr]

Uhm. . .



View attachment 754460

Proof the F-16 evolved from bionic gulper eels

 

[quellish]

Subsonic aircraft air intakes are designed according to other criteria. They do not need to reduce the flow rate, it is initially subsonic.
The sweep of the J-36 wing was chosen from the condition of the most advantageous flight at supersonic cruising speed, as was the Su-57 wing.

I don’t know if the sweep is for supersonic cruise because he’s a very draggy boi, but it sure wasn’t done for RCS.

 

[Ainen]

Guys, this is not a Su-57 topic (saying that as one of worst off topic offenders).

And on a personal level, secret projects is one of very few places in the internet over this x bad bad y gud gud.
May it continue to remain elsewhere?

 

[Deino]

As I said, CGs, sketches or drawings of the SAC design are rare so far ... yesterday the great animation by @xmszeon and today I found this on FB.

(via @隨心所欲)

 

[Avimimus]

Another way to look at the evidence is that the aircraft is an attack aircraft with self defense capability.

Sure. If, by attack aircraft, you mean attacking other aircraft.

 

[FlyGuy369]

As I said, CGs, sketches or drawings of the SAC design are rare so far ... yesterday the great animation by @xmszeon and today I found this on FB.

(via @隨心所欲)

View attachment 754475

I am willing to bet they did a boundary layer gradient vice DSI for the intake on this. Seen this some time ago, and I think it's a fair guesstimate.

 

[Jackonicko]

I'm going to look as though I'm picking on poor Paralay, I don't mean to!

I'm normally a big fan of Paralay's work, but I don't buy the span-bigger-than-the-length angle. I think this comes a lot closer to what I've been looking at in pictures and on film, no?

 

[paralay]

I'm going to look as though I'm picking on poor Paralay, I don't mean to!

Questioning everything is a healthy reaction of the body, I do it myself

 

[LowObservable]

I'm going to look as though I'm picking on poor Paralay, I don't mean to!

I'm normally a big fan of Paralay's work, but I don't buy the span-bigger-than-the-length angle. I think this comes a lot closer to what I've been looking at in pictures and on film, no?

View attachment 754506

Concur. The clearest underside shots are from locations ahead of or behind the airplane and some foreshortening occurs. I took a video grab that had a softer but more dead-on view and adjusted accordingly.

 

[Avimimus]

Questioning everything is a healthy reaction of the body, I do it myself

I think the thing which is hardest for some of us to accept is (1) the numerology and (2) the certainty with which statements derived from it are presented.

 

[Jackonicko]

Concur. The clearest underside shots are from locations ahead of or behind the airplane and some foreshortening occurs. I took a video grab that had a softer but more dead-on view and adjusted accordingly.

What do you make of the view I posted, Bill? I reckon that it's a bit 'out' size wise (I think its closer in length to the J-20 than shown)

 

[Deino]

IMO this is so far the best and most realistic CG showing the CAC J-36!

(Images via @高山CG from Weibo)

 

[siegecrossbow]

IMO this is so far the best and most realistic CG showing the CAC J-36!

(Images via @高山CG from Weibo)

View attachment 754516View attachment 754517View attachment 754518View attachment 754519View attachment 754520View attachment 754521View attachment 754522View attachment 754523View attachment 754524View attachment 754525

Finally added gaps in the nozzles.

 

[Gwalker18]

IMO this is so far the best and most realistic CG showing the CAC J-36!

(Images via @高山CG from Weibo)

View attachment 754516View attachment 754517View attachment 754518View attachment 754519View attachment 754520View attachment 754521View attachment 754522View attachment 754523View attachment 754524View attachment 754525

Very, very plausible!

 

[lancer21]

Man this thing is absolutely stunning. Probably the closest thing to a flying saucer Earth ever created. Come on you awesome chinese CGI artists, do J-50 as well.

 

[FighterJock]

This is the best looking CGI of the J-36 that I have seen so far.

 

[totoro]

but why would you need such a long cockpit canopy? there's literally room for another row of two people after the front row. Would it not be more logical to keep the canopy shorter than shown, if seating is side by side and if there are 2 pilots inside? It's stealthier, probably cheaper to have a smaller canopy and it's not like this thing is gonna rely on visibility from the cockpit so much.

 

[siegecrossbow]

but why would you need such a long cockpit canopy? there's literally room for another row of two people after the front row. Would it not be more logical to keep the canopy shorter than shown, if seating is side by side and if there are 2 pilots inside? It's stealthier, probably cheaper to have a smaller canopy and it's not like this thing is gonna rely on visibility from the cockpit so much.

That and less drag.

 

[paralay]

Let's play with the J-50
For such a fighter, an engine with an afterburner thrust of 20-21 tons will be just right

 

[quellish]

OK, this is for everyone, let's all come up with some nice, serious CGI concepts with realistic combat potential then we'll see who's get selected by the Chinese to build a prototype or prototypes, could be fun!

Like this?

 

[lancer21]

Great stuff as always Paralay. What kind of performance you predict for the J-50?

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

It can be assumed that the air intake of the J-36 is optimal for a speed of M =1.67 / 1780 km/h
The entry angle is F-22 - 34 degrees and the optimal speed is M=1.5 / 1593 km/h

This is simply incorrect, I'm not sure how you're getting a lower sweep angle for the F-22, when it's visually apparent that the angles on the J-36 is somewhat more modest. Even from the planform view, the projection is aligned with the leading edge sweep of 42 degrees, making the actual inlet plane sweep considerably steeper. Furthermore, a caret inlet is swept along multiple axes, and at ideal operating conditions, the two oblique shocks generated by the edges would be co-planar, and that doesn't necessarily have to occur at the highest possible sweep angle allowed by the lip geometry.

 

[Deino]

but why would you need such a long cockpit canopy? there's literally room for another row of two people after the front row. Would it not be more logical to keep the canopy shorter than shown, if seating is side by side and if there are 2 pilots inside? It's stealthier, probably cheaper to have a smaller canopy and it's not like this thing is gonna rely on visibility from the cockpit so much.

Interesting point … here another one:

 

[Ainen]

Let's play with the J-50
For such a fighter, an engine with an afterburner thrust of 20-21 tons will be just right

Looks too big; PL-17s don't fit in. Also, 1.2 t:w at MTOW surely is excessive?

 

[Avimimus]

So where is the thinking at with regard to both reheat and thrust vectoring?

 

[LowObservable]

What do you make of the view I posted, Bill? I reckon that it's a bit 'out' size wise (I think its closer in length to the J-20 than shown)

The proportions look about right. My RAeS estimate holds at 74' long, 64' span, >>2200 ft2 wing area.

 

[FighterJock]

Currently I do not think that the J-36 will have trust vectoring Avimimus. Though that could change over time as more information comes out.

 

[sferrin]

but why would you need such a long cockpit canopy? there's literally room for another row of two people after the front row. Would it not be more logical to keep the canopy shorter than shown, if seating is side by side and if there are 2 pilots inside? It's stealthier, probably cheaper to have a smaller canopy and it's not like this thing is gonna rely on visibility from the cockpit so much.

Could be so your pilots can get in and out of it easily.

 

[paralay]

Great stuff as always Paralay. What kind of performance you predict for the J-50?

Let's start with the picture

 

[VTOLicious]

The proportions look about right. My RAeS estimate holds at 74' long, 64' span, >>2200 ft2 wing area.

@Jackonicko

 

[Trident]

IMO this is so far the best and most realistic CG showing the CAC J-36!

Yes, that's very good! I think the actuator blisters blend into the wing more smoothly than that and the DSI bump appears not to be "conical" enough, but it's definitely the best so far.