Ideal PLAAF/PLANAF fighter?

I think we've done this before, but I think it's time to revive the SinoDefence tradition of 'ideal this/that' threads.

What do 'we' think the ideal contemporary fighter aircraft for China would be? Not a guessing game on what the J-XX will actually be like, but a chance to be creative, throw ideas and logic around.

With the recent flight of PAK-FA, and the April Fools re Japanese ADX flight, it got me thinking....


What emphasis' are ideal for PLAAF?

Modest cost (ie many in service) vs world beating capability (ie prestige but small numbers)

High performance vs agility

Stealth vs weapons load and/or something else

Air dominance vs strike

etc



Here's an idea to get the ball rolling. Influenced a lot by Japanese stealth program.
* Relies on radar-blockers for much simpler engine placement.
* Relatively short airframe
* About size class of F-18
* Relative emphasis on stealth and internal AA weapons stowage



Might have to trim the wingspan, maybe add anti-flutter wing pods which could double for ECM etc.

I think with the distances involved here, one major concern should be range and also loiter time. Hence my preferance of a larger fighter, in the class of a Flanker. That also provides more flexibility on how to outfit the frame. The size allows for some internal weapons carriage and a bigger fuel load.
Due to the ranges to be covered, I think an optimization for higher altitues is worthwhile, hence I also tend towards a Delta design.
I think right now the bigger need is to controll the battlespace from a counter air perspective, the strike role is more adequatly covered. So I focus a little more on the A-A aspects.
In general, since the biggest need is also not to penetrate a hostile battlespace, but to control a rather neutral one, I place more emphasize on sensors and comm capability. Somewhat less on stealth.
A large wing area for good climbing and turning capabilites is also a need here.

For startes I've just modded your first concept a little to fit my preferances.
The canopy allows for a better all around view.
Airplane is longer to fix the size issue.
Wintips are clipped, some ECM/ESM equipment in that position makes sense.
Moved engines a little closer for better CG placement and to increase actual wing area.

Land based aviation can afford to have the option of a hugely expensive heavy air dominance fighter.

Imagine a scenario the size of potential conflict in Taiwan, each aircraft loiter over the island for 1 hour, and generate 4 sorties a day, one regiment of 24 planes will be able to have a flight of 4 above the island round the clock, and two regiments will have 8, when backed by AWACS, nothing will be able to take off beneath them. Basically, China won't need more than 12 regiments of such fighters. Then a dedicated stealth strike aircraft for interdiction and maritime strike. And a medium multirole aircraft for everything, which will also have a carrier borne version.

Ideally, i'd go with two different fighter aircraft, but if i had to stick with just one model for all the combat missions - interception, CAP, deep strike, CAS, etc then i guess i'd go with something like this:

Weight class around 12 tons empty. Mtow around 26 tons. Single engine, 120 kn military power, 180 kn in AB. Side intakes, starting quite a bit forward, like halfway from the length of the canopy. Canards in front. (im in the camp of people not seeing canards ruining frontal RCS that much), compound delta wing a la f16xl, going all the way to the end of the fuselage. (unlike for example on Gripen, where the wing ends quite a bit before the end of the fuselage) Vertical tail surfaces protruding behind the engine, in the samilar way horizonal tail surface are 'hanging' after the engine on f22. No horizontal surfaces, so basically it'd be a pelican tail, not unlike what was once proposed for X32 during its development. In addition to steering, the angle of the tails would add in control at high AoA and even, to a lesser degree, as elevons.

Internal space for weapons - two weapons bays, one under each intake. Not very deep, probably not suited for weapons of mass over 500kg, but long enough to accept double (staggered) AAMs in each bay, or a single, a bit thicker missile for other purposes - Antiradar, smaller land attack cruise missile/ antiship missiles.

And so on. I'll try to do a drawing by tomorrow.

Love the revision Scratch, interested in how that line of thought will evolve.

As an idea to throw out there, how about widening the centroplane, which is the opposite direction to your modification. This line of thought is highly reliant on radar blockers as there's no real option for an S-bend intake, unless the centroplane is used for a lateral-S-bend. I'd rather use the centroplane for weapons bays and wheels, plus fuel.



We are definitely getting into heavyweight fighter territory, which is playing to King Comm's viewpoint which is I think air dominance.


Toroto, sounds like you are working on the 'low' brother in a low-high duo. Nothing wrong with that, looking forward to the sketches

Or more like a stealthy J-8-II....

Although I'm going into the direction of a bigger airframe here, I'm still of the opinion numbers shouldn't be completely sacrificed for technology. I'm not looking for the latest and greatest stuff, but for a solid performance fighter that comes at reasonable cost.
I'm also with Totoro in that I'd like more than one airframe to do it all. Another, lighter allround fighter like suggested and also maybe even a dedicated strike plane would be nice.
For now I will continue with my current design. A 3D Modell is on the drawing board. I'm pretty sure I'll also play around with canards, as I like the aerodynamic benefits it brings and also don't think it's too bad for RCS meassures, especially since I don't place that much emphasize on it anyway.

Planeman, for the stealthy J-8, how about integrating Rudders and Stabilators into one controllsurface on each side on that one, I think it would at least look awesome ...
The widebody airplane will sure have a lot of internal space, question is how much lift the centroplane will create and how agile the plane can then be.

One change from the description would be to the wings. I moved away from a real compound delta and basically just added small lerxes in front of a regular delta. There are, naturally, many issues with this design, even if the drawing is quite crude, but i do believe it should be workable. Dimensions should be 17 meters in length, overall, and a modest wingspan od 10 meters. (which, when i rethink it, may have to lengthtened to some 11 meters)

Nice sketch, definitely a good starting point. The main issue I see is limited internal weapons load. Side bays like that might be able to carry a single PL-12 each, which is fine for BVR. Maybe add WVR missile bays in the forward fuselage between the intakes? Or in the wings.

Another sketch. I got rid of the lerxes altogether, it just seemed superflous with the canards in front.

The middle weapons bay might be unworkable though. While there is space for a weapon there, I'm not sure how the said weeapon could be ejected under extreme conditions, with both left and right weapon bay doors also opened. Perhaps more importantly, with the plane being fairly sleek, thats pretty much the only big bit of fuselage left for fuel storage. Without it - the whole plane might have somewhat short legs. I would think everything else is more or less self explanatory.

Now, the whole plane would be a bit of a jack of all trades, master of none kind of a deal. But thats what you get with a single mid sized model, good even for an aircraft carrier variant.

It would definitely lack in the heavy weapons department - those could be carried only externally. And that in itself, without another heavier class of an airplane (new bomber) might be quite an issue for future PLAAF.

Ideally, though - future plaaf should consist of three main combat airplanes.

A single engined 11 ton fighter / cas airplane, with secondary strike capability. Medium altitudes, speeds not over mach 2. Overall dimensions like the Rafale.

A twin engined 18 ton fighter / interceptor / strike airplane. High altitude, high speed performance. Overall dimensions like f15.

A twin engined 24+ ton heavy striker / bomber with secondary long range interceptor capability. Medium altitude, medium speed envelope - should be using two of the engines used on the single engined fighter. Overall dimensions like bac tsr2 with longer wingspan.