People's Liberation Army Air Force : News & Discussions

[Innominate]

Btw, the USAF considers the F-22 higher than the F-35 'cause it can supercruise. That's why General Hostage says he needs 8 F-35s to do the job of 2 F-22s. So, high speed is very important.

No. That analogy has been debunked the General that said it would take 8 F-35's to do what F-22's was purposely taking it out of context because congress was considering spending money on upgrades for the F-22. When he made that comment the F-35's were carrying two 2000lm bombs and two aim120s. Eight F-35's in that configuration can only carry 2 BVR missiles which equals 16 missiles which is what 2 F-22's carry combined.

You should read what F-22 pilots that take on F-35 aggressors have to say... these F-35's are tech limited to radar and IRST.

When it comes to avionics, while the J-20 is unknown, the Rafale is more advanced than the F-22, and is more or less similar to the F-35.

Lol. Not even close when it comes to the F-35. Let me know when Rafail gets 360 degree sesorfused to its helmet and cyber warfare capability.

 

[Parthu]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1874428854556864516

That side-on angle reminds me of something from the US:

Mysterious Stealthy Shape That Resembles Future Fighter Concepts Spotted At Radar Test Range (Updated)

The apparent low-observable aircraft test shape appeared in broad daylight at Lockheed Martin’s Helendale radar cross-section measurement range.

www.twz.com

 

[Speedster1]

They have many concurrent programs running at the moment so there must be significant parts commonality with J-20, etc.

 

[randomradio]

Avionic is as important as fuselage and powerplant in a 6th gen fighter for active stealth, comm security, radar capability and data links. One can do clear assessment on their AI capability based on what their AI policy is. 2025 is a crucial year for China in this domain.

Coming to powerplant, no one knows if they have upgraded their WS15 or it is WS19 engine for this purpose, three engines with one drossle intake. There is no IR image, there are not radar images. Very early to come to correct assessment.

Sure. But majority of the core avionics that can go into 6th gen can also be introduced in 4th gen. You want an unmanned LCA Mk2 with MUM-T, it's being developed. You want a laser, it won't be internal like on a 6th gen, but it will come via a pod. But you can see here that only airframe changes can cater to an internal laser. More avionics that go inside a 6th gen can simply be carried in pods on 4th gen. You just need to have enough hardpoint left for weapons, with extras coming in via drones. Supporting drones can also provide a lot of 6th gen capabilities to LCA Mk2. That's why avionics isn't such a big factor.

Airframe and propulsion will have to be the main defining factors for 6th gen. For now, we only have broad-spectrum stealth and VCE, and VCE can also be introduced on older jets. So the propulsion system should also cater to advancing the airframe's capabilities, kinda like what TVC does.

 

[randomradio]

Whatever you mention becomes relevant but when others try to examine/explore it then it becomes irrelevant. You have commonsense but others don't. I wonder if moderators will caution you or not.
What has F-35 DAS to do?...already answered... how much time India, China, EU will take to develop such sensor & what if J-36 on its nose has it now?
BM's plume is analogous to SCRamjet's plume. We need to have some reference point. Still you can't see.
Ofcourse it's commonsense to know most agility & IR stealth during subsonic but it is also commonsense to know that if/when a HySo fighter is deveoped then it WILL DASH & give away its location or at least direction giving chance to enemy to be prepared once it arrives.
View attachment 39365

Exactly like I said, DAS is totally irrelevant. We are talking about defining a generation.

It is also commonsense to think that HySo jet with SCRamjet will need huge amount of fuel hence it will be big jet, may be like SR-71, may be little smaller than it. So frontal stealth might be low but may not be from other angles.
View attachment 39367

Just like RF trianglation can be done similarly IR triangulation can also be done

View attachment 39370

And it is also commonsense not to echo something undefined repeatedly otherwise people will go deep into it & also think you are Russian in disguise trying to advertise their upcoming products. LOL!

What if the Mig-41 is as small as a heavy fighter jet like the Mig-31?

SR-71 and SR-72 are meant to carry out different missions. Another example of an irrelevant topic. These jets have been designed for consistent high speed operations over long periods. A tactical fighter doesn't need that, so it will carry considerably lesser fuel.

J-36 design with big wide wings doesn't compare with HySo desgin at all. Keeping Supersonic Area Rule in mind i wonder how can such jet turn even like 4gen jet unless someone can explain.
High altitude requires U-2 like wings for slow speed or SR-71 like dart wings for high speed. But both cannot be combined at high altitude unless someone can explain.
USA is the 1st to reveal 6gen aircraft in general but is 6gen bomber, so it doesn't define entire 6gen like that. Similarly if MiG-41 comes out like quoted then they may label it as 6gen INTERCEPTOR. I don't wanna assume or conclude anything unless they reveal it.
BTW, just for analogy of classification, till this date nobody consideres F-117 as Fighter.

Why are you stuck on turns? Even considered tighter turns require subsonic speeds? All these jets can go subsonic, you know.

You are not arguing against me, you are arguing against the Russians.

Those are contradictory lines 'can't be done.... publicly known" LOL! even if you are an insider DoD person.
The video of IAF chief is there on YT saying 1 line that they have 6gen roadmap, i think it was Air Force Day speech.
And ofcourse it is important now that AMCA should be made 5.5gen & they're even advertising it like that.
But the point is that IAF has not made any statement on 7gen. And i'm not aware if they said anything to use HSTDV R&D into HySo Fighter in a particular timeline.

Yeah, the IAF will have an AMCA-sized drone program. HSTDV is way too behind to be used in a near-space fighter. ISRO's long-term scramjet program is quite a bit more advanced.

Basically DRDO wants to achieve scramjet propulsion in the endo-atmosphere for a cruise missile, while ISRO's aiming for exo-atmosphere for spaceflight. Both for unmanned systems over the next few years. Then ISRO wil follow-through with a program for human-spaceflight, and DRDO will have to keep up. All of this is meant to be achieved by 2035. So between 2035 and 2040, ISRO will have a human-rated space shuttle. And naturally, DRDO will develop a militarized system for the IAF post that over the next 10 years.

Russia, China and the US should have developed similar systems long before we do. Countries are basically already transitioning towards spaceflight in less than 10 years for civilian tech, alongside non-agile, long range civilian and military use aircraft like a new hypersonic jetliner and the SR-72.

In 2026, China's going to have the first flight of a mach 4 jetliner and they tested its shcramjet engine only last month.

Chinese detonation engine in test flight for supersonic passenger jet

Jindouyun – named after Monkey King’s ‘somersault cloud’ – reached Mach 4 at more than 65,600 feet, Space Transportation says.

www.scmp.com

So we are rapidly transitioning towards high speed already.

 

[randomradio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1874428854556864516

Retractable vertical fins. Similar to what's supposedly expected on NGAD.

@Bon Plan

 

[randomradio]

No. That analogy has been debunked the General that said it would take 8 F-35's to do what F-22's was purposely taking it out of context because congress was considering spending money on upgrades for the F-22. When he made that comment the F-35's were carrying two 2000lm bombs and two aim120s. Eight F-35's in that configuration can only carry 2 BVR missiles which equals 16 missiles which is what 2 F-22's carry combined.

You should read what F-22 pilots that take on F-35 aggressors have to say... these F-35's are tech limited to radar and IRST.

In the subsonic regime, the F-22 and F-35 have very similar performance, so the F-35 is fine at low altitudes alongside the F-22.

But the reason why Gen Hostage said you need 8 F-35s is 'cause you need 4 F-35s to protect the other 4 from the second and third wave of enemy jets, while the F-22 can escape using high speed. The F-22 cannot even carry 2000 lbs bombs, and when carrying 1000lbs bombs, has the same limitations as the F-35.

Red Flag limits quite a bit of the F-22's advantages, which was also noted by Indian pilots. Blue forces are basically scripted to positioning 'cause the decisions are all centralized. The Blues are used like chess pieces instead of allowing decentralized independent thinking, which is also why the F-22 pilots do not get significant control over the aircraft to make their own decisions.

Lol. Not even close when it comes to the F-35. Let me know when Rafail gets 360 degree sesorfused to its helmet and cyber warfare capability.

