China's V/STOL studies, concepts & considerations

zyklon

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't think there are any probable customers for China's hypothetical S/VTOL fighter jets that are rich enough, capable enough and needy enough to operate them.

Totally agree with you, but was hoping someone saw an angle that the rest of us might have missed.

The only prospective customer that meets all three requirements which I could fathom of would be the PLANMC.

I haven't been paying much attention to this, so if I need to be corrected, please don't hesitate.

From my understanding: a number of PLANAF units have been reflagged under the PLAAF in the last few years.

So one could reason that the PLANAF is looking to carve out new niches for itself to ensure its continued relevance as an institution, and one way to accomplish that would be to invest in capabilities that will contribute to (future) PLA (expeditionary warfare) requirements.

However . . . such conclusions are inevitably going to make you wonder just what it is the PLA is preparing for?!
 

Tomboy

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't think there are any probable customers for China's hypothetical S/VTOL fighter jets that are rich enough, capable enough and needy enough to operate them.

The only prospective customer that meets all three requirements which I could fathom of would be the PLANMC.
Also being fair if Shenyang AECC really wanted to sell off this VTOL jet concept, they would've put a model of this system at Zhuhai last year and not post obscure research paper and patents especially since these patents were submitted back in 2022, gives them ample time to show it off at Zhuhai if they really wanted to. Given the number of resources devoted and how extensive and complete the designs are I personally really think this might actually be a PLANMC project for an expeditionary strike fighter similar to F-35B but with all the Navy and Air Force crap taken out of it to make it cheaper and easier to produce.
I haven't been paying much attention to this, so if I need to be corrected, please don't hesitate.

From my understanding: a number of PLANAF units have been reflagged under the PLAAF in the last few years.

So one could reason that the PLANAF is looking to carve out new niches for itself to ensure its continued relevance as an institution, and one way to accomplish that would be to invest in capabilities that will contribute to (future) PLA (expeditionary warfare) requirements.

However . . . such conclusions are inevitably going to make you wonder just what it is the PLA is preparing for?!
It's likely they just want to match USMC capabilities in expeditionary warfare, after all PLA is meant to match the US military by 2049. Such capability will probably also be of great use in a potential pacific war. Plus, this development really makes you wonder what the 076 was designed with in mind as 30-ton aircraft elevators is great for carrying two large drones but could also carry a single F-35B sized fully loaded STOVL fighter jet. Coupled with full length EM catapult to me seems a bit overkill if you only want to launch drones.
 
Last edited:

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
I haven't been paying much attention to this, so if I need to be corrected, please don't hesitate.

From my understanding: a number of PLANAF units have been reflagged under the PLAAF in the last few years.

So one could reason that the PLANAF is looking to carve out new niches for itself to ensure its continued relevance as an institution, and one way to accomplish that would be to invest in capabilities that will contribute to (future) PLA (expeditionary warfare) requirements.

However . . . such conclusions are inevitably going to make you wonder just what it is the PLA is preparing for?!

As far as I understand it, the PLANAF is looking towards specializing - That is, by focusing "towards the sea".

That's why except certain special mission aircrafts, the PLANAF has been gradually transferring land-based warplanes (e.g. J-11BHs and JH-7/As) to the PLAAF in the past couple years, while retaining aviation elements that are fundamental/crucial to the PLAN's goals (J-15/T/S/D/DTs and J-35) and leaving the rest of the weightlifting to the PLAAF.

It's likely they just want to match USMC capabilities in expeditionary warfare, after all PLA is meant to match the US military by 2049. Such capability will probably also be of great use in a potential pacific war. Plus, this development really makes you wonder what the 076 was designed with in mind as 30-ton aircraft elevators is great for carrying two large drones but could also carry a single F-35B sized fully loaded STOVL fighter jet. Coupled with full length EM catapult to me seems a bit overkill if you only want to launch drones.

