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

Scott Kenny said:
NO THEY DO NOT.

Aircraft with a tail generate negative net lift with it to pull the nose up.

Aircraft with canards generate positive net lift to pull the nose up.

A stable aircraft's center of gravity is forward of the center of lift, which causes the aircraft to want to pitch down in flight.
Click to expand...
It depends on whether the aircraft is naturally stable or unstable. A subsonic F-16 is statically unstable, so the wing and the tail are producing lift to balance each other out since the C.M. is behind the wing's A.C. Once the F-16 becomes supersonic,the A.C. shift reward makes it naturally stable, then the tail load is typically in the downward direction to stabilize the pitching moment from the wing.
 
6footboy said:
Take a look at this video from the Millenium 7* - lots of new unmanned aircraft besides the manned Shenyang and Chengdu designs.

Click to expand...
I do have to note that the CH-7 is probably a export drone judging by its numerous appearance at Zhuhai in its developmental phase also the fact that entire Rainbow series is a export product.
 
My first reaction is those look like the bomb bay doors for a bomber carrying some very heavy medicine! What an interesting multi role capable platform.
 
LowObservable said:
Nothing screams fake. The eedy beedy eyes (HUDs) are a nice touch. What are we looking at here, though?
Click to expand...
Possible airbrake? Other than that, I can't think of any other possibility, especially since the other side pictures indicate that the back should be flat, so I think it's most likely a speed brake.
 
LowObservable said:
Nothing screams fake. The eedy beedy eyes (HUDs) are a nice touch. What are we looking at here, though?

View attachment 772610
Click to expand...

I think that's just the outer "line" of the aircraft when looking at it from that angle. A combination of the aircraft's actual dorsal fuselage shape, the splinter camo they have for it, and the camera's poor quality/deliberate distortion, makes it look like there are structures there when there really isn't.

In a way, the splinter camo is working lol
 
Maybe you're right, from another photo it shows that there should be no airbrake behind the J36.
 
SUPER=BUG said:
Oh my God, if this photo is real, the person who took this kind of picture could have been in jail for two or three years.LOL
Click to expand...
No, I really think China loves the publicity regarding these new platforms and showing them off, seriously. I person taking the photo(s) may be scouting for the next non-Chinese concepts to copy.
 
Hydroman said:
No, I really think China loves the publicity regarding these new platforms and showing them off, seriously. I person taking the photo(s) may be scouting for the next non-Chinese concepts to copy.
Click to expand...

If they really did, they would be releasing images themselves, officially, and in better quality.

There is a difference between tolerating pictures and footage of a certain quality/resolution/content being released, and showing them off for publicity in that manner.


The best way to view this dynamic is:
1. the aircraft themselves are at a stage of mundane testing/development where they can't fully prevent images and footage from getting out anyhow.
2. they still have means to try and set maximum ceilings for what civilians are able to release outwardly (you can bet there is footage and videos that have been taken of this which is much higher in quality than what has been released on the internet).

Now, I'm sure that there are probably some elements of CAC, AVIC or the PLA at large who are feeling pleased at the publicity these things do get -- but that's different to actively letting those factors drive what is released. And their desire for publicity definitely isn't driving any official release of imagery/footage, because if that was their focus, we'd be seeing much better pictures than what we have, in a more astonishing manner as well.

===

Regarding the shape of the aircraft, I've depicted in a red outline, what I think is the approximate to the overall outer "silhouette" of the aircraft from the photo angle is -- in yellow is the direction of the air intake and the way it protrudes and blends into the rest of the fuselage.

Keep in mind the red outline is asymmetrical from this perspective because the photo was not taken head on, so the dorsal air intake makes the "silhouette" look uneven.

1749258029031.png
 
Last edited:
zjz said:
www.twz.com

This Could Be Our Best View Yet Of China's J-36 Very Heavy Stealth Tactical Jet

The latest image taken of the jet while on the ground appears to show new details, including two smaller weapons bays straddling a large main bay.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

TWZ has a feature on this already .....

Personally I think it is more of a demonstrator than a operational aircraft ....
Click to expand...
I'm confused with the use of the word 'demonstrator'. Of course it's not a operational aircraft, but here are some images of J-20 prototypes, I'll compare them to the American technology demonstrators, like the X-35, then re-compare what we see on the J-36.

First J-20 prototype, 2001 and 2002 are below:
1749270280361.png
1749270379820.png I'd say these are on par with demonstrators like the X-32, and the X-35.
1749270847822.png


The photo's of the J-36 however, seems to point to it being more refined, and more similar to these J-20 prototypes like 2011, and 2015:
1749270440928.png
1749270501899.png
1749270878691.png
1749270894122.png


These are still prototypes of the J-20 mind you, but they are much further along in development. Coincidentally the J-36 has many of the additional features seen on 2011, than 2001. And we've seen the J-36 has been numbered '36011'. I'm not going to jump to any further conclusions, but the aircraft seems certainly much further a long in it's development. So this is why im confused with the term demonstrator. I would just call them prototypes, as I think in terms of visible tech, J-36 numbered 36011 is far more similar to the J-20 prototype 2011, than prototypes 2001 which I would call a demonstrator, as it's similar to the X-35.
 
zjz said:
www.twz.com

This Could Be Our Best View Yet Of China's J-36 Very Heavy Stealth Tactical Jet

The latest image taken of the jet while on the ground appears to show new details, including two smaller weapons bays straddling a large main bay.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

TWZ has a feature on this already .....

Personally I think it is more of a demonstrator than a operational aircraft ....
Click to expand...
The J-36 had the designation 36011 on the side of its fuselage back when we saw it late last year.
We know that the J-20 prototypes started with 2001, then progressed to 2011, etc. This applies for the prototypes also by Shenyang.

Following the naming convention I believe it is likely that this is a prototype and not a demonstrator. The J-36 and the J-XDS both seem to be further ahead in terms of development than that. Of course it will take years before they will reach initial operating capability, I would predict no earlier than 2029 at the absolute earliest that Chengdu will begin serial production.
 
Hydroman said:
No, I really think China loves the publicity regarding these new platforms and showing them off, seriously. I person taking the photo(s) may be scouting for the next non-Chinese concepts to copy.
Click to expand...
1749275679134.png
"’At the time, Wei was not aware that .... the military facilities in the photos were sensitive military information ... and ultimately Wei was dealt with according to law.‘’

The MSS is sure quick at cracking down and disappearing the photographer for something they want the netizens to promote online..

I'd say if it was in the air over public areas, it's basically fair game. But assuredly jumping some sort of fence to capture a clear front view is definitely pushing it.

Realistically even the Chinese MSS can't exactly enforce their residents from taking photo's of a aircraft flying in the air of a densely populated area. Which is why the other photo's didn't have some sort of punishment.
 
Nx4eu said:
I'm confused with the use of the word 'demonstrator'. Of course it's not a operational aircraft, but here are some images of J-20 prototypes, I'll compare them to the American technology demonstrators, like the X-35, then re-compare what we see on the J-36.
Click to expand...
Yeah the western propaganda and pundits will stick to the "demonstrator" tag because it conform with their desired world view that they want themselves to believe in and they want their audience to believe in.

I don't recall anyone calling the Sukhoi T-50 prototype a demonstrator for example. Or does anyone call the B-21 prototype a demonstrator? Nope, they don't even call it a prototype. So probably this is exactly what the J-36 36011 is, i.e. whatever the first B-21 is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nx4eu said:
View attachment 772770
"’At the time, Wei was not aware that .... the military facilities in the photos were sensitive military information ... and ultimately Wei was dealt with according to law.‘’

The MSS is sure quick at cracking down and disappearing the photographer for something they want the netizens to promote online..

I'd say if it was in the air over public areas, it's basically fair game. But assuredly jumping some sort of fence to capture a clear front view is definitely pushing it.

Realistically even the Chinese MSS can't exactly enforce their residents from taking photo's of a aircraft flying in the air of a densely populated area. Which is why the other photo's didn't have some sort of punishment.
Click to expand...
This is just a routine publicity piece on confidentiality, unrelated to this morning's incident.保密干事 (The people responsible for confidentiality) don't take action that fast. Also, the person who took that photo better watch out. The last person who photographed the J20 (that side view in the woods) got sentenced to 7 years in prison.(ゝ∀･)
translate by deepseek
 
siegecrossbow said:
Many wall climbers died from tea intoxication to bring us this information.
Click to expand...

微博

随时随地发现新鲜事！微博带你欣赏世界上每一个精彩瞬间，了解每一个幕后故事。分享你想表达的，让全世界都能听到你的心声！
m.weibo.cn m.weibo.cn

Already apprehended. Apparently he took the photo from very long range with high def camera.
 
Deino said:
Since recently too many faked Images of the J-36 were posted and this one looks almost too good to be true I would say, let‘s be sceptical again!

View attachment 772605
Click to expand...
It looks delightfully futuristic, although would it realistically need two HUDs? Does the Su-34 have two HUDs? The F-111? (Ka-52?)

Given that one person is the pilot and the other a weapons operator, wouldn't it only be necessary for one of them?
 
EmoBirb said:
It looks delightfully futuristic, although would it realistically need two HUDs? Does the Su-34 have two HUDs? The F-111? (Ka-52?)

Given that one person is the pilot and the other a weapons operator, wouldn't it only be necessary for one of them?
Click to expand...

There is probably no fixed pilot seat. Either seat can be used to drive the plane
 
What are the chances that this aircraft(J-36, IMO J-XDS seems too small to pack such a system) will/is equipped with MSDMs like shown in the patent as some credible leaker has been touting, it could potentially act as an APS against missiles and even aircrafts if they somehow got close enough. US has been working on a similar system, although it seems to use a different launch method ie. being carried in a rocket pod instead of being on an internal VLS. Missiles themselves is quite small, estimated to be under 1m in length and lacks a warhead thus relies on direct impact to intercept missiles.


epZBOzqI.jpg

This is the Lockheed concept: ezgif-8d88bd1ffa97fc.jpg
Only 78cm long and 41mm in diameter if PLAAF has a similar missile I think it could be possible to pack a few of these into the fusolage.
 
Last edited:
That top inlet looks off kinda sugests its a a protype till more powerfull engines apear and it goes to being a twin engine design. Given how fast Chinese are evolving their designs i would not be surprised if a twin engine is not already under construction.

With novel aerodynamic configurations , flight hours on such a plane are what they need for refinment of final designs ,.
 
EmoBirb said:
It looks delightfully futuristic, although would it realistically need two HUDs? Does the Su-34 have two HUDs? The F-111? (Ka-52?)

Given that one person is the pilot and the other a weapons operator, wouldn't it only be necessary for one of them?
Click to expand...
The operational orientation of this aircraft is different from any previous aircraft, and it may not be appropriate to make a similar comparison with the SU34.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom