China’s new J-36

In December 2024, images from China confirmed the existence of a new, sixth-generation aircraft in testing. A tailless design, it appeared to be a crewed aircraft, possibly a strike fighter. Now, almost one year later, images confirm that a second prototype has emerged, with several revisions.

While little can be confirmed about these prototypes, considering recent developments like the J-35, J-16, and J-15T, it is fair to assume this new design—nicknamed the Chengdu J-36—is not merely propaganda vaporware.

Indeed, tracking recent trends – as we have on this channel over the past two years – it appears that the PLA Air Force and Navy Air Force are aiming to match the capabilities of the US Navy. The addition of one or more sixth-generation manned aircraft or UASUnmanned Aircraft System (UAS): A comprehensive term used in military and regulatory contexts to describe the entire integrated ecosystem required to ... More makes sense, and for this reason, the J-36 could very well be a capable piece of equipment.

Today, we’ll take a brief look at both prototypes of the new J-36, a trijet, tailless, diamond-double-delta wing aircraft.

HISTORY

Plans for the development of a sixth-generation fighter domestically by China go back at least half a decade.

Before this, rapid acquisition programs in the early 2000s enabled the PLAAFPLAAF (People's Liberation Army Air Force) – The aerial warfare service branch of the People's Liberation Army and the official air force of the Peopl... More to fast-track the development of its own fifth-generation fighter aircraft. The first result of this process was Chengdu’s Project 718, a fifth-generation concept emerging from the J-XX fighter scheme. It followed a rapid 2-year development process, going from the drawing board in 2008 to taking its maiden flight in January 2011. By 2017, it had entered service, and over 300 are now reported to have been built.

While the true capabilities of the J-20 remain a mystery, it highlights China’s growing ability to procure new designs rapidly and in significant numbers. This must be noted when considering newer concepts, such as the J-36, as it shows how quickly such concepts can move from testing to full-scale production.

The J-36 concept dates back to 2018. Reports indicated Chengdu Aircraft Corporation submitted proposals for sixth-generation airframes, and by 2019, designers confirmed such concepts existed at the company.

Similar to the J-20’s timeline, a rapid development process appears to have occurred over the following five years. In 2021, Chinese state media reported on the existence of a new sixth-generation design, and in late 2022, the US Air Force noted the existence of what appeared to be a sixth-generation development program mimicking the system-of-systems method utilized by US manufacturers. During this period, discussions about whether China was building a tailless diamond delta-wing design began to emerge online, after satellite images of a Chengdu airfield appeared to show such a design on the tarmac, with a similar outward appearance to the X-44 MANTA.

Then, in 2023, the Aviation Industry Corporation of China formally released conceptual images of a sixth-generation domestically built fighter, which closely resembled earlier drawings allegedly leaked from internal presentations.

FIRST PROTOTYPE

Up to this point, however, everything was purely speculative, with no direct confirmation of anything beyond conceptualised drawings. This would all change on December 26, 2024.

Over the course of the day, a series of images emerged from Chengdu in China, near an airfield owned by Chengdu Aircraft Corporation. The images show what appeared to be a piloted but highly abnormal aircraft; a large, tailless, trijet flying wing of sorts, with the number ‘36’ printed on the forward part of the fuselage. Trailed by a new J-20S – the twin-seat derivative, still in yellow primer – this new aircraft was clearly a Chengdu design, aligning closely with the sixth-gen concepts shown in years past.

Following this, statements from the US military – likely with ample intelligence – were announced to the public, stating that the design was clearly a sixth-generation design and that its intended role was that of air superiority. Others, however, claimed this was closer to the long-rumored JH-XX project, the US designation for a claimed regional stealth bomber program.

Initial analysis from online commentators and larger aviation outlets, such as The War Zone, noted similarities in the center fuselage to the J-20, and that the broader nose and forward fuselage could indicate a tandem-seat setup. What’s more, the tailless setup tracked similar US concepts from the time, with the obvious advantage being a drastically lowered radar cross-section if executed correctly, and lower drag for long-range missions.

This first concept did not appear to have traditional thrust vectoring; rather, the three engines were placed in a similar configuration to that found on the YF-23, atop the rear of the fuselage, covered from the bottom by the fuselage, which extends slightly outward. The obvious advantage is a semi-masked infrared signature, allowing for the spreading and cooling of exhaust gases as they exit the aircraft.

The trijet setup was also noted as significant; with the aircraft itself appearing just as long as the J-20 – around 70 feet – and with large landing gear, it was likely a heavy craft, requiring a large powerplant, possibly three WC-10 engines. Another peculiarity was the large intake on top of the fuselage, alongside more conventional intakes on either side. The logic of this remains uncertain. The top intake appears to be in DSI configuration, and the sides are similar to the intakes of the F-22, with a splitter design. In theory, using two rather than one intake method is unusual, as even if calibrated on the ground, thrust output will likely differ at various points within the performance envelope.

From the bottom angle, some speculate that eighteen surfaces could be seen, including split flaps near the wingtips, likely to provide yaw control otherwise lost with the removal of the tail.

Finally, some images indicated two apertures on either side of the nose, suggesting side-looking airborne radar and electro-optical, to expand both radar and passive optical coverage beyond 180 degrees.

Thus, with limited information, this first sighting highlighted a few possibilities. Firstly, its overall design appeared sound in terms of radar signature reduction methods, although in truth, this is impossible to confirm by images alone. It was unlikely that the design would be intended to be a bomber, but rather a modernised fighter platform oriented around long-range missions, networking, and in particular, acting as a central node or control point for drones and loyal wingman systems; however, all of this is hard to say, so take it with a grain of salt.

LATER SIGHTINGS – FIRST PROTOTYPE

Later, this first prototype would take its second flight publicly, demonstrating afterburners and split rudders on each wing.

Several more sightings of this initial model would occur since then. The third would occur in April 2025, with footage of the aircraft landing. The footage indicated that the aircraft in question was not a tandem-seat side-by-side design, but a single-seat, single-pilot configuration.

Landing at the Chengdu airfield, this was similar to previous sightings, where a large, newly built extended shelter appears to exist to house the aircraft. Also of note was the paint scheme. It could have been a stealth coating of some sort, outwardly appearing similar to the splinter camouflage we saw on pre-production models of the SU-35S.

Shortly after this, images also emerged, claiming to show the J-36 with its landing gear retracted in flight.

The fourth major spotting would occur in May 2025, providing clear images of the aircraft’s landing approach. This came just days after images of Shenyang’s own sixth-generation concept, the so-called J-50, emerged online.

Images showing the J-36 landing confirmed the existence of a large infrared search and track system under the nose, and likely confirmed that, at least in this configuration, it would house two crew members, likely in tandem.

The fifth and latest major sighting of this first prototype occurred in June, showing the aircraft parked in a hangar in high resolution. Opened up, it appeared to show three ventral weapons bays, what is almost certainly a twin-seat tandem cockpit, and highlighted both the size of the aircraft and the heavy-duty landing gear necessary for its weight.

SECOND PROTOTYPE

The second prototype, revealed via a captured image in October, shows several design changes.

Firstly, when compared to the original configuration, the second prototype appears to have dropped the YF-23 styled engine exhausts in favor of more conventional nozzles, similar to those found on the F-22, and likely capable of two-dimensional thrust vectoring.

The trailing edge has been brought forward, revealing the engines clearly from directly underneath the aircraft. This indicates a focus on agility, which is not necessary in a conventional bomber, further alluding to this being a multi-role design with a focus on standoff air-to-air capabilities.

The gear configuration had also changed, from a tandem truck to a more conventional side-by-side arrangement.

The side inlets also appear to have been revised, now resembling diverterless supersonic inlets, which affects their radar signature. Whether or not this new prototype even has a top inlet is uncertain.

Other, smaller changes were noted, although it is hard to confirm given the warped nature of the images; for example, some commentators noted a slightly altered wing shape, fuselage, and width, although none of this could be confirmed with certainty based on the image.

DESIGN REVIEW

With what we currently know, let’s briefly review the design. Of course, take it all with a grain of salt, as at this point, everything is mere speculation based on existing analysis.

In terms of design logic, outwardly the J-36 does appear to track with Western NGAD or sixth-gen concepts; a focus on derivatives of the diamond or double diamond wing shape, a lowered radar cross section, no tail, and the likely integration of loyal wingman or drone networking, aided by a two-crew configuration, all make sense with this design.

The tailless design offers several advantages, as noted earlier; the first being reduced drag, resulting in better cruise performance and range. The second is the reduction of the radar signature in the cross-section. Neither advantage is guaranteed – it has to be engineered correctly.

However, there are drawbacks; with fewer surfaces of control, the obvious disadvantage is agility, especially at lower speeds. The relevance of this in the future remains uncertain; in theory, such stealth designs would ideally focus on long-range standoff capabilities, with the possibility of anything close to merging with an enemy being low. However, as we have seen in the Russo-Ukrainian War, when the situation goes kinetic, anything is possible.

However, there is one other considerable difference between eastern and western air power that would play into the logic behind the J-36. That is refueling. China lacks the tanker fleet possessed by the US Air Force. Note that for power projection, the US relies on either tankers or the forward deployment of carrier strike groups. For long-range bombing operations, tankers have been crucial.

Thus, if this is part of the reasoning, it may explain the larger size of the aircraft despite supposedly being a fighter or strike aircraft. With no guaranteed ability to forward deploy tankers, the J-36 may instead rely on a larger overall design with larger fuel stores.

This would also make sense given its claimed mission: to fly long distances and then loiter on station, partially operating as a node for drones or other aircraft. Indeed, we see drones, such as the so-called CH-7, optimized for long-range, long-endurance mission profiles.

In terms of active radar technology, nothing remains certain. The large nose could theoretically accommodate a massive AESAAESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) Radar: An advanced radar system that uses an array of numerous small solid-state transmit/receive modules t... More radar, enabling not only threat detection but also high-resolution power when in synthetic aperture mode. If it’s anything like the F-35’s new AN APG-85, this would allow for ground and sea mapping in great resolution, useful for both target acquisition or simple recon. Note that with the possibility of side-mounted apertures as well, this would allow the aircraft to beam the reconnaissance area while still monitoring, similar in some ways to the old SR-71’s side-looking optical systems.

Speed is another factor. As many have noted, it is likely that Chengdu is aiming for supercruise capabilites, somewhere between Mach 1.0 and 1.5. Note that anything over this speed risks thermal damage to stealth coatings. This comes down to engine reliability; in the past, China struggled to produce reliable engines. This issue appears to be related to machining imperfections, which led to slight imbalances in the centrifugal balance. However, this appears to have been reconciled over the past two years. If this is true, supercruise is likely possible and would indeed be preferable for such a design.

Taking this into account, we can theorize that if the J-36 works as intended, it could pose a threat, as highlighted by former US Air Force General Mark D. Kelly. With long-range, stealth, and long-range standoff capabilities, the J-36 could fill a very niche role, flying extended air-to-air missions without the discernible presence of tankers. In a defensive posture, its integration of stealth and multi-mission capabilites such as drone networking, could make it a serious threat in Defensive Counter Air roles.

As noted in our previous videos on Chinese aircraft, namely the J-16 and J-15D, all new developments must be understood within the context of systems networking. Unlike Russia, which appears to have a decentralised approach, China follows the example of the US; namely, the streamlined networking of air, land, and sea assets, particularly by crunching data from various nodes, and then using this information to paint a picture of the battlespace, which can then be transmitted, for example, to pilots.

A practical example is a datalink type system; traditionally utilising an AEW system as the principal node, data is then shared between one or more flights for target identification, visualisation of target commitment, and general situational awareness.

Modern systems go far beyond this, allowing for the networking and sharing of not only active radar returns, but data from other sensors, including passive receivers, optical receivers, and so forth. This can then, ideally, be crunched into useful information for ships, land-based assets, and aircraft, while being shared among each asset in whatever data format is deemed necessary. Ideally, this would go beyond the passive overlay of target position data and allow for, say, true target acquisition information, which could be transmitted to a missile guidance computer without the pilot having to actively correlate the datalink information with his own radar imagery. The advantages of such technology are obvious: the passive reception of information, the locking up of targets using transmitted data, and the firing of weapons without a pilot ever having to paint the target himself.

Such technology is being pursued by both the US and China, and cannot be ignored when considering systems such as the J-36, or indeed the F-35. Thus, the outward appearance of these fifth- and sixth-generation aircraft cannot be the sole reason when considering capabilities, as systems networking becomes ever more important.

CONCLUSION

In the final analysis, the J-36’s true role remains a mystery. It is likely to be multi-purpose, with standoff air-to-air and precision air-to-ground capabilities. While most commentators have thus far downplayed the possibility of it being a regional bomber, in theory, it is possible; after all, precision strikes do not necessarily imply a large payload is necessary, but rather mission endurance and stealth.

Beyond this, it’s possible that it will fill the role of both electronic warfare and intelligence gathering, with long-range and loitering endurance. Technology integration likely includes the ability to not only network with other aircraft, but to control drones and similar autonomous systems, acting as the command and control centre or node for these deployable unmanned assets, probably integrating AI or other advanced algorithms to crunch data, control onboard systems, or network assets.

It is also possible that – just like with the various J-35 prototype configurations – the two prototypes of the J-36 are not necessarily evolutions, but different development branches of the program.

In truth, however, nothing about the design can be stated with certainty, from claimed specs to mission type, nor even if the design actually represents something China will purchase to mass produce.

It would seem that the goal of the J-36, beyond specific tasking, aligns with China’s broader push to enhance anti-access/area denial capabilities, with an obvious focus on the South China Sea and the Taiwan Straight. Their development of technologies is fast, as noted by Assistant Secretary of the US Air Force Acquisitions Andrew Hunting, and if this pace continues, we will likely see further developments of the Chengdu J-36 in the very near future.