Chinese Air Force

[rockdog]

From Jane's

 

[rockdog]

Using which mechanism those missiles are gonna stack up one above another ?

Not a serious drawing from some CG studio

 

[E-195]

Using which mechanism those missiles are gonna stack up one above another ?

Using missiles does not make it 6th generation, to be 6th generation needs lasers, AAM on such a large aircraft just makes it an ungainly large target.


If you have a B-21 and you make a 1/10 scale B-21 which one has a larger radar signature?

J-36 by being large has a lot of reflecting area, regardless it has no vertical fins.

Add a third intakes makes more drag and its fat boat tail has 3 nozzles, 3 nozzles close together have a higher IR signature than 2 widely separated nozzles.


technically that aircraft is a fat aircraft a 3rd engine requires fuel too, so its structure is heavier heavier aircraft at high Gs generate more structural forces, it is like trying to make a B737 as agile as a F-16, the structure will break on B737.

The Americans know it so they are redesigning the NGAD concept to something lighter, but that will mean a very revolutionary engine to power lasers

An illustration of the light fighter concept was included as part of a presentation by Chief of Staff of the Air Force, Gen. David W. Allvin, at the Global Air and Space Chiefs Conference, held in London last month and attended by air and space chiefs from around the world. The presence of the illustration was first brought to our attention by The Aviationist.

Air Force Floats Light Stealth Fighter Concept As Its Heavy Fighter Program May Be In Jeopardy

The Air Force’s top officer touted the concept as a path to develop a less expensive and more flexible fighter design, which is odd considering a top priority was the service’s NGAD heavy fighter. The Air Force’s top officer touted the concept as a path to develop a less expensive and more...

www.twz.com

 

[Ayan Barat]

Using which mechanism those missiles are gonna stack up one above another ?

Will definitely require some ingenuity but in can be done.

We already have multi-rack launchers that can carry four BVR-AAMs

And we also have the so called "Trapeze Launchers" that simply extend the munitions out of the IWB instead of ejecting them. So on a rudimentary level we can combine these both to get an arrangement where instead of a single missile, the whole rack is extended.

Made a rough CAD for better understanding

And on a more sophisticated level you can have something like a "missile magazine" where each magazine holds two missile in vertical arrangement.
F-23s were supposed to have similar set-ups if they had won the competition

 

[rockdog]

6 Gen fighters from USAF and PLAAF both chosed bigger sizes are not coincidence.



3rd engine will provide enough power for detection and communications for drones.

 

[rockdog]

Will definitely require some ingenuity but in can be done.

We already have multi-rack launchers that can carry four BVR-AAMs
View attachment 21656
And we also have the so called "Trapeze Launchers" that simply extend the munitions out of the IWB instead of ejecting them. So on a rudimentary level we can combine these both to get an arrangement where instead of a single missile, the whole rack is extended.

Made a rough CAD for better understanding
View attachment 21657
And on a more sophisticated level you can have something like a "missile magazine" where each magazine holds two missile in vertical arrangement.
F-23s were supposed to have similar set-ups if they had won the competition
View attachment 21659

Maybe some creative way like side weapon bay of J20

 

[E-195]

6 Gen fighters from USAF and PLAAF both chosed bigger sizes are not coincidence.

View attachment 21660View attachment 21661

3rd engine will provide enough power for detection and communications for drones.

View attachment 21662

US Air Force Pauses NGAD Project, Explores 6th Gen Light Fighter Concept​

The idea of a light fighter has existed for some time. Several officials have discussed the idea of developing an entirely new light fighter (4th or 4.5th generation) for low-end threats, while others have proposed building a light fighter variant of a sixth-generation aircraft.

U.S. Air Force Pauses 6th Generation Fighter Project, Explores Light Fighter Concept

U.S. Air Force Pauses 6th Generation Fighter Project, Explores Light Fighter Concept

armyrecognition.com

To justify fatso you avoid news

 

[rockdog]

US Air Force Pauses NGAD Project, Explores 6th Gen Light Fighter Concept​

The idea of a light fighter has existed for some time. Several officials have discussed the idea of developing an entirely new light fighter (4th or 4.5th generation) for low-end threats, while others have proposed building a light fighter variant of a sixth-generation aircraft.

U.S. Air Force Pauses 6th Generation Fighter Project, Explores Light Fighter Concept

U.S. Air Force Pauses 6th Generation Fighter Project, Explores Light Fighter Concept

armyrecognition.com

To justify fatso you avoid news

You self claimed something contradictory.

 

[E-195]

You self claimed something contradictory.

View attachment 21667

you level of arguing is of stupid level


When an aircraft is designed, it is made as light as the required structural strength allows, and the wings or rotors are designed to support the maximum allowable weight. When the weight of an aircraft is increased, the wings or rotors must produce additional lift and the structure must support not only the additional static loads, but also the dynamic loads imposed by flight maneuvers. For example, the wings of a 3,000-pound airplane must support 3,000 pounds in level flight, but when the airplane is turned smoothly and sharply using a bank angle of 60°, the dynamic load requires the wings to support twice this or 6,000 pounds.
Severe uncoordinated maneuvers or flight into turbulence can impose dynamic loads on the structure great enough to cause failure. In accordance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 23, the structure of a normal category airplane must be strong enough to sustain a load factor of 3.8 times its weight. Every pound of weight added to a normal category aircraft requires that the structure be strong enough to support 3.8 pounds. An aircraft operated in the utility category must sustain a load factor of 4.4 times its weight, and acrobatic category aircraft must be strong enough to withstand 6.0 times their weight.

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2023-09/Weight_Balance_Handbook.pdf

Okay Genious tell me if your crap J-36 weights 55000 kg 6 times its weight are 300000kg got it genius!

more weight more stress in the structure genius

 

[Nutcracker]

Will definitely require some ingenuity but in can be done.

We already have multi-rack launchers that can carry four BVR-AAMs
View attachment 21656
And we also have the so called "Trapeze Launchers" that simply extend the munitions out of the IWB instead of ejecting them. So on a rudimentary level we can combine these both to get an arrangement where instead of a single missile, the whole rack is extended.

Made a rough CAD for better understanding
View attachment 21657

Rail launchers. Might be difficult to do with ejector launcher for stealth platforms.

And on a more sophisticated level you can have something like a "missile magazine" where each magazine holds two missile in vertical arrangement.
F-23s were supposed to have similar set-ups if they had won the competition
View attachment 21659

Hm fascinating .

 

[rockdog]

you level of arguing is of stupid level

？？






And u r racist.

 

[BON PLAN]

If you have official data, I can believe you but the specifications are not known

My bad. You may be right :

B2 : 4 engines of 77Kn each

F135 is 125kn dry thrust, so it's not impossible than B21 is fitted with just 2 engines of this kind.

 

[E-195]

？？

View attachment 21672

View attachment 21673


And u r racist.

View attachment 21675

you are basically trolling.

Avoiding answering to facts.


A heavier aircraft is structurally weaker, more expensive and 3 engines require more fuel than 2 engines, 3 engines make for larger cross section and higher drag, but like i said you level of arguing is stupid level, and you want keep it like that

 

[E-195]

My bad. You may be right :

B2 : 4 engines of 77Kn each

F135 is 125kn dry thrust, so it's not impossible than B21 is fitted with just 2 engines of this kind.

It seems the B-21 has 2 engines, the NGAC FCAS and GCAP all are 2 engined aircraft.

GCAP and FCAS use V-tails, and NGAD seems they want a lighter fighter.

The main difficulty is the laser and the engine, they have to produce 6 times the electricity they do now and being lighter and more capable

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYo16-0gtds

 

[rockdog]

View: https://x.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1875720483381105133?t=r3YUdzM25_xkZfOCnXbAwg&s=19


View: https://x.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1873293836400939288?t=7VXmz2fPbJBqW88fJtqkCg&s=19


View: https://x.com/wmhuo168/status/1878178757854294106?t=HNkygM7rPcELJfRLwFWlPg&s=19

 

[E-195]

View: https://x.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1875720483381105133?t=r3YUdzM25_xkZfOCnXbAwg&s=19


View: https://x.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1873293836400939288?t=7VXmz2fPbJBqW88fJtqkCg&s=19

obviously this is propaganda well not even propaganda just an opinion, how to reduce drag from 3 engines that seem 2? well as they are set on J-36 there is no Chance but in boon supersonic they tried by setting the central 3rd engine farther aft to simulate a fuselage stinger or fuselage tail of a 2 engine jet such as Embraer Phenom





But on J-36 they have more drag obviously you low quality posts does not present any aerodynamic study just a personal opinion to hide your crap post really low class posting


same solution of boom supersonic was tristar but on J-36 all are parallel

obviously YF-23 generates less drag than J-36 but what you do give is a rhetoric opinion without science