What we can learn about China's J-36 (from America's FB-22)

Go to ground.news/Sa... to stay fully informed on military developments around the world. Subscribe through my link right now for 40% off their Vantage Plan, which is what I use everyday.
- BREAK -
A now-defunct plan to field F-22 Raptor-based bombers, known as FB-22s, offers us some insight into what China hopes to accomplish with their new J-36 stealth aircraft that recently started testing.
📱 Follow Sandboxx News on social
Twitter: / sandboxxnews
Instagram: / sandboxxnews
Facebook: / sandboxxnews
TikTok: / sandboxxnews
📱 Follow Alex Hollings on social
Twitter: / alexhollings52
Instagram: / alexhollings52
Facebook: / alexhollings. .
TikTok: www.tiktok.com...
Citations:
www.airandspac...
www.af.mil/Abo...
www.sandboxx.u...
www.19fortyfiv...
thediplomat.co...
www.sandboxx.u...
www.sandboxx.u...
www.twz.com/ai...
www.secretproj...

[@SandboxxApp]

Go to ground.news/Sandboxx to stay fully informed on military developments around the world. Subscribe through my link right now for 40% off their Vantage Plan, which is what I use everyday.

[@markusbalbach7608]

but it was never built and never will be, and for as long as usa is the biggest employer in china, them will keep making money ON america to use it against america... China now HAS its F/B22 itteration, and america scrapped its NGAD. what do we learn from all that?: STOP SUPPORTING CHINA BY PRODUCING WESTERN STUFF THERE!!!

[@mikeduplessis8796]

HMD for the raptor? Didn't you say it wasn't possible due to the canopy?

[@dannysu62]

@SandboxxApp 1. Many American commentators always ignore major comparison and pick languages to dismiss many huge advancements made by China in military. 2. These commentators actually help propaganda and brain washing Americans that China is bad guy and cannot do things well. They unknowingly help shielding the huge military complex to corrupt legally every year and suck 900 billion tax dollars from American citizens. These commentators unknowingly help the corrupted military complex continue to fail extremely badly in new technology, comparing to the huge advancements made by China in recent 10 years. Kudos guys!! 3. The military complex guys love to legally corrupt and suck money by selling lunch boxes and coffee cups for easily $900 bucks a piece and existing weapons for huge profits. More honest guys developing new technology work harder but look stupid not taking the easy money from legally corrupt contracts. 4. Supposed a family making 200k pays $30k federal tax, $20k of which goes to military, the remaining 10K and borrowed money go to other spending. If you get back this $20k from being taken by corrupted bad guys, what can you spend for yourself and your kids? Shouldn't you hate these bad corrupted guys? 5. US weapons and power help genocide 10k+ kids in Gaza and kill so many civilians all over the world. US is clearly the bad guys in these suffering countries. China as a rising global power did not fire a shot in conflicts in 35 years, which is a first time phenomenon in long history. China's great achievement in peace and power shall be celebrated by the whole world. Commentators, get back your humanity and do some good deeds for peace, at least don't help the bad corrupted guys taking your money easily.

[@dannysu62]

@SandboxxApp 1. Many American commentators always ignore major comparison and pick languages to dismiss many huge advancements made by China in military. 2. These commentators actually help propaganda and brain washing Americans that China is bad guy and cannot do things well. They unknowingly help shielding the huge military complex to corrupt legally every year and suck 900 billion tax dollars from American citizens. These commentators unknowingly help the corrupted military complex continue to fail extremely badly in new technology, comparing to the huge advancements made by China in recent 10 years. Kudos guys!! 3. The military complex guys love to legally corrupt and suck money by selling lunch boxes and coffee cups for easily $900 bucks a piece and existing weapons for huge profits. More honest guys developing new technology work harder but look stupid not taking the easy money from legally corrupt contracts. 4. Supposed a family making 200k pays $30k federal tax, $20k of which goes to military, the remaining 10K and borrowed money go to other spending. If you get back this $20k from being taken by corrupted bad guys, what can you spend for yourself and your kids? Shouldn't you hate these bad corrupted guys? 5. US weapons and power help genocide 10k+ kids in Gaza and kill so many civilians all over the world. US is clearly the bad guys in these suffering countries. China as a rising global power did not fire a shot in conflicts in 35 years, which is a first time phenomenon in long history. China's great achievement in peace and power shall be celebrated by the whole world. 6. Many are brain washed to fear communism. I'm sure many don't know that 75 years ago communist liberated 400 million poor peasants. Give landlord’s lands to peasants so they don't need to pay 60%+ harvest to landlords so as to have living dignity. The concept of socialism manifested all over reality, developed a hugely prosperous economy and military tech that surpasses the US. Many RedNote users went to China and were shocked to see single women can walk safely late at night enjoying food and entertainment. Commentators, get back your humanity and do some good deeds for peace, at least don't help the bad corrupted guys taking your money easily.

[@ASpyNamedJames]

Just more yankee bragging. Very little to do with the subject at had (J-36).

[@anotherbacklog]

The problem with the US is never the tech, but the bureaucracy and corpo greed. It need to go back to the era when engineers are in charge.

[@MultiverseJoe]

You mean back to the old system of MANY X planes and dozens of new test models; the 1950s. Too expensive now. AI testing has/will continue to replace that pattern. The B21 is the perfect example for today and the future. It’s already ready for full production and combat.

[@MultiverseJoe]

So you believe the B21 will become what the FB22 would have been? Me too.

[@tombearclaw]

@@MultiverseJoeI think the b21 is a substitute for the NGAD. Range and payload are what AF needs for NGAD along with drone wingmen to defend them and expand sensor reach

[@nobodyjustme7481]

Yep. Too many hands touching the cooking.

[@XkriskrossX]

@@tombearclaw Nah, NGAD is strictly air superiority and a replacement for the Raptor. The B-21 is a replacement for the B-2. The NGAD will help protect the Raiders and coordinate with the AI wingmen. It's pretty insane that the AF is considering a light fighter concept when a potential war with China (Heaven for forbid) will depend almost entirely on sortie range. China will try it's best to destroy every carrier, every island airbase and air tanker to hamper US/Japan-AUKUS forces so they'll need an aircraft that has enough internal fuel to make it all the way from Honolulu to Beijing. They need to fire anybody who thinks anything, but a super-heavy stealth fighter will be the next NGAD.

[@electb]

For those of us that aren't pirates. That line always makes me smile.

[@iarissei]

😅 Yar, We Be pirates o' the Sky, Laddie. 😂

[@korana6308]

He had made that joke in every single video about planes and nautical miles, that it became redundant and cringe at this point.

[@TymaDem]

Argh, shiver me timbers 🏴‍☠️

[@texasranger24]

5:16 if you already know about ground news and wish to skip the ad

[@Dumbledore6969x]

Sponsor block skips this automatically

[@Nathan-vt1jz]

I’m glad he’s getting sponsors and I don’t mind hearing about it. I do miss the jingle advertisements of the 90’s, so catchy.

[@markusbalbach7608]

@@Dumbledore6969x all i got is adblock free for firefox^^. sponsor blocks??

[@shaneofcanada7042]

And if you would like Alex to be able to feed his family, I would suggest listening to at least part of the ad. Especially when its paying for consistently great content.

[@linuxsuperuser]

thanks

[@bug5654]

US: So how did you solve the icing problem? China: Icing problem?!

[@johnnydoe3603]

I bet the Chinese are even Stealing the way We draw Circles and also Rectangles. 🤣🤣

[@EpistemicAnthony]

Stealth fighters are not rectangles. There are multiple effective ways to design them, which can be seen from planes like the F-22 and the YF-23, which are shaped very differently. That is why it is suspicious when aircraft like the J-20 are identical in the front to the F-35 and F-22, especially given that we already know with certainty that they espionage'd tons of design documents for those planes. That being said, even if China stole the designs, it doesn't matter. That just means they got a leg up on us. War doesn't care about fairness. A copy of an F-22 can still shoot down an F-22, so we shouldn't be whining about them copying designs. It is a valid strategy.

[@JojoJoget]

Like how the Americans stole Nazi tech?

[@Neymar.amcc24]

@@EpistemicAnthonyI ain’t readin allat

[@Apathy474]

Horrible logic. You can delude yourself if you want but the designs of the j35 and j20 are blatantly inspired by the f22 and f35. They even have similar names. Granted there are other jets that ALSO look very similar so China isn't unique in that. Also China stole data about the f22 and f35

[@Jamespaintsplastic]

So you're saying that when you take a f-22, then enlarge the fuselage/wings to increase the payload, remove the vertical tail to improve stealth, then improve the sensors.... you get a faster b-21 raider?

[@JacobGevedon]

Yep

[@robertlee5214]

That's going to be a new plane. take out the vertical stabilizer along will need to rewrite the whole flying control software.

[@thomaszhang3101]

All these changes you described are related to the airframe. If you have to make that much change to the airframe, might as well start from scratch. In fact, new technologies can be retrofitted to older generation aircraft to make them 3.5 gen, 4.5 gen, 5.5 gen, but what defines the 6th generation from the 5th, or 5th from the 4th, are always traits that the previous generation cannot acquire through upgrades, and these traits are always related to the airframe, as it is the hardest to change.

[@tongzhouwarrior]

@@thomaszhang3101 This was beautiful! I am going to use this to make people understand what's a generational difference means.

[@drewski5730]

Not even close. The F22 would have a substantially smaller payload and less capability and range. Clearly many of the performance metrics would be much better than a B-21; but keep in mind the B-21 doesn’t need to be supersonic, or maneuverable. This is why the program was cancelled. It’s to think about an FB-22, but it wasn’t optimized for a stealth strike mission that it would have been meant for. The airframe would have been more or less redundant and very expensive for its capabilities.

[@MrCateagle]

I hope the F-22 updates include making its IFDL compatible with the F-35's MADL. This would improve interoperability between the two aircraft.

[@madkabal]

I also hope it's called the King Raptor. For the memes.

[@M16_Akula-III]

....Not happening.

[@iarissei]

14:59 " When Flying angry...." That needs to become the standard Phrase For Flying without regard for Stealth. 😂

[@texasranger24]

The US Army just chose General Dynamics and Rheinmetall as finalists for the 4000 Bradley replacement IFVs (well, a year ago, and i will keep asking). Could you do a Firepower series video about this program, the two finalists and the other three that dropped out. Or more generally the current state of IFVs (Bradley, CV90, Puma, Lynx) and their most likely future. Maybe even including anti air IFVs like some CV90 variants and SkyRanger.

[@Cuck_life]

You should be asking task and purpose that question since he does videos exactly like what your asking for.

[@jackwells2924]

He’s back 😂😂 ps I agree with the request

[@Gcmjet737]

Here's a question for all of you out there. Why is the U.S. air force so adverse to canards?

[@regalplays7135]

Seconding this

[@TylerSmithMusic1]

@@Gcmjet737because they don’t do anything but create a maintenance headache. Usually two different metals are used which creates corrosion between them. We also don’t do it because maneuverable isn’t the point anymore. It’s long range avionics and stealth. Canards are a big radar soak

[@dioad1739]

I worked on the F-22 paint buildings at Lockheed Martin In Marietta Georgia it was a honor for me.

[@celestialsatheist1535]

Nice to meet you

[@viciousstarfish]

It’s a kite, the technology is in the strings.

[@PeterWhite-q1k]

You are funny! I like that kind of humor!

[@josephmumma6997]

Great and informative post as usual Mr. Alex. Keep em coming so we can keep enjoying em!!!!!

[@judah7162]

I have been scratching my head trying to remember where I saw that design before and I just remembered it was in the first Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X. game.

[@ralph72462]

I watched a video where a kid built a hobby NGAD and it flew like the real thing. Hard to know what is real now days... Drones I think are the future of the defenses for our nation adapted to work with our regular technology of the day. Land, sea, and air. Let me not forget underwater, and space where hypersonic con move quickly around our planet.

[@avogatro]

I try to search similar designs on H.A.W.X wiki on fandom, I can't find it.

[@jimmay1988]

Lol, great game! You just cracked all of China's engineering source material.

[@anotherbacklog]

The Ubisoft Ace Combat was fun. I wouldn’t be surprised if the actual aircraft designer and engineers grow up playing those games.

[@ayuchanayuko]

If Ace Combat was an inspiration, we would be seeing Belkan Witchcraft by now

[@dereksteneman9657]

You do a great job my friend! A+ always

[@7212Mopar]

1986, Lockheed was at my campus soliciting graduates to join their team in development of the ATF, now known as the F22. I am now ready to retire. That is how old the F22 is. Not new by any means even with regular upgrades. F15 is from the early 70s. We need to focus on getting NGAD into operational status.

[@johnmaccallum7935]

They haven't been much value in Ukraine, like tanks.

[@Simulcrom]

@@johnmaccallum7935 Comparing the war-in-Ukraine to what a conflict between the US and China would look-like doesn't make sense. The doctrines and the amount of air-power and guided munitions both sides can leverage is greater than what Russia is capable of doing.

[@rocketeng1888]

Those were fun days having all the big companies chasing grads for jobs… I had a huge smile on my face…

[@M16_Akula-III]

@@johnmaccallum7935 What? LOL the tanks were quite helpful already.

[@JojoJoget]

@@Simulcromthat’s hubris, same hubris that found out the hard way that C4 strapped to drones would demolish tanks

[@texasranger24]

A full video about the X65 and active flow control would be cool.