You do realize all those are just marketing buzzwords to impress fanboys, right?

 

[screambowl]

Sure. But majority of the core avionics that can go into 6th gen can also be introduced in 4th gen.

No, not necessarily. You need more power for AI which may not be available adequately, also for cooling. It's very complex, time consuming and requires complete overhaul. The whole processor and the PLC with AI compatible processor onboard will be different.

It will require complete new cable for power electronics, different pin cable etc. In case they want to attach an IR camera or Laser pod then you have two options either the engineers will design an IR camera or the Laser pod with active AI capability ( which means processor attached in camera case along with pre charged batteries) or passive IR camera or Laser Pod that means no attached pre charged batteries and the data will be sent to the computer onboard and that will process the signal, here they will again need complete new cabling, may also effect the weight of aircraft.

In that cost for 30 aircrafts you can get new 6th gen engine and frame prototype build from scratch in India.

Supporting drones can also provide a lot of 6th gen capabilities to LCA Mk2.

They should scrap AMCA Mk1 give boost to that Ghatak project and deploy them with LCA Mk2, together as a package they will work like 5 Gen aircraft, thus it will also increase load on enemy air defence since one system will now have to engage two aircrafts . Go for AMCA MK 2 with complete new engine and avionics., shift main focus on 5.5 to 6 gen straightaway.

Because the Issue is you don't have time.

 

[Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik]

Exactly like I said, DAS is totally irrelevant. We are talking about defining a generation.

What are you writing? Do you even read properly? DAS is critically important to detect sneaking enemy jets & missiles.
We're trying to understand 6gen but you're adamant to define 7gen based on just 1 thing - HySo sub-orbital flight & i'm trying to explain that if such complex, costly thing can be detected from far then it may not be worth, atleast not for countries like India with financial crunch.
I told you many times that we all can explore HySo combat jet in general, but in its own thread, w/o connecting it to any country/AF when nobody has passed any official statement about it.

What if the Mig-41 is as small as a heavy fighter jet like the Mig-31?

You are free to speculate till it comes out. That's your comprehension & opinion.

SR-71 and SR-72 are meant to carry out different missions. Another example of an irrelevant topic. These jets have been designed for consistent high speed operations over long periods. A tactical fighter doesn't need that, so it will carry considerably lesser fuel.

In world of top secret jets, a point of reference is required. If Mach-3.5 SR-71 needed so much special fuel then Mach 4+ jet will also need.
Even after giving a reference for understanding if you call something as irrelevant then you are acting stubborn not to understand IDK why.

Why are you stuck on turns? Even considered tighter turns require subsonic speeds? All these jets can go subsonic, you know.
You are not arguing against me, you are arguing against the Russians.

I'm not stuck on anything. Whatever aspect will come up, it'll be explored as much as possible.
We're not talking about tanker, airliner, so agility means turns.
I'm not "arguing", just discussing based on limited public data, refernces, etc. Learn to use +ve or neutral words rather than personal, provocative ones. Be it Russians or anybody, 10/100/1000 people may have 10/100/1000 speculations about a new platform. If IAF literally "argued" on Su-57 with Russia & exited PAKFA proect & we don't operate MiG-31 then why can't i "argue"/discuss +/- points for another platform?

Yeah, the IAF will have an AMCA-sized drone program. HSTDV is way too behind to be used in a near-space fighter. ISRO's long-term scramjet program is quite a bit more advanced.
Basically DRDO wants to achieve scramjet propulsion in the endo-atmosphere for a cruise missile, while ISRO's aiming for exo-atmosphere for spaceflight. Both for unmanned systems over the next few years. Then ISRO wil follow-through with a program for human-spaceflight, and DRDO will have to keep up. All of this is meant to be achieved by 2035. So between 2035 and 2040, ISRO will have a human-rated space shuttle. And naturally, DRDO will develop a militarized system for the IAF post that over the next 10 years.
Russia, China and the US should have developed similar systems long before we do. Countries are basically already transitioning towards spaceflight in less than 10 years for civilian tech, alongside non-agile, long range civilian and military use aircraft like a new hypersonic jetliner and the SR-72.
In 2026, China's going to have the first flight of a mach 4 jetliner and they tested its shcramjet engine only last month.

Chinese detonation engine in test flight for supersonic passenger jet

Jindouyun – named after Monkey King’s ‘somersault cloud’ – reached Mach 4 at more than 65,600 feet, Space Transportation says.

www.scmp.com

So we are rapidly transitioning towards high speed already.

You have repeatedly passed CONCLUDING remark that DRDO WILL produce military system for IAF in 2040s. So don't accuse others.
ISRO's success is different from ADA/DRDO/HAL. Collectively if our GoI/MoD & DoD units can't manage a Turbofan on their own then it is not convincing that they are "rapidly transitioning towards high speed already" & will make a high supersonic high altitude jet in 15-20yrs from now. They'll be busy with AMCA, MWF, TEDBF & UCAVs. So feel free to speculate personally but kindly don't pass remarks on their behalf on international forum otherwise it puts all Indians in bad light.

 

[Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1874428854556864516

I've to admit that they have done something unique with rotating V-tail if USA has not already tested some X/Y series of jet.

 

[Rajput Lion]

Chinese forums are buzzing with more details about J-50:

"The data provided is speculative:

• Broadband omnidirectional stealth (from Ku band to VHF) is estimated to be at least -40 dbs or approximately RCS: 0.0001 square meters (four zeros).
• The aircraft length is 22 meters, with a wingspan of 19 to 19.5 meters.
• The maximum takeoff weight is estimated to be around 40 tons.
• The top speed is estimated to be Mach 3.
• It features a large strake and a deformable Lambda wing.
• It includes a straight-axis fully movable variable V-tail (which can switch between a fully movable vertical tail and a Lambda wing configuration).
• The wingtips have fully movable winglets.
• It is a highly agile air superiority stealth fighter.
• The chin houses an electro-optical detection system window.
• It is powered by twin engines, with DSI (Diverterless Supersonic Inlet)蚌式进气口 on both sides of the chin.
• The estimated maximum total thrust is around 37 tons.
• It is equipped with two-dimensional thrust vectoring nozzles.
• It has an exceptionally large and long main weapons bay.
• There are two longer side weapon bays (for close combat missiles).
• The weapon bays can carry various types of ammunition such as PL-15, PL-10, and PL-17.
• The estimated combat radius for air engagements is between 2000 to 3000 kilometers."

Source: Sino Defence Forum

@randomradio, @vstol Jockey, @marich01, @Ashwin, @_Anonymous_ , @Innominate, @YoungWolf, @Parthu, @Milspec, @Sathya, @Hydra, @Gautam, @Ankit Kumar, @Speedster1 et al

 

[Speedster1]

Seems to be similar in concept to the Su-34/F-111, a medium bomber with self-escort capability. Heck, the cockpit supposedly also has side-by-side seating.

 

[randomradio]

What are you writing? Do you even read properly? DAS is critically important to detect sneaking enemy jets & missiles.
We're trying to understand 6gen but you're adamant to define 7gen based on just 1 thing - HySo sub-orbital flight & i'm trying to explain that if such complex, costly thing can be detected from far then it may not be worth, atleast not for countries like India with financial crunch.
I told you many times that we all can explore HySo combat jet in general, but in its own thread, w/o connecting it to any country/AF when nobody has passed any official statement about it.

DAS absolutely has no place in this discussion. You just brought it up just to say scramjet will be very IR-heavy so it won't be developed.

The fact is anything with afterburner can be detected from far away. But the point of scramjet is to buy time via transit. An scramjet aircraft is neither going to fight at that speed, nor is it going to activate it before fighting begins. It will just fly from point a to point b or get to high altitude and then cruise.

You are free to speculate till it comes out. That's your comprehension & opinion.

You are speculating too. Literally, about everything.

In world of top secret jets, a point of reference is required. If Mach-3.5 SR-71 needed so much special fuel then Mach 4+ jet will also need.
Even after giving a reference for understanding if you call something as irrelevant then you are acting stubborn not to understand IDK why.

Nope. The Mig-31 is made for mach 3 but uses only 25% more fuel than Su-35. How would you like to explain that?

