Thread 63973540

Is the J-36 the first time the chinks have innovated? I literally can't think of any other aircraft design they could have copied or stolen this design from.

>>63973540 (OP)
Well we didn't see NGAD x planes. They may stole these designs.
But China definitely innovates in terms of putting advanced designs into service. Their programs end with actual hardware unlike countless US MUC programs.

Implessive

it seems unique, yes. especially the engine and intake arrangement.

China right now is what the US was in the 50's - 70's
A manufacturing giant breaking ground and dominating on countless technological fields.

It is no surprise that their aviation follows suit, the US made a crazy number of revolutionary designs during that time period.

>>63973682
Catching up is easy when you're just copying somebody else's homework. Actually surpassing the guy you're cheating off of is a lot harder.

>>63973540 (OP)
The planform is ripped directly from American studies into low observability designs from the mid 90s. There was one in particular that had over a dozen planforms, one of which matched the J-36 almost exactly

The papers and graphics from them have been posted here multiple times, I wish I saved them. All I have is picrel

>>63973726
>Actually surpassing the guy you're cheating off of is a lot harder
That's true and what you're describing is called Second Mover Advantage.
It's easier to catch up than innovate, so China can reach to where US is now pretty quickly. US has moved on by then but the distance to catch up again is smaller so they catch up again faster.
Essentially, China is getting two steps closer to US while US is getting one step further away, eventually they're roughly at the same spot and China has to choose between staying one step behind US while they invent stuff, or trying to invent new stuff and compete with them.

Do they want to follow USA on a guide-led tour of arms or run alongside them in an arms race?
Reality is that these aren't mutually exclusive and China is attempting to do both; steal everything, innovate when they can and hopefully pull ahead at least a little.

>>63973808
>The planform is ripped directly from American studies into low observability designs from the mid 90s
Do you know if any of those went beyond wind tunnel/RCS mock-ups?

It feels like putting one in the air and possibly into production counts as innovation at this point, there's an awful lot of work involved in going from a stolen/public design to a flying air craft.

>>63974488
>It's easier to catch up than innovate, so China can reach to where US is now pretty quickly. US has moved on by then but the distance to catch up again is smaller so they catch up again faster.
Also, obviously this is a continuous process, not one with discrete steps.
There's some asymptote like behaviour, calculus geeks will recognise what the curve looks like.

>>63974488
>eventually they're roughly at the same spot
the closer you are the smaller is the second mover advantage

>>63973540 (OP)
>I literally can't think of any other aircraft design they could have copied or stolen this design from
Half the grad students in aerospace programs in the US are asian. Just sayin'

>>63974496
>the closer you are the smaller is the second mover advantage
I don't think that's true.
Can you give an example of why that would be so?

>>63974489
asymptote is almost a good comparison in that they will never reach the US.
it's a bad comparison in that the chinese "line" is not trying to catch a static target.
the us will continue to innovate and the chinese will continue to try to steal, never reaching the us line.

>>63974488
>Do you know if any of those went beyond wind tunnel/RCS mock-ups?
These programs are direct predecessors to NGAD. Boeing made a demonstrator that flew in 96, see picrel. X-36 was a pair of subscale prototypes that flew in 97. X-45 and X-47 were both derived from this research.
>and possibly into production
Still a few years out from that, don't get ahead of yourself.

>>63973682
Their manufacturing quality is still quite low. It'll take the at least 20 years to catch up with established industrial nations

>>63973540 (OP)
yes, they innovated the first 3 engine design because theirs are so shit that 2 was insufficient for their power needs

>>63974689
They actually copied that idea too.
Hard to believe, I know.

>>63974513
because less tech tricles down to you and its foundations are less published and widespread

>>63973540 (OP)
Why do you believe they've innovated, considering no one knows its specs, and the chinks are known for lying and exaggerating?

>>63973540 (OP)
kill yourself chinkspammer