[@angelosasso1653]

I agree but good luck finding anything useful about it, last time I checked DARPA was very tight lipped about that project. I always assumed DARPA gave this project specifically to Boeing in order to save them as a competitor, after all this usually drives innovation and lowers prices. Given that Beoing f*cked up so many times in the past and its rather piss poor performance in developing new tech as of late one can only hope they land back on their feet sooner than later...

[@MarvelousSeven]

Am I the only person who remembers the FB-23 Concept?

[@t1000eg]

I spent two years solid flying the FB-22 in Ace Combat 7 BVR style

[@erasmus_locke]

5:16 is the start of the video

[@justonemorecast]

I remember reading about the FB-22 in an article in US news and world report about 30 years ago.

[@Rimasta1]

I think at the time Robert Gates deemed Raptor production less critical than MRAP production.

[@ecleveland1]

Russia was never going to be a problem for us after 1991. And China, who’s worried about China, they are never going to be a threat. Don’t you just love our military leaders and our civilian politicians!

[@ImperiumLibertas]

​@@ecleveland1 China will attempt to take Taiwan that much they have made clear. They get to pick the time but the theater has already been set.

[@wisenber]

Is NGAD really halted due to funding, or is it halted because the USAF and USN want to do some soul searching about what the next generation really should be before they spend so much that a course change would be too costly?

[@MarathonBot]

Thats what i thought

[@dead-claudia]

yeah i was thinking the same minor nit tho: the navy didn't halt funding, and their f/a-xx is actually ahead of schedule iiuc. it's only the air force that halted their end of the project, the ngad.

[@chrissschwehr5911]

@@dead-claudia The Air Force may need to swallow their pride and buy into the Navy F/A-xx program in order to have a replacement for the F-22.

[@tomshackell]

My own personal (very much non-expert) take: it looks like air warfare is about to change dramatically. It seems increasingly likely that future air wars will be fought largely by drones, with humans only acting to manage fleets of AI aircraft. In that situation is NGAD, as previously conceived, the right platform for that situation? What would be the right platform? No-one really knows, we are in an in-between state: it looks like the drones are coming, but they are not here yet. My read is the USAF are looking at this and saying: why not wait a few years and see how this plays out before we jump on a particular design.

[@wisenber]

@tomshackell China seems to be leaning towards stealthy enough longer range missile truck with longer range missiles. If that's where it's heading, just use the B21 you just rolled out and get to work on longer range air to air missiles and UCAV. Super expensive, but less costly than a new program, let alone a new program that's nearly obsolete soon after adoption. And it could drive the unit cost of B21 down.

[@helloworld040]

Seriously comparing a 2 engine PowerPoint concept with a 3 engine prototype?

[@slit555]

Yes, we must downplay the most disturbing adversary aerospace advancement since the Me 262 or Sputnik “Bro we already thought of that !!!!!!11!”

[@Apathy474]

You don't even know the significance of the third engine so why are you acting like you do? Nobody knows ANYTHING about the jet yet so I don't get why people are hyping it up.

[@chrisspulis1599]

Brilliant job. Thanks heaps

[@thearisen7301]

A FB-35 inspired by the F-16XL or F-16U would of been cool.

[@acompletelynormalhuman6392]

Sadly we don't have that but if you look at Airbus' sixth gen concept it looks very similar to the f16xl

[@MostlyPennyCat]

​@@acompletelynormalhuman6392 Indeed, FCAS and F-16XL both have ogive deltas. But I think GCAP Tempest rings closer to J-36 with its enormous delta, lots and lots of room for fuel and missiles. I think that's the reason Japan has chosen to join GCAP, it's specced up for Pacific peer warfare. That or shooting down F-22s, 15s and 16s over Greenland while sinking USN warships landing the USMC at Nuuk Port. You know, for when Trump attacks NATO. Because he's apparently lost every single marble left

[@ashbirk4681]

I love it when my fighter designations sound like a 7/11 slurpee

[@USS-SNAKE-ISLAND]

(would've or would have)

[@JIMMY-THE-JEW-FROM-PHILLY]

F36 KINGSNAKE. SEE THAT

[@konstantinnikiforov8453]

I think the unique capability would be that the lower engines probably have baffles that close off the intakes when in cruise flight and shut the engines off to improve stealth and fuel burn.

[@ronaldharris6569]

Does anyone find it strange that espionage can leak ram coatings and stealth shapes but the technology to build powerful reliable supercruise engines eludes everyone but the USA

[@kwonekstrom2138]

Not really... evidence suggests that their RAM coatings aren't up to par... The precision necessary to machine jet engine parts is very high. Any flaw in that production will cause either performance or maintenance issues.

[@walkinondamoon1]

​@@kwonekstrom2138huh evidence? Are you a spy who took the coat for testing or sent an awacs to do some testing? Noone can know that, its wishful thinking. Its coating may very well be inferior but there can be no "evidence". Even if US intelligence knows it they would never say they know how good it is. Its not like its an aircraft shape where an expert could guess some things about it.

[@truth6441]

Got to keep people in the race if you want to continue making $$$.

[@zimcoder]

As Usual the USA and AMericans continue to under estimate and downplay China's innovation, capability and manufacturing at high speeds and yet China keeps proving these notions wrong across many fields. While the US still has a lead, I doubt it will remain so very long in this field because of China speed. The US's bureaucracy, higher costs of doing everything(compared to China) and political bickering will be its undoing in this race with China.

[@ronaldharris6569]

@zimcoder you have several good points my country the USA is going through a bad period we may not recover from the Trump idiocracy,so the technology and innovation lead that we have enjoyed may be coming to an end

[@Will-W]

One idea that sticks in my head is that the middle engine is a generator for directed energy weapons, radar jamming, etc.

[@alexandermarken7639]

The third engine is likely able to provide the power needed for a long range cruise with two engines shut down. It would extend the range and loiter time by at least %50. makes sense.

[@FuzzWoof]

This was my first thought when I saw it. Cruise or loiter on one central engine, perhaps even with the inlets closed to the other two to reduce radar signature even further, the inlet for the third engine being on top would shield it from any ground based radars.

[@alexlowe2054]

After having some time to think about these developments, I wonder if this is another Mig Foxbat situation. US commentators think China is building a giant new cutting edge fighter, because everyone in the US has been stuck thinking about new fighter designs for decades. However, I don't think China actually needs a new cutting edge fighter. What would they do with a fighter without any bases in the pacific? Anything the size of a fighter will be too short range to have any impact, until China has neutralized the US pacific fleet. Before China can utilize a new fighter, they need to counter US naval power. Which is why I think the J-36 isn't a big fighter, it's a small naval interceptor. As much as the Chinese navy has numbers, they still lack the capabilities to take a head on fight with the US navy. That's part of the reason they've been investing heavily in missiles that can force US ships far enough away from the coast to prevent them from interfering with a potential invasion of their neighbor. However, while missiles know where they are at all times, they don't know where US carriers are. In a hot war, you need survivable assets that can get close enough to detect things. Lobbing missiles only works if you have sensors that know where the targets are. Combine that with the fact that anti-ship missiles still have a strict limit due to being land locked. Plus, anything with enough height to reach a carrier in the mid Pacific would be detectable at a very long range, giving the carrier group plenty of time to take counter measures. I expect that the new J-36 is basically just a big dumb platform to launch the Chinese equivalent of JASSMs, and would get beaten in a fight against current US fighters. A larger longer ranged more stealthy version of the J-22 might be enough to put Chinese fighters in range of US carrier groups, even in the middle of the Pacific. It's probably notably worse than the J-22 in the ability to survive if it's been detected, but if the only goal of the J-36 is to push the US navy another 500 miles farther from China, that might be the only thing China cares about. What's confusing is the three engine design. If the size is a hint at the need for more range, why build a plane with three engines, which will hurt fuel consumption? Even if the size isn't an indication of the desire for more range, why have an extra engine that hurts fuel consumption and costs a lot of internal volume? Was the three engine choice a move to reduce the engine count from an original 4 engines, indicating a larger bomber rather than a fighter? Or was it a design choice to increase the engine count from two, indicating that the Chinese engines aren't powerful enough to meet their needs for a proper fighter? Either way, I think the three engine design is a strong hint that everyone is overly-optimistic about how advanced this design is. There's a reason three engine designs have fallen out of favor.

[@amazin7006]

They have different needs than America so their jets have different roles. it is not really a foxbat situation, honestly I don't think such a thing can really exist with modern reconnaissance abilities.

[@officialcheetahhopperz1]

if all the J/H-36s suddenly disappear, that's because i ate them thinking they were Dorito chips.

[@AEFisch]

Looks like the role of the FB111 (F111f) that never got filled. From range, speed to ground following radar and more bombing capacity (internal) than any Attack fighter. These concepts are obviously critical to the Chinese to reach well out to sea not having any Naval or even significant airborne refueling. For the USA it depends on what the threat is.

[@hoghogwild]

The internal bombing capacity was lost in the F-111F as the PAVETACK was mounted there. This combo did well in Libya during Eldorado Canyon and during Desert Storm where it plinked tanks using 500 pound laser guided munitions The FB-111A did offer internal carriage for 2 bombs with a further 4 under the wings, or 4 external and 2 internal AGM-69A SRAM nukes. The F-111C let the Aussies have an excellent capability for all the decades the "Pig" served RAAF retiring in 2010.

[@garynapolitano1270]

I suggest using the YF-23’s platform for the outline of YF-23 for the “FB-23”

[@nfuryboss]

The US might need to build a Valkyrie-like 120,000 ft operation ceiling bomber hosting ultra-long-range missiles. This could also act as a surveillance platform. Seems like the only reason for stealth these days is to sneak up and fire some high-speed missile to neutralize defense systems and logistics. They are just going to look very similar in form and capabilities.

[@EpistemicAnthony]

Yeah, that IS the purpose of stealth in the modern era. That is a pretty important purpose, too.

[@nfuryboss]

@@EpistemicAnthony I heard the Chinese are testing out an adaptive cycle engine for a March 4 Chinese version of "BlackBird" SR-71 I certainly think they are touring and snooping around the US Air Force museums to take photos and ideas back home to kick around that our defense and Pentagon left on the table.

[@RadiusG60]

36T in debt. Ruling the world is not worth it. My kids live's and prospects are not as good as mine were 50 years ago. What good did it do to be in Afghanistan for 20 years, and Iraq for over 8 years? What good did it do to out source semiconductor manufacturing to Taiwan, only to have to defend it forever? Why are we still in Syria? How much has it cost the taxpayer to have two horribly corrupt east European countries fight each other for the last 3 years, with no end in sight? Tax money going to propping up corrupt dictators so their kids can sit on the boards of directors for 1 million a month? Can any countries cross the Atlantic or Pacific and invade the US? We have all the farmland and energy we will ever need. 36T in debt.

[@JohnGrigg-gz9gm]

How is the weather in Russia? Lol 😉 America and the CCP/China are now engaged in a clash of civilizations/value systems. As for your country, you are the sick man of Europe and cannot even handle Ukraine.

[@EpistemicAnthony]

What you experienced 50 years ago was the result of a unique time in history where America experienced a golden age. It was not a normal period of time, and that prosperity was never going to last. The problem is that many in your era did not realize this, and they squandered that opportunity rather than using it to invest for future generations. Nostalgia for the 1950s-1980s is misplaced. It was never going to last, and it will not be coming back short of some pretty major world events that are unlikely to occur.

[@JohnGrigg-gz9gm]

@@EpistemicAnthony You are only half right. What America is experiencing now is a return to the Gilded Age, a time of deep exploitation and abuse at the hands of the rich elites. Look at housing, healthcare, corporate welfare, stagnant wages, heavy inflation, education, etc.,...

[@ronnie0817]

Your kids prospects are still better than most of the worlds kids prospects are 50 years from now.

[@oompalumpus699]

_On my bingo card, I'm still betting on the US becoming completely self-sufficient and disconnected from the globalist scene two decades from now. Kinda what Japan wants to do but can't really pull off._

[@wrong4538]

Isn't this what the B-21 was designed for?

[@dancotterman1267]

I watched your B-21 Raider video and it's made a very good case for it making a new "fighter" almost duplicate its already existing capabilities. I see why they are on hold and their deciding what to spend the money on. It's a moving target and it makes sense to get it right and save billions. Do we need another fighter? When we have the B-21 already? It's fascinating whatever they decide. One thing is certain, they are developing new engines, and better sensors which will outperform what we have already.

[@martindice5424]

You have to live a Raptor- but.. Given the huge advances in the sensor environment coupled with hugely capable long range BVR missiles has the concept of the air superiority fighter run it’s course? Yes I know, we’ve heard this before but with current and foreseeable technology I understand why the B-21 has been seriously considered as a better alternative to the NGAD. It’s an intriguing and tempting concept if you are the USAAF. Just saying…

[@dead-claudia]

i'd say that as soon as the air force does four things, fighters will actually become obsolete: 1. figure out how to capture and reuse missiles, including back into internal storage bays 2. replace payloads with 20mm/30mm autocannons on some of those missiles 3. give those modified missiles the smarts to shoot planes and other missiles down 4. integrate them with their ai loyal wingmen system of these, the only thing that isn't just a matter of integrating existing tech is 1, and even that is mostly just putting existing pieces together. that would literally turn the b-21 and their loyal wingmen into potential fighter carriers capable of establishing air denial at massive ranges. for one, they could be extremely effective at knocking out sam arrays since they could just shoot the interceptors down from a safe distance before ultimately colliding with the radar array as a kinetic weapon.

[@honfmeilingfleet957]

now comes to think about it J-36 does almost looks like FB-22 concept

[@Wvk5zc]

It doesn't lmao

[@justinpaul3110]

I like Justin Bronk's assessment that the J36 is meant to carry long range missiles to take out refueling craft, etc. That would make sense considering their strategy of Area access denial. Furthermore, as Alex has said before, its not good enough to build a couple of technology demonstrators. Can they make dozens? Do they have the expertise to plan and use those planes? Can they train pilots to the same capability as American pilots? Going back to another Bronk point: can they make that thing work in tandem with multiple weapons systems? There's way more to overtaking the USA than flying two prototypes over a city on Maos birthday.

[@HairlessMonkee]

I seriously doubt anyone with a shred of credibility is questioning China's capacity to produce as many platforms of any variety they decide they need. This is not Russia we're talking about. We in the US should be more concerned about our own abysmal ability to produce ships in any reasonable quantity. Something where China outperforms us by an order of magnitude not to be ignored.

[@DerekJames8.31.24]

@@HairlessMonkeewell said. In near peer war with them . We may have the same problem russia is having . Losses out pacing the production

[@acompletelynormalhuman6392]

​@@HairlessMonkee if you look at it by tonnage we have a way bigger navy it's not that we can't make boats it that we prefer to make lager more capable ships And I don't think China can make large quantities of quality aircraft I feel like we'd get a Russia situation similar to a lot of Russian equipment they focus so much on quantity that the quality plumits to the point where very little of their equipment is capable of what they claim granted some of their equipment when it was actually biult right is actually pretty impressive and I think that's true for China as well

[@mikepatton8691]

​@@HairlessMonkeecouple of additional points: Not only can China out produce us with their sizeable manufacturing base in vehicles, ships, planes and ammunition but most scenarios that have us going to war with China have those battles taking place in basically China's backyard. Which makes it much easier for China to bring their numerical advantage into play. Fighting closer to China creates very long logistical lines and will definitely be a factor in bringing in fuel and ammunition. Every time a ship blows through its on board missile complement, either offensive or defensive, they will have to sail off to somewhere to reload and then travel back to the battlespace. In a peer to peer conflict with a country like China a ship can go through its missiles very, very quickly and the Navy only now is experimenting with at sea reloads, for many years ahead the only feasible way to reload the ship's VLS missile tubes is in a port. A friendly port that hasn't been laid to waste, which means a port far enough away to be more easily defended. You don't want a billion dollar, or more,, ship sitting still for too long in a port.

[@markusbalbach7608]

@@HairlessMonkee dictatorships like china are hybrids, the people there support its system mostly enthusiastically. they have the extreme advantages of either a competing market of companies as well as stateside control mechanisms over these. the wages are incomparable to the west, and THATS their biggest advantage right next to sheer man/brainpower. china cant be stopped militarily without paying the utmost price. Like in the past, the success in winning against them lies within an economic strategy resembling war.

[@michaelpatrick6840]

I don’t know if it’s worth diving into but, if the USA had 700 Raptors and a wish list amount of FB Raptors, would there be an F-35 and a B-21 Raider where they are currently at?

[@bluemarlin8138]

There would definitely be a B-21, because the B-2 would still need replacement due to its small production run. The F-35 probably wouldn’t exist in its current form though. The extra F-22s and FB-22s would cover those mission sets for the Air Force. However, there probably would be one or two new stealth fighters for the Navy and Marines, since neither the F-22 nor FB-22 is really suitable for their needs.

[@karlkobler218]

We need a twin engine, delta wing FB-35 with 1500 nm combat radius.

[@jsdreyer2031]

A single F-35 engine has more thrust than both F-18 engines combined. A single engine delta wing F-35 could have a combat radius of 1200 nautical miles, doubling range and ordnance of a F-35A. And it would be less expensive and easier to develop since it wouldn't deviate as much from existing F-35s than a twin engine. That engine is so powerful that the new B-21 bomber uses just two of them.

[@robf8349]

Bro that's essentially the NGAD

[@georgesmith4768]

@@robf8349Exactly. It’s almost like the pentagon kind of knows what it’s doing!

[@jamesmanger4392]

F-35XL Wideboi when?

[@TonygectGee]

@@jsdreyer2031 Except it cannot do supersonic cruise

[@ADBSpartan]

Lowering the supply lowers the bill but increases the cost

[@barrykennedy9947]

I think at this point all we know is it will fly, unless you believe in all the Chinese press releases.

[@Comodo79]

Hello Alex, A video on exotic fighters would be very interesting i think… Pakistan, India, Tuky, Cina ecc…

[@thelastlatchkeykid8466]

Does anyone know why China’s PLAAF roundel/insignia/logo looks so similar to the U.S.A.’s? The star I get, but the bars too? And when it’s the low vis roundel, they look almost identical from distance.

[@braddbradd5671]

To me it looks unique

[@roshanchachane142]

The biggest advantage that the USA holds over any other nation is the engine technology. All those advanced systems are crippled without a powerful and reliable jet engine. China, Russia or India can build sensor fusions and other sensors, but these are not very useful without a powerful engine.

[@dead-claudia]

yup. it's our logistics that's propelled us so far ahead of everyone, and engine tech is absolutely a crucial part of it.

[@JohnGrigg-gz9gm]

Supposedly, within a decade China will have caught up, at least to the European level of engine building.

[@Flyinghigh888]

When did India built a useful engine?

[@roshanchachane142]

@@Flyinghigh888 Never, I just said India can build the software and sensors.

[@thegameroptimus140]

​@@Flyinghigh888avionics not engine

[@donaldlee8249]

Just realized the naming scheme FB is exactly the same as JH

[@michaelmarrero2569]

NGAD from TEMU

[@MarathonBot]

Bringing racism into this is crazy

[@michaelmarrero2569]

@MarathonBot Have you bought things from TEMU? the quality is not that good? It have nothing to do with racism

[@Iwillnevertakemymeds]

​@@MarathonBot go back to 2020. This is 2025 we don't wanna hear your bullshit

[@xstarwolfx]

The FB-22 might be a way for the F-22 to have a new life as airframes are retired from A-A service. The 6G limit would add years to the fuselage, just add the FB-22 wings and presto, a high speed stealth striker ready for China and perhaps Russia.

[@Soras_]

Not gonna happen because US cannot produce any f22

[@joevaccaro6655]

USAF can overcome that obstacle by understanding that proaction is better than reaction and making sure competent personnel are in charge of the system of controls.

[@notyouraveragegoldenpotato]

Proaction?😂

[@Nathan-vt1jz]

I think it also has as much to do with the funding and procurement side in Congress.

[@Ariccio123]

8:16 holy crap this is an amazing slide! I see so many things listed here that ended up making it into the f-35, including apparently literally "JSF Common Radar Modules and Processor"

[@icollectstories5702]

One thing to keep in mind is that, at the moment, only the US really cares about intercontinental military aircraft. Almost all of the other countries are more concerned about threats close to their borders. So while the American planes have impressive flight ranges, it's not a feature that means much to other countries.

[@frostblasts]

Kind of ironic too since Russia and China are THE threats of their respective regions. Their priority is range, payload capacity, and cheap production cost to threaten their neighbors.

[@dead-claudia]

and the us's war prep with china also involves essentially projecting guerilla warfare from the sky. stealth and range is absolute key.

[@danielclawson2099]

It matters to the Chinese. Supposedly, It's one of the reasons the Chengdu J-20 is so large: large internal fuel tanks to allow long range patrols over the Pacific Ocean to harass airborne US tankers. I bet the size of the new fighter bomber concept is partially related to fuel capacity so that it can use standoff weapons against American targets in the Pacific. Edit: f20 > J-20

[@accountantthe3394]

@@danielclawson2099 F20 Tigershark large?

[@danielclawson2099]

@@accountantthe3394 fixed. Ty.

[@geoffreywardle2162]

Another very good presentation, could there be the option of revisiting the F/B-22 as an alternative to NGAD but with the same CCA's interface capabilities? Politicians think only of the current days events the cancelling of the F/B-22 in 2006 was for the same reasons here in the UK our government cancelled the Future Offensive Air System (FOAS) program (which full scale LO pole models were built and manufacturing, systems and teaming technology R&D was well advanced) in 2005/6 which was to fight the unwinnable war on terror. A lot of the FOAS technology is now going forward on Tempest / GCAP I am glad to see.

[@lightspeedvictory]

Requesting video on DARPA’s ArcLight program and is it a viable alternative to the Dark Eagle and its navy version

[@FoxMarrion]

Informative

[@roje3647]

People have no idea what the Department of Defense is doing. Their 20 years ahead of what you think they have.

[@vinny7114]

I believe that, they don't even know where to waste money first, but hey if. The taxpayers don't care why should they.

[@TheOriginalJAX]

Il just say it in blunt terms because we are missing the point in my opinion; Military Contractors have over promised and under delivered for just under 40 years now yet their are a lot of execs and senators with very big bank accounts and bunch of company's that have repeatedly merged and consolidated. On top of that people are now people being un a lived and hunted to the ends of the earth for even speaking out against corner cutting with safety production standards on civilian airliner production lines. Like c'mon thinks it's time to take a step back and go is that really conscionable? if not what does that say for the practices, protocols and procedural efficacy of the rest of the organisation and it's ability to adhere to them so it does not stray away from it's mission? I would say this would indicate that this is a symptom of a much more pervasive problem impacting these areas that people need to be taking more seriously. We are lacking transparency in the right areas simply put, no we don't want transparency with absolutely everything national security I know.

[@vinny7114]

Wow finally someone with common sense. Thank you, it's like everyone is okay with burning money.

[@dead-claudia]

worth noting that the air force's own talk makes it sound like the brakes were likely to be hit on the ngad even if they did have the money why spend all that money on an expensive and difficult-to-build fighter you have concerns could get easily shot down with future tech that's already in early research stages today? (note: idk for sure that's why. it's just an educated guess.)

[@Qbb0828]

The things that US can learn is that don't mess up with the pace with China.

[@rothtiberiuscain7589]

Thanks, been waiting for a trusted source of analysis from you.

[@Loubie2005]

Trusted? This guys bias asf

[@Iwillnevertakemymeds]

​@@Loubie2005yes, everyone who doesn't agree with you is "so biased!!1!1"

[@richardknapp570]

Generals love the latest and greatest all jammed into one platform, whether it makes sense or not....and regardless of cost. How about doing a requirements process followed by cost/benefit analysis for each feature? It is crazy how almost every single program goes over budget as the requirements change during and after development and how associated costs skyrocket

[@aric117]

Everyone remember how we thought Russia was building better stuff for cheap in the 20th century?

[@blackkn1ght]

China isn't the soviet union. The Chinese are actively catering to nations that use western and European tech, which means they aren't afraid of looking like fools. Remember when China entered the air defense competition in Turkey and everyone laughed at them until they showed their system was better than the patriot and the s-400? The only reason why Turkey didn't get it was due to Chinese concerns over Turkey's talk about the Uyghur population in China.

[@kwonekstrom2138]

@@blackkn1ghtI can remember several times Russia demonstrated their weapon performance. Almost every piece of equipment turned out to be much worse than advertised when operating in real world conditions. They don't have much of an export market for their aircraft...

[@IronBroccoli]

They may not be what they advertise now but if they are competing and getting better it doesn’t matter. It’s still a threat when paired with China’s massive industrial capacity. And It’s another incremental improvement to their military capabilities which are catching up faster than America is pulling away. Without America getting its defense economics right all additional time favors China’s development , since they are progressing faster than the US is because they aren’t pioneering cutting edge technologies(but copying what exists) and developing their doctrine specifically to undermine America’s advantages.

[@korana6308]

What do you mean? It was and it still is doing that. Nothing comes even close the the Su57M. The Al51 engine is the best fighter jet engine in the world, nothing comes even close. And yes, it is mighty cheap. The Su 57M costs roughly $20 - $30 million USD. That's literally peanuts compared to the "cheap" F35. Nothing comes close to the Russian efficiency.

[@korana6308]

@@kwonekstrom2138 Can you give an example of that? Russian export market is literally booming rn including it's m. aircraft market. It has about 60 billion worth of stuff on order, and about a third of that or around 33% is military crafts, and there are more contracts for more crafts being signed as we speak, as more contracts were signed on the recent Chinese airshow ( everyone gets into the 5 year queue to get the best (Russian) crafts in the world).

[@maximmorrison5867]

The j36 is probably power hungry and needs the extra engines for the auxiliary power output as well thrust

[@jrcicirello]

The real concern isn’t the advancement of US air supremacy, but the US security of our military security.

[@thedarksidestudiosinc.2665]

This what Deepseek garbage commenting looks like, don’t be fooled

[@Jonasbarbury]

And giving Chinese engineers and scientists access to the companies building these aircraft.

[@underthemoon-p7q]

Da weel conthurhn ifithis avasmat uhsa suprg bert n earny security gurney Milton thcurity

[@libertarianGO]

​@@Jonasbarbury Look. I understand the sentiment, BUT there are some other factors to consider. 1) there are a lot of very smart ANTI COMUnisT chinese engineers. If we dont poach them, they will work for china. 2) spies have ALWAYS been a problem. The US has sucked at outing these the last 2 decades, but its not a true major threat if the US actually target spies rathern their own citizens. That being said, if the US fixes its political issues, chinese spies is a MUCH smaller real issue.

[@Dave5843-d9m]

DEI is a gift to spies working against USA. This will be a significant part of why Trump is hitting it so hard.

[@bennychesney7185]

Can you do a video on a hypothetical FB-35 design and cover the advantages/disadvantages of adding it America's arsenal?

[@teddy.d174]

I read an article recently stating that the third engine, although providing extra thrust is most likely for electrical power generation.

[@jacobbrassard2776]

The thing is gonna have a ridiculously powerful engine like a mega watt. F 35 is being upgraded to 80 mega wats 😢

[@What7YiYue]

Yes because China has cutting edge radar and electronic warfare tech.

[@jackie2-g8l]

That doesn't even make sense

[@maerten9517]

Hi Alex, what would one the best way to ask you military related questions dierectly. Do you have a forum?

[@JustinSeabolt]

The US really needs to get moving on the NGAD and more attritable AI wingmen. Im pretty sure the 35 and 22 would spank the J36 in the real world, but the US really shouldnt let China close these technological gaps.

[@angelaferkel7922]

J-36 is not really an air superiority fighter and will lose in close range combat. But it could have an edge over the current US jets in BVR due to the far more advanced stealth design compared to the old F-22 and F-35 But the J-36 will likely be more like a strike fighter taking out ground targets and ships and then outrunning western planes thanks to 3 engines while drones would most likely keep a safety layer between them anyway as they are cheaper and more expandable than the overpriced US drones

[@Loubie2005]

22 and 35 wouldn’t even get close buddy, keep dreaming

[@kwonekstrom2138]

I'm not that worried... China has spent a lot of development to counter weapon systems that were operational 30 years ago... In the last few years the weapon systems we've released are on a whole different level when it comes to coordination, sensory, and deployment.

[@JustinSeabolt]

@angelaferkel7922 I wasn't clear. I didn't mean the J-36 was a dogfighter, rather it would not outperform western fighters.

[@craigpaul623]

​@@Loubie2005 Hey, don't look now, but your Dunning-Kruger is showing.

[@jasonvick55]

I really hope the DOD learns from these past mistakes and doesn’t repeat them with the NGAD program. We could be so much more prepared today if we had these capabilities.

[@trajhenkhet02]

Honestly us airpower is far ahead of anything other nations have. The F-35 and F-22 just need to be periodically upgraded. The B-2, B-52, B-1, B-21 and B-117 (aka "Casually Tossed Cigarette) are more than enough.

[@rwschumm]

Let's remember that the F-22 has undergone 20+ years of upgrades and integration on Processing ability, Software, Communications, Navigation, and Identification, Missile Detection, Electronic Warfare Systems, and Infrared Seach & Track, and also Weapons Capability & Modernization. Even if the Chinese can match the US in these areas, testing and integration of all of these systems into a brand new aircraft could easily take many years or longer to perfect. I think the Chinese always want to 'display' anything new, to try to make the US/Allies think twice if we feel conflict with China is necessary. I feel we have far less to be concerned about than the 'headlines' may cause people to think...

[@d1492ay]

People like you are the reason why the Chinese are catching up fast, and the US is falling behind. You still think F-22 is actually useful in a conflict with China. Do you know what the range on these F-22s are? Where are these F-22s going to be based at when the US fights China off its coast? Are these bases around China safe from Chinese short ranged ballistic missiles? Does the F-22 require very little maintenance and can fly from improvised runways with very little ground support? Are you thinking about using aerial refueling to extend F-22's range? What will the sortie rates be like if every F--22 has to be refueled by tankers on their way to China? Are the tankers themselves safe from Chinese attacks? If the US loses a few dozen tankers to Chinese long range AAMs, can they be easily replenished? The reality is that the US is incapable of gaining air superiority anywhere near China due to logistics, Chinese numerical advantages, and a quickly closing gap on quality of aircraft and men. The Chinese are spending 300 billion USD a year on its military (

[@dead-claudia]

be concerned of those boasting of their abilities. be scared of those who hide their abilities. it's worth noting that of all our adversaries, the only one who isn't boasting 24/7 about their capabilities is iran. and iran's drone capabilities are an actual serious threat.

[@JohnGrigg-gz9gm]

@@dead-claudia Keep in mind that Iran's stealth fighter is a fiber glass display model! Lol

[@Simulcrom]

@@dead-claudia Iran is the furthest behind technologically(China is 1st, Russia is 2nd).

[@Iwillnevertakemymeds]

Very well spoken

[@brenthegarty3922]

Please do a video on an FB-35. 👍

[@oliverez5567]

Yeah I wonder how they got info ............................................................................................................................

[@tim76239]

I've left this comment many times everywhere...why is everyone calling the Chinese plane 6th gen? All we know from the grainy video is it's tailess The US had tailess jets as long ago as 1948

[@Iwillnevertakemymeds]

EXACTLY, there has been zero evidence of any six gen capabilities. This is most like a 4th or 5th gen aircraft. The fear mongering is really annoying

[@EpistemicAnthony]

Yeah, I agree. Seems like an example of a story being puffed up for hype. There's nothing to suggest this is actually any kind of advanced aircraft.

[@Digital-Dan]

I have trouble believing we're ever going to contend militarily with China. We need each other too much.

[@scroopynooperz9051]

They're still terrible at building jet engines though.

[@tarmaque]

From what I hear, they can't figure out the metallurgy.

[@siyamkamal9587]

Getting better at it though.

[@justinpaul3110]

Yeah don't they have a lifespan of something like a quarter of the american engines?

[@greentea5471]

But for some reason they are still good enough to have their own space shuttle and space station while the USA can't even rescue their 2 stranded astronauts and have to share the International Space Station with Russia 😅 this doesn't make sense 😂

[@Cuck_life]

@@greentea5471 whenever i see those emojis i just think the person who uses them is 12 years old. Keep being a shill for the chinese though lil pink.

[@RickeyHuber]

What about B-21 with longer Range and better stealth. If they use F-22 planed upgrade, F-35 upgrade and B-21. The B-21 give us long Range solution, large payload and High stealth ? Both F-35 and B-21 will also get Drone aircraft. That would give 3 degrees of freedom and would it be more cost effective ? Thanks so much for your channel. Maybe you could video on that and include your assessment. Maybe include if China J-36 maybe mitigated with the solution above? I want you to know that your my primary source information so this is just a question?

[@dead-claudia]

the b-21 has a publicly stated one-way range of over 6.5k miles, or a combat radius of a little over 3k miles (long enough for it to be able to hit china from guam without aerial refueling). that 2k mile range boasted here of the chinese fighter-bomber is way less. i do wonder how long it'll be before the us ends up with a bomber that can do round trips across the pacific without refueling.

[@jimreynolds2837]

NGAD flew in September of 2020, FA/XX is still rolling on and the B-21 raider is in production. So I’d say we are far from behind.

[@Loubie2005]

Yes, you’re very far behind

[@jimreynolds2837]

@ not even close. Everything they have currently is a cheap copy of US or Russian jets. Hell their Aircraft carriers are an old Soviet carrier, a replica of that same carrier and the new one is a look alike to the Nimitz and Ford class carriers. China is so far from innovate when it comes to military.

[@Loubie2005]

@@jimreynolds2837 how does it look like an American 6th gen jet then America doesn’t have a 6th gen jet ? You’re coping hard and that’s okay, one day you’ll accept China is better than America

[@ptm3993]

@@jimreynolds2837 China’s 6 gen fighter s areflying with a design that we have ever seen before, and you claim they have no innovation? Where is your PowerPoint plane NGAD at?

[@skyserf]

@@Loubie2005r/wooosh

[@Karackal]

Would retractable tail surfaces be a silly idea? Be stealthy as the default but become maneuverable if needed?

[@hunnybunnysheavymetalmusic6542]

A brother-in-law of mine used to fly the F15 out of Myrtle Beach, S.C. and he said that they could accelerate the plane vertically and out climb many SAMs to a height of up to 68,000 feet. He was a Colonel in the USAF and later went on to become a flight instructor when he aged out of being an active pilot. He said that the F-15 he flew was pushing 75k thrust. While he may have been lying, its odd to think he would lie about something that people's daily lives depended upon. I'm more under the impression that the lie was for the USAF to downplay the performance of the plane for the sake of promoting the F-22. Also, with the newer engines on thee F-15EX, I've been getting inside reports of up to 96k of thrust and 75,000 ft in 'slingshot' mode. And yes, it CAN no churn out mach 3 [even though these numbers are NOT supposed to be known by the general public, therefore the statement was (rather reluctantly) withdrawn quietly, after somebody got called on the carpet for their loose lips]

[@anotherbacklog]

According to War Thunder leaks, the actual F15 is better than in game so your brother in law wasn’t lying.

[@Austin-gb1cq]

F-15s can only accelerate vertically with slick wings. Meaning on missiles/bombs or external fuel tanks. Still the first to do it, though.

[@garynapolitano1270]

QUESTION: why does contrail whisp off the outer edges of wings during aerial maneuvers?

[@texasranger24]

Could you do a video about the future of Shorad? Will short range air defense provided by the laser stryker? Will the Bradley replacement IFV XM30 function as an anti air cannon? Should the US look at the SkyRanger / Skynex / millenium gun system? And will there be a Stinger replacement with a better battery, targeting, and most importantly more affordable? Or is this affordable future the APKWS guidance upgrade for the cheap and plentiful Hydra 70mm rocket? Should we slap that on Avenger Hummvees? Or IRIS-T? And how are M-shorad Strykers doing? The new EAGLS?!

[@briancavanagh7048]

I don’t think the Senate has the stomach to fund a F22 derived fighter/bomber. The Air Force certainly does not have the ability to transfer or risk funding from their B21.

[@RussetPotato]

I would like to remind everyone that the Luftwaffe had a technological edge but was defeated by secure manufacturing facilities, superior logistics, and numbers. China is a very viable contender to put the USA in it's place by sheer volume and a clear ability to make technological advancements at a scale similar to the USA at the time we entered WWII.

[@USS-SNAKE-ISLAND]

Not a bad point, but if you're relying on stolen tech for your weapon's systems, you will always be behind, and that's an authentic problem, too.

[@zlm001]

Thanks.

[@MrSnafu-1973]

I get a kick when certain countries implement stolen designs that were rejected for flaws in the design. Especially when there are wrenches thrown into the design intentionally.

[@ronnie0817]

Can you please talk about the B-1 lancer being the only full winged body aircraft in the US and how there's talk about it being the future of aircraft design both civilian and military

[@cturdo]

Shocking! Imitation and pure theft are the highest form of flattery.

[@kamsunleong6648]

Another F( Failure) 35 crashed recently in Alaska. Most crash prone 5th gen fighter jet on record. No one on their right mind would copy it.

[@Iwillnevertakemymeds]

​@@kamsunleong6648 wow! it's almost like there is a higher probability that a 5th gen aircraft crash will be the most common 5th gen aircraft in the world. I know, highschool-level probability wasn't your thing, it's okay.

[@scotttudor6647]

“I’d even intercept that.” - The Kid

[@zimcoder]

A lot of speculation about the J-36 and a lot of supposition of what the FB-22 might have been and understandably an attempt to underplay China's abilities to make better jets than America. Sounds all too familiar as we have seen with EVs, Ai, Robotics, Astronomy etc and yet China keeps upstaging the US. Don't underestimate China's ability to innovate and manufacture at a speed the US simply can't match.

[@rodgerfruin]

Or their ability to steal our tech

[@oompalumpus699]

_Taiwan is a country._

[@WasabiSniffer]

oh what a world with a King Raptor we might have had... probably wouldn't be too different but it'd be a lot cooler

[@SmoochyRoo]

I'm inclined to disagree that the J-36 is a similar aircraft to the FB-22. I'm strongly inclined to believe the J-36 is an interim aircraft meant to field similar capabilities to what China expects of NGAD, so that they're not caught with their pants down in a conflict where ours is in service. Something they can slap together with their existing technologies to have something that can contend with whatever weaknesses they see in our defense apparatus and disrupt our kill chains as much as possible as a way to ready themselves for a (hopefully not) inevitable conflict with us, rather than develop exquisite components for it to do everything like we originally expected out of NGAD.

[@ioanbota9397]

They are so powerful I like it

[@mcs131313]

24:25 I also don’t really get the criticism of copying. Ultimately 1) similar functions will drive a similar form. 2) it’s still really hard. Not saying we shouldn’t try to thwart intellectual property theft - but if you’re consistently the lagging developer - you’d have to be crazy to not leverage others designs and R&D

[@funguseaterAI]

yeah, if it wasn't for "reverse engineering" we probably wouldn't have had the PC revolution, not in the 80's anyway

[@FinsburyPhil]

It feels like there is still a profile gap between the B-21 and the F-35 for a 'medium bomber' which a two-seat, larger wing, bigger weapons bay aircraft would fill.

[@SuperVt100]

That is a Chinese one-off. They are excellent at drone technology. I would not be surprised if a drone controller is used as a basis for all of their modern airplane technology. Their drones simply have a box that attaches to them and that's where all the software is. You could have a bunch of them in an airplane. They would have redundancy as well as flexibility.

[@kolideoskope]

Using three engines shared with the rest of the fighter fleet makes a decent amount of sense vs building unique extra powerful engines just so you can use two on a single aircraft.

[@paraweir]

The lack of 'critical forward planning and strategy' for the US Armed Forces worries me most.

[@michaelj1492]

Off topic, I’m sorry and just curious. What’s the squiggly device in the top if some canopies.

[@MotoroidARFC]

That's the explosive charge to break the canopy just before the ejection seat fires.