Or this new J-36 is expected to be a mach 2 fighter, but carries 20T fuel.

This is how you are bringing irrelevant equations into your speculation.

I'm not stuck on anything. Whatever aspect will come up, it'll be explored as much as possible.
We're not talking about tanker, airliner, so agility means turns.
I'm not "arguing", just discussing based on limited public data, refernces, etc. Learn to use +ve or neutral words rather than personal, provocative ones. Be it Russians or anybody, 10/100/1000 people may have 10/100/1000 speculations about a new platform. If IAF literally "argued" on Su-57 with Russia & exited PAKFA proect & we don't operate MiG-31 then why can't i "argue"/discuss +/- points for another platform?

Agility means G performance and corner speeds, not turns.

You have repeatedly passed CONCLUDING remark that DRDO WILL produce military system for IAF in 2040s. So don't accuse others.
ISRO's success is different from ADA/DRDO/HAL. Collectively if our GoI/MoD & DoD units can't manage a Turbofan on their own then it is not convincing that they are "rapidly transitioning towards high speed already" & will make a high supersonic high altitude jet in 15-20yrs from now. They'll be busy with AMCA, MWF, TEDBF & UCAVs. So feel free to speculate personally but kindly don't pass remarks on their behalf on international forum otherwise it puts all Indians in bad light.

Dude, you are literally speculating the same thing I am.

You are just assuming your opinion is more important than mine, hence all the extra self-importance.

 

[randomradio]

No, not necessarily. You need more power for AI which may not be available adequately, also for cooling. It's very complex, time consuming and requires complete overhaul. The whole processor and the PLC with AI compatible processor onboard will be different.

It will require complete new cable for power electronics, different pin cable etc. In case they want to attach an IR camera or Laser pod then you have two options either the engineers will design an IR camera or the Laser pod with active AI capability ( which means processor attached in camera case along with pre charged batteries) or passive IR camera or Laser Pod that means no attached pre charged batteries and the data will be sent to the computer onboard and that will process the signal, here they will again need complete new cabling, may also effect the weight of aircraft.

In that cost for 30 aircrafts you can get new 6th gen engine and frame prototype build from scratch in India.

Electrical power is more about sensors than computers. The amount of computing and the power required is actually quite miniscule in comparison.

For example, the F-22, F-35 and Rafale were introduced with a bunch of PowerPC processors slapped together which combined wouldn't even cross 50 W. Graphics processing for GUIs need more processing, but a modern gaming PC is much more powerful.

They should scrap AMCA Mk1 give boost to that Ghatak project and deploy them with LCA Mk2, together as a package they will work like 5 Gen aircraft, thus it will also increase load on enemy air defence since one system will now have to engage two aircrafts . Go for AMCA MK 2 with complete new engine and avionics., shift main focus on 5.5 to 6 gen straightaway.

Because the Issue is you don't have time.

I agree with your assessment but we need our industry to catch up. They need the Ghatak + AMCA transition before they can create experimental tech. And we need the budget for it to, so the country needs to get richer befor we can fund it.

It's the usual shtick. We gotta maintain pace, and if the Chinese do something far more impressive than imagined, we will have to cooperate with others or import directly.

 

[randomradio]

Chinese forums are buzzing with more details about J-50:

View attachment 39390

"The data provided is speculative:

• Broadband omnidirectional stealth (from Ku band to VHF) is estimated to be at least -40 dbs or approximately RCS: 0.0001 square meters (four zeros).
• The aircraft length is 22 meters, with a wingspan of 19 to 19.5 meters.
• The maximum takeoff weight is estimated to be around 40 tons.
• The top speed is estimated to be Mach 3.
• It features a large strake and a deformable Lambda wing.
• It includes a straight-axis fully movable variable V-tail (which can switch between a fully movable vertical tail and a Lambda wing configuration).
• The wingtips have fully movable winglets.
• It is a highly agile air superiority stealth fighter.
• The chin houses an electro-optical detection system window.
• It is powered by twin engines, with DSI (Diverterless Supersonic Inlet)蚌式进气口 on both sides of the chin.
• The estimated maximum total thrust is around 37 tons.
• It is equipped with two-dimensional thrust vectoring nozzles.
• It has an exceptionally large and long main weapons bay.
• There are two longer side weapon bays (for close combat missiles).
• The weapon bays can carry various types of ammunition such as PL-15, PL-10, and PL-17.
• The estimated combat radius for air engagements is between 2000 to 3000 kilometers."

Source: Sino Defence Forum

@randomradio, @vstol Jockey, @marich01, @Ashwin, @_Anonymous_ , @Innominate, @YoungWolf, @Parthu, @Milspec, @Sathya, @Hydra, @Gautam, @Ankit Kumar, @Speedster1 et al

It looks all impressive, but even if I'm wrong I still think it's made for carriers. It feels too early to succeed the J-20, while not having addressed their carrier issue. The USN's planning to deploy both F-35C and F/A-XX on their carriers, so the J-35 and this J-50 can be their equivalents within the same timeframe.

The lager weapons bay size too, if up to scale, resembles what's necessary for a carrier.

But this aircraft definitely is more impressive than the J-36.

 

[Rajput Lion]

It looks all impressive, but even if I'm wrong I still think it's made for carriers. It feels too early to succeed the J-20, while not having addressed their carrier issue. The USN's planning to deploy both F-35C and F/A-XX on their carriers, so the J-35 and this J-50 can be their equivalents within the same timeframe.

The lager weapons bay size too, if up to scale, resembles what's necessary for a carrier.

But this aircraft definitely is more impressive than the J-36.

If J-36 can supercruise at Mach 2 and carry 4-8 PL-17s, it is then one scary bird especially for ISTAR/HVT platforms.

These 6th gens address one big problem of 5th gen in the form of carrying VLRAAMs and big cruise missiles like YJ-12 internally. Scary propisition for both US & India.

 

[randomradio]

If J-36 can supercruise at Mach 2 and carry 4-8 PL-17s, it is then one scary bird especially for ISTAR/HVT platforms.

These 6th gens address one big problem of 5th gen in the form of carrying VLRAAMs and big cruise missiles like YJ-12 internally. Scary propisition for both US & India.

I've personally held the view that AWACS are not survivable anyway. Only AEW stealth drones can make it.

 

[randomradio]

Radar-size argument is an excellent argument for 3 engines.

Thread.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1875158382128304471

The side arrays alone can be gigantic relative to the J-20's.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Chinese forums are buzzing with more details about J-50:

View attachment 39390

"The data provided is speculative:

• Broadband omnidirectional stealth (from Ku band to VHF) is estimated to be at least -40 dbs or approximately RCS: 0.0001 square meters (four zeros).
• The aircraft length is 22 meters, with a wingspan of 19 to 19.5 meters.
• The maximum takeoff weight is estimated to be around 40 tons.
• The top speed is estimated to be Mach 3.
• It features a large strake and a deformable Lambda wing.
• It includes a straight-axis fully movable variable V-tail (which can switch between a fully movable vertical tail and a Lambda wing configuration).
• The wingtips have fully movable winglets.
• It is a highly agile air superiority stealth fighter.
• The chin houses an electro-optical detection system window.
• It is powered by twin engines, with DSI (Diverterless Supersonic Inlet)蚌式进气口 on both sides of the chin.
• The estimated maximum total thrust is around 37 tons.
• It is equipped with two-dimensional thrust vectoring nozzles.
• It has an exceptionally large and long main weapons bay.
• There are two longer side weapon bays (for close combat missiles).
• The weapon bays can carry various types of ammunition such as PL-15, PL-10, and PL-17.
• The estimated combat radius for air engagements is between 2000 to 3000 kilometers."

Source: Sino Defence Forum

@randomradio, @vstol Jockey, @marich01, @Ashwin, @_Anonymous_ , @Innominate, @YoungWolf, @Parthu, @Milspec, @Sathya, @Hydra, @Gautam, @Ankit Kumar, @Speedster1 et al

Saurav Jha hosted by Adi Achint on Def Talks continues from where he left off on the IAH on the DDR channel expounding on the latest Chinese offerings , the nature of the beast , it's future & on what our response ought to be .

 

[Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik]

DAS absolutely has no place in this discussion. You just brought it up just to say scramjet will be very IR-heavy so it won't be developed.
The fact is anything with afterburner can be detected from far away. But the point of scramjet is to buy time via transit. An scramjet aircraft is neither going to fight at that speed, nor is it going to activate it before fighting begins. It will just fly from point a to point b or get to high altitude and then cruise.

If sword is not powerful enough to penetrate shield then it may not be worth.
Not just DAS/IRST but all kinds of detection has everything to do as shown in old diagram which i didn't make. Detection is the 1st step to counter something. If a jet has good RF stealth but poor IR stealth then it will obviously caution enemy who might setup an ambush or somehow nullify the attack. It can be used in Asymmetric situation where enemy doesn't have long range good IR sensors.
Such a jet has been rumored since 1990s like Aurora, SR-91, XR-7, etc, People called them "Black Triangles", so many people either already understand its basic theory, operation, mission & flight profile or try to understand

- when it will dash,​

-when it will slow down,​

-at what speed it can launch a conventional or nuke weapon,​

-its turning radius in both slow & high speed, etc,​

-how can it be detected & countered.​

So such a sleek body jet can intercept, strike do BVR but it has to make L or U turn & bug out fast.
But before making anything, every country tries to explore all its aspects if it is feasible by

-technology,​

-cost,​

-numbers,​

-geopolitically,​

-geographically, etc.​

Such a jet would be very costly due to

-special materials,​

-special manufacturing,​

-special training,​

-special maintenance,​

-even special fuel, etc.​

USA might make some being tech leader & capitalist country, but to be used asymmetrically.
Russia will watch its citizens die rather than bending before West. That's why just like cold war days, it might make something.
China IDK.
India... 1st make Kaveri Turbofan & 5gen AMCA. IMO we don't require it
So you can't just mention something & expect others not to analyse & discuss all these aspects, especially when you have not even mentioned these aspects even after asking many times.

You are speculating too. Literally, about everything.

I speculate based on pics, diagrams, calculations which you don't. I could be wrong too. If IDK then i write "IDK". But you are not humble.

Nope. The Mig-31 is made for mach 3 but uses only 25% more fuel than Su-35. How would you like to explain that?
Or this new J-36 is expected to be a mach 2 fighter, but carries 20T fuel.
This is how you are bringing irrelevant equations into your speculation.

Actually this is irrellevat comparison of MiG-31 Vs Su-35 when one is Interceptor & other is dangerous Dogfighter.
Anyways, for some people 25% may a lot, for others not so much. it is like arguing over "the glass is half empty or half full". PERCENTAGE & Absolute Values have their separate importance mathematically. PER CENT or PER 100 units, we reduce large absolute values to order of 100 to understand easily, that's all.
SR-71 required repeated refuelling, so does MiG-31 & so will MiG-41 & so will HySo jet if made.
If F-22 can supercruise at Mach 1.8 & Rafale at M 1.5 then J-36 with 3 WS-15 engines might be able to SuCr @ M2. Nobody is expecting it to dogfight. It can strike & do BVR.

Agility means G performance and corner speeds, not turns.

Different vocabulary can be used. "Turn" is a generic word. Yes, agility does mean Gs & corner speeds, meaning tight turns, L turn, U turn, V turn, etc. Hence i said about turning radius. So that means Interceptor by design cannot be agile.

Dude, you are literally speculating the same thing I am.

ROFL! We are not at all speculating the same thing. You's speculating undefined 7gen & HySo fighter in 15-20yrs for IAF, but not me, not even IAF chief.

You are just assuming your opinion is more important than mine, hence all the extra self-importance.

Well, this is a personal attack, but don't worry i won't report. Since 25 years i'm downloading useful pics, vids, diagrams which i share but most people don't, my opinion is based on such verifiable data. Like i said above if IDK then i write "IDK". I even wanted to open my own website, but it becomes full time job. Also, I always mention myself to be low IQ guy which i'm actually. It's just that engineering degree gives some advantage at some places of already knowling something, i don't have to start from scratch. So i can't help jealous, stubborn, impulsive, people if they don't do homework & don't share resources even after asking.