Note:
STO = Short take-off
CATO = Catapult-assisted take-off
BAR = Barrier-assisted landing
VL = Vertical landing


Well, if the PLANMC is really looking towards inducting an S/VTOL warplane (manned or unmanned) in the future, I'd say that the 075 LHD can certainly operate it and massively benefit from it (albeit some major resurfacing work needs to be done to reinforce the flight deck against engine exhaust heat, similar to the Izumo CVs).

However, the question comes with the 076 LHD. The LHD already features a full-length EMCAT and an EMAGS - Meaning that the PLANMC could just put a couple J-35s on it, instead of having a specialized S/VTOL warplane.

One possible idea which I could envision would be that this S/VTOL warplane (if it is indeed meant to be developed into an actual, functional, warfighting-capable platform) can conduct both STO and CATO for take-off operations, but only VL for landing operations.

That is:
- On the 075 LHD = STO using the entire length of the flight deck, while VL using the rear section of the flight deck. This is the same as every LHD/LHA/light CV elsewhere.
- On the 076 LHD = CATO using the EMCAT segment of the flight deck, while VL using the rear section of the flight deck.

This means that on the 076 LHD, this S/VTOL warplane only needs the EMCAT segment of the flight deck to conduct take-offs, while only using the rear segment of the flight deck to conduct landings. This should eliminate the problem where the BAR operations on the 076 LHD using the EMAGS would require clearing the entire length of the flight deck from any obstructions (which hinders any CATO operations until the BAR is complete). This would be highly beneficial towards improving the sortie rates for the 076 LHD compared to other flattops of similar type.

Of course, there's also the debate on whether having higher sortie rate is actually crucial for an LHD versus that of a CV(N). The PLAN may see this improvement as insignificant/unnecessary, so this S/VTOL warplane idea may only belong to the archives.

But we'll see.
 
Last edited:

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
Well, if the PLANMC is really looking towards inducting an S/VTOL warplane (manned or unmanned) in the future, I'd say that the 075 LHD can certainly operate it and massively benefit from it (albeit some major resurfacing work needs to be done to reinforce the flight deck against engine exhaust heat, similar to the Izumo CVs).

However, the question comes with the 076 LHD. The LHD already features a full-length EMCAT and an EMAGS - Meaning that the PLANMC could just put a couple J-35s on it, instead of having a specialized S/VTOL warplane.
I don't think 075 will support any serious tempo of operations. It's a rather cheap box in the end.
However, it didn't take long for these NATO countries to realize or at least decide that their fears were overblown and finite resources would be better invested elsewhere.
Those programs mostly failed, though, and then institutional self-preservation kicked in.
 

mack8

Junior Member
As far as I understand it, the PLANAF is looking towards specializing - That is, by focusing "towards the sea".

That's why except certain special mission aircrafts, the PLANAF has been gradually transferring land-based warplanes (e.g. J-11BHs and JH-7/As) to the PLAAF in the past couple years, while retaining aviation elements that are fundamental/crucial to the PLAN's goals (J-15/T/S/D/DTs and J-35) and leaving the rest of the weightlifting to the PLAAF.



Note:
STO = Short take-off
CATO = Catapult-assisted take-off
BAR = Barrier-assisted landing
VL = Vertical landing


Well, if the PLANMC is really looking towards inducting an S/VTOL warplane (manned or unmanned) in the future, I'd say that the 075 LHD can certainly operate it and massively benefit from it (albeit some major resurfacing work needs to be done to reinforce the flight deck against engine exhaust heat, similar to the Izumo CVs).

However, the question comes with the 076 LHD. The LHD already features a full-length EMCAT and an EMAGS - Meaning that the PLANMC could just put a couple J-35s on it, instead of having a specialized S/VTOL warplane.

One possible idea which I could envision would be that this S/VTOL warplane (if it is indeed meant to be developed into an actual, functional, warfighting-capable platform) can conduct both STO and CATO for take-off operations, but only VL for landing operations.

That is:
- On the 075 LHD = STO using the entire length of the flight deck, while VL using the rear section of the flight deck. This is the same as every LHD/LHA/light CV elsewhere.
- On the 076 LHD = CATO using the EMCAT segment of the flight deck, while VL using the rear section of the flight deck.

This means that on the 076 LHD, this S/VTOL warplane only needs the EMCAT segment of the flight deck to conduct take-offs, while only using the rear segment of the flight deck to conduct landings. This should eliminate the problem where the BAR operations on the 076 LHD using the EMAGS would require clearing the entire length of the flight deck from any obstructions (which hinders any CATO operations until the BAR is complete). This would be highly beneficial towards improving the sortie rates for the 076 LHD compared to other flattops of similar type.

Of course, there's also the debate on whether having higher sortie rate is actually crucial for an LHD versus that of a CV(N). The PLAN may see this improvement as insignificant/unnecessary, so this S/VTOL warplane idea may only belong to the archives.

But we'll see.
Absolutely agree with what you say. Does the 076 have arresting gear btw? This in regards to the possibly of carrying standard J-35 fighters.
One other benefit of the EMALS launch of a STOVL fighter is that it can be launched with full fuel and weapons, negating the need for reduction in either that is one of the drawbacks STOVL fighters are plagued with be it for STO or VTO,
 

Tomboy

Junior Member
Registered Member
Absolutely agree with what you say. Does the 076 have arresting gear btw? This in regards to the possibly of carrying standard J-35 fighters.
One other benefit of the EMALS launch of a STOVL fighter is that it can be launched with full fuel and weapons, negating the need for reduction in either that is one of the drawbacks STOVL fighters are plagued with be it for STO or VTO,
076 has arresting gears but that mainly for drones as 076 will still be primarily recovering heavy drones
 

mack8

Junior Member
Ok so based on that we have two scenarios regarding the possibility of fighter capability for PLAN's 075/076 LHAs.

1. J-35 standard fighter- could be used on 076, launched by EMALS, recovery requires clearing the deck for axial operations like a WW2 carrier. Slow sortie rate due to only 1 EMALS. However J-35 is a top of the line fighter, probably superior in every respect to F-35B, especially loadout and range.
2. Notional STOVL fighter- could be operated by both 075 and 076, and on 076 EMALS launch can be carried with full fuel and weapons if the situation requires (the same drawbacks as to low sortie rate applies as for J-35 though), but STO or VTO operations can be carried out as well for maximum sortie rate. Simpler VL recovery.

It will be very interesting to see which way PLAN will go. Imo they absolutely need fighters, VTOL or not, operating from the LHAs if they want to truly oppose the USN capability in this regard (which operate significant numbers of F-35Bs from their LHAs)
 

Tomboy

Junior Member
Registered Member
2. Notional STOVL fighter- could be operated by both 075 and 076, and on 076 EMALS launch can be carried with full fuel and weapons if the situation requires (the same drawbacks as to low sortie rate applies as for J-35 though), but STO or VTO operations can be carried out as well for maximum sortie rate. Simpler VL recovery.
IMO there really isn't any draw backs to using STOVL fighters other than the fact that this fighter will have less range due to the lift fan but as 076 have an EMALS, you could launch a jet at MTOW with full fuel and weapons and still recover vertically like a helicopter to maximise sortie rate as it's mainly the landing on a straight deck that ruins sortie rate since you'd have to clear everything on deck to support landing aircraft. A 076+STOVL combo would be better than America class+F-35B since F-35B is not capable of taking off from an America class LHA at MTOW. Now whether or not will CMC think this is a good enough reason to approve a new aircraft is another question but based on recent findings I personally think they've already made their decision.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
I don't think there are any probable customers for China's hypothetical S/VTOL fighter jets that are rich enough, capable enough and needy enough to operate them.

Sorry, I was supposed/meant to write "any probable foreign customers", instead of just "any probable customers".

I don't think 075 will support any serious tempo of operations. It's a rather cheap box in the end.

Well, a cheap box can become a good cheap box if the box can be utilized to its better (if not best) potential.

Besides, the 075 LHD is also easier and cheaper to procure, plus can be built faster than 076 LHD for obvious reasons should the push come to shove, despite the obvious drawbacks with regards to STO+VL when compared to CATO+VL operations. Plus, it'll still be a major capability upgrade over an all-helicopter fleet for conducting/supