Recently, a shocking propaganda film "Eagle Strikes the Sky" released by the Aviation Industry Corporation of China has aroused widespread discussion among military enthusiasts. The CG image of a new fighter shown in the film is remarkable for its extremely agile flight attitude. This raises exciting speculation: has we taken a new step in the development of a sixth-generation fighter?
The fighter features an advanced delta-wing, tailless layout design that shows design similarities to the U.S. Next Generation Air Superiority Fighter (NGAD) program. Experts speculate that the fighter may be equipped with a technologically advanced axisymmetric vector thrust engine, which can achieve super-maneuverable flight through 360-degree all-round vector thrust adjustment. Whether this innovative design concept will become the mainstream of the development of the sixth generation fighter is worth our continued attention.
At present, the design of the world's sixth-generation fighter jets is roughly divided into two schools: one follows the traditional layout and optimizes the aerodynamic design; The other is more radical, inheriting the "de-tailing" design concept of the fifth-generation aircraft. Clearly, the latter seems to be the focus of research in both China and the United States. Faced with these two different design ideas, we can't help but ask: which one is more suitable for the needs of the future battlefield?
According to the accumulation of existing technology, the fans put forward some conceptual designs of the sixth-generation fighters. Their common feature is that the canard layout is basically retained, which may reflect that China's engine technology still needs to be improved in terms of complete "tailing". Is this design concept more realistic?
The U.S. also has significant differences in the design philosophy of the sixth-generation fighter between its two major services. The Air Force's NGAD program focuses on improved maneuverability, while the Navy's F A-XX program focuses more on versatility and versatility. This difference precisely reflects the difference in the needs of the two armies.
In the face of such an international trend, what balance does China need to make when designing a sixth-generation fighter? Should we also consider the adaptation of such fighters to the needs of naval construction? This is a question worth pondering. In the aforementioned AVIC promotional animation, the new fighter has an air intake design similar to that of the F-22 "Garette", which has the advantage of excellent stealth performance, but may be slightly less maneuverable in comparison. Such a choice seems to imply that stealth remains a key factor in the development of China's next-generation fighters, even at the expense of a certain amount of maneuverability.
Does this mean that the future air defense environment will become more complex and threatening? Obviously, both China and the United States have already begun to develop sixth-generation fighters. China may choose to make small optimizations to traditional designs to complete the technological leap at a more secure pace. And those advanced design choices, although they are already in the experimental stage, their advantages and disadvantages still need to be tested by actual combat.
We have every reason to believe that in the near future, China's sixth-generation fighter jets will also spread their wings and soar above the blue sky.