Shenyang / Chengdu "6th Gen" Aircraft - News and Analysis

EmoBirb said:
Simply because you see it and think about the F-111 and Su-34 when you notice the seating arrangement, landing gear and size.

But size and seating arrangement lend themselves to an aircraft that's intended to generate plenty of power, have long range, carry large weapons and also work in a command and control role within the larger kill web (kill chain?) somewhere below genuine AEW&C aircraft but above the unmanned and less capable manned assets it will direct in theater (presumably).
Click to expand...
Well, it would make sense for the J-50 to be the PLAAFs frontline fighter and the J-36 to be the fruit of the JH-XX program. Could probably fit a KD-21 or some kind of LO cruise missile / AShM in those bays. Just my opinion of course.
 
Uuuuiiiuu said:
Well, it would make sense for the J-50 to be the PLAAFs frontline fighter and the J-36 to be the fruit of the JH-XX program. Could probably fit a KD-21 or some kind of LO cruise missile / AShM in those bays. Just my opinion of course.
Click to expand...

I think what EmoBrb is trying to say is that future warfare, at least in the Indo-Pacific, will be fought over long distances where stealth, speed and range are prioritized. 4th gen style mobility may be less prioritized.

This leads to designs that are larger to allow for greater internal carriage and range. These planes may end up being more or less long distance missile slingers, whether it is air to air or air to ground.
 
If the weight of J-XDS can be limited to within 35 tons, I personally feel that with Fujian's catapult, it can definitely be catapulted, if it indeed has considerations for being deployed on the ship.
 
helmutkohl said:
I think what EmoBrb is trying to say is that future warfare, at least in the Indo-Pacific, will be fought over long distances where stealth, speed and range are prioritized. 4th gen style mobility may be less prioritized.

This leads to designs that are larger to allow for greater internal carriage and range. These planes may end up being more or less long distance missile slingers, whether it is air to air or air to ground.
Click to expand...
Im fully aware of the speculative characteristics of 6th gen fighters. However, I am saying with the J-50 being around, it would be strange for the PLAAF to operate 2 6th generation fighters, and the yet unseen H-20 and JH-XX.
 
SUPER=BUG said:
In fact, there will no longer be the code JH. The JH fighter jet was a demand of the Chinese People's Liberation Army during a special period. As you can see, for example, the J16 can also carry some special missiles, but it is indeed J.
Click to expand...
According to the DIA the JH-XX program was still ongoing. Maybe they were wrong then?
 
Uuuuiiiuu said:
Im fully aware of the speculative characteristics of 6th gen fighters. However, I am saying with the J-50 being around, it would be strange for the PLAAF to operate 2 6th generation fighters, and the yet unseen H-20 and JH-XX.
Click to expand...
Would it be strange though? If both fighters are meant to complement and encompass different mission profiles it wouldn't be that strange. IIRC the J-35A is still mostly air to air orientated, strange don't you think? Since the J-20 is already air to air orientated, why build another aircraft meant to do a similar role?

From a outsiders perspective, many decisions seem to be strange as it does not match the doctrine we understand in the west.
 
Alfa_Particle said:
Right, one of the most intriguing things about the J-XD-S. A paper on its intakes (16/46+ pages):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1971441654390501454
View: https://x.com/Alfa_Particle/status/1971441654390501454?t=-sQkrzrOCkiSV9kRhF7IRA&s=19
Click to expand...
Huh… using google translate this seems to be from someone master’s thesis. If true, holy hell I feels really inadequate about my master thesis even if it is in different field.

I mean imagine your master thesis being use on major component of next generation of military aircraft…
 
What appears to be a darkened (AI tampered?) picture of the J-50 (though some suggest this might even be the original as the two released are said to be pictures of the camera display that took the pictures), perhaps some additional details might be made out.
1758877049070.jpeg
 
By adjusting the size of the canopy and the main landing gear wheels, I created this comparison image. It can be observed that it is likely slightly smaller than the Su-27 series. Therefore, I believe carrier operations are entirely reasonable. compete.png
 
  1. Aerodynamic Design for Boundary Layer Isolation
    • Waverider Design Principle: The leading edge of the inlet is designed to generate a three-dimensional curved shock wave (incident shock). Ideally, this shock wave can deflect most of the low-energy boundary layer developing from the forebody away from the inlet entrance, causing it to spill over the lip, thereby achieving "aerodynamic isolation." Figures 3.1 and 3.2 in the thesis show that, despite boundary layer development on the forebody, the inlet maintains good waverider characteristics, with the shock wave fitting closely to the lip, which reduces the direct ingestion of the boundary layer to a certain extent.
  2. Employing "Bleed Slots" for Active Suction (Core Control Method)
    • This is the most effective flow control method studied in the thesis. When ingestion of part of the forebody boundary layer is inevitable, bleed slots are opened at key locations inside the inlet to actively discharge the low-energy fluid.
    • Purpose:
      1. Reduce Boundary Layer Thickness: Directly remove slow-moving fluid near the wall to control boundary layer growth.
      2. Stabilize Flow Field: Enhance the stability of the terminal shock, improving the inlet's resistance to backpressure.
      3. Reduce Distortion: Prevent the boundary layer from accumulating and separating within the duct, thereby improving outlet flow field uniformity.
    • Optimal Locations: Based on comparisons of different schemes (Chapter 3), the most effective configuration places bleed slots at:
      • Near the throat section (Location 1): Suction at the end of the compression section, where flow is about to enter the diffuser, helps stabilize the terminal shock.
      • On the inner wall of the first bend in the diffuser (Location 3): In the S-shaped duct, the higher pressure on the inner wall can cause boundary layer accumulation and separation. Suction here effectively suppresses the generation and development of separation vortices.
    • Effectiveness: Using this scheme, at the design point (Ma=1.8), the outlet total pressure recovery coefficient increased by 2.01% and the outlet flow distortion index decreased compared to the baseline configuration without bleed slots.
 
I conducted a comparative analysis after using AI to read the papers.
  1. The fundamental compression principles are different.
DSI intake: Essentially, it is an evolution of the external compression intake. It replaces the traditional adjustable ramps with a carefully designed fixed bump (compression surface), which generates a series of compression waves (equivalent to multiple oblique shock waves) outside the intake to pre-compress the airflow. The main compression of the airflow is completed before it enters the lip.
Fused internal turning intake: It adopts internal contraction compression. Its core is a three-dimensional internal contraction reference flow field. After the airflow passes through the inlet lip (which is itself a three-dimensional shock wave), it enters a three-dimensional curved channel that contracts inward and toward the center. In this channel, the airflow is efficiently compressed through complex shock and isentropic wave systems. The compression process mainly occurs inside the lip.
  1. The philosophy of boundary layer treatment is completely different.
This is the point that best reflects the "essential difference."
The bump design of the DSI is its core. The lateral pressure gradient generated on the surface of the bump (the pressure decreases from the center to the sides) acts like an invisible "broom," sweeping the pre-body boundary layer from the central area above the intake to the corners on both sides before the airflow enters the intake, allowing it to overflow from the sides of the lip. Its goal is to "keep the boundary layer from entering the door."
The fused internal turning intake, on the other hand, adopts a more "open" strategy. Under the highly integrated design, it acknowledges that it is difficult, if not impossible, to completely avoid ingesting the pre-body boundary layer (especially the side boundary layer). Therefore, its focus is not on "pushing" from the outside, but:
First, using the wave-riding principle to push the low-energy flow in front as much as possible away with the inlet shock wave.
Then, for the boundary layer that has already entered the intake, it opens bleed slots at key locations such as the internal throat and expansion bend, acting like a "drainage system" to actively suck and discharge it, preventing it from accumulating and separating inside.
 
Kommoe said:
I conducted a comparative analysis after using AI to read the papers.
  1. The fundamental compression principles are different.
DSI intake: Essentially, it is an evolution of the external compression intake. It replaces the traditional adjustable ramps with a carefully designed fixed bump (compression surface), which generates a series of compression waves (equivalent to multiple oblique shock waves) outside the intake to pre-compress the airflow. The main compression of the airflow is completed before it enters the lip.
Fused internal turning intake: It adopts internal contraction compression. Its core is a three-dimensional internal contraction reference flow field. After the airflow passes through the inlet lip (which is itself a three-dimensional shock wave), it enters a three-dimensional curved channel that contracts inward and toward the center. In this channel, the airflow is efficiently compressed through complex shock and isentropic wave systems. The compression process mainly occurs inside the lip.
  1. The philosophy of boundary layer treatment is completely different.
This is the point that best reflects the "essential difference."
The bump design of the DSI is its core. The lateral pressure gradient generated on the surface of the bump (the pressure decreases from the center to the sides) acts like an invisible "broom," sweeping the pre-body boundary layer from the central area above the intake to the corners on both sides before the airflow enters the intake, allowing it to overflow from the sides of the lip. Its goal is to "keep the boundary layer from entering the door."
The fused internal turning intake, on the other hand, adopts a more "open" strategy. Under the highly integrated design, it acknowledges that it is difficult, if not impossible, to completely avoid ingesting the pre-body boundary layer (especially the side boundary layer). Therefore, its focus is not on "pushing" from the outside, but:
First, using the wave-riding principle to push the low-energy flow in front as much as possible away with the inlet shock wave.
Then, for the boundary layer that has already entered the intake, it opens bleed slots at key locations such as the internal throat and expansion bend, acting like a "drainage system" to actively suck and discharge it, preventing it from accumulating and separating inside.
Click to expand...


Can we stop posting - in fact I would advocate it to simple forbid it! - AI-generated stuff; in fact mostly nonsense? :mad: @overscan (PaulMM) ??
 
Deino said:
Can we stop posting - in fact I would advocate it to simple forbid it! - AI-generated stuff; in fact mostly nonsense? :mad: @overscan (PaulMM) ??
Click to expand...
I just used AI to summarize the original text. Based on my understanding of the original content, I believe his statement should be fairly accurate.
When there is a solid foundation of original text, it can prevent AI from fabricating information based on its own imagination.trust me
 
Deino said:
Can we stop posting - in fact I would advocate it to simple forbid it! - AI-generated stuff; in fact mostly nonsense? :mad: @overscan (PaulMM) ??
Click to expand...
Since I am not a native English speaker, I find it challenging to logically edit large sections of text containing specialized vocabulary (my major is Electronic Information Engineering with a focus on radar). Therefore, I can only rely on AI to help summarize the content into English. Additionally, the original paper, which university students can easily download.
 
lancer21 said:
What appears to be a darkened (AI tampered?) picture of the J-50 (though some suggest this might even be the original as the two released are said to be pictures of the camera display that took the pictures), perhaps some additional details might be made out.
View attachment 786180
Click to expand...
Pretty good size aircraft as you look at the size of the pilot's helmet in comparison.
 
Reddington777 said:
Isn't the LO mix for glass baked into the glass itself? There's zero chance a 6th gen fighter would not have a cockpit glass that doesn't have LO treatment baked in.
Click to expand...
Not 100% for sure, but I thought they were coatings like on sunglasses. Vapor deposition. (Though it would make more sense to have it imbedded so it doesn't get scratched up. On the other hand, would it be as effective embedded rather than on the exterior surface?)
 
Sferrin said:
Not 100% for sure, but I thought they were coatings like on sunglasses. Vapor deposition. (Though it would make more sense to have it imbedded so it doesn't get scratched up. On the other hand, would it be as effective embedded rather than on the exterior surface?)
Click to expand...
Yeah apparently you're right:
The F22 Raptor canopy ... comprises two sheets of polycarbonate, sandwiched between two layers of optical glass, fusion bonded in an autoclave and drape formed over a canopy blank ... A metallic coating of indium-tin-oxide is added to the canopy to reflect the radar waves, giving it a golden tint.
Click to expand...
-Bill Sweetman F-22
A window member composed of a transparent resin or inorganic glass with a transparent conducting film such as gold or ITO (indium tin oxide) coated thereon, is used as an electromagnetic wave shield window for stealth aircraft. Applying such transparent conducting film enables, while maintaining transparency to visible radiation, both a radio wave stealth property which scatters radio waves in various directions so as not to be detected by radar, and an electromagnetic wave shield property which prevents harmful electromagnetic waves, except for visible radiation, from invasion into an aircraft.
Click to expand...
Global Security

But in any case, there's still no chance that whatever techniques they used didn't have LO materials on the canopy. Who knows how stealth coatings have changed these days for the glass canopy part though.
 
Reddington777 said:
Yeah apparently you're right:

-Bill Sweetman F-22

Global Security

But in any case, there's still no chance that whatever techniques they used didn't have LO materials on the canopy. Who knows how stealth coatings have changed these days for the glass canopy part though.
Click to expand...
I wonder if there are different compositions. The F-22 is gold but some of them get pretty colorful. The F-16 generally seems to be gold but the Gripen and Hornet/Super Hornet more of a rainbow hue. Then this one appears to have both versions, one on each piece:

7tnkkux.jpg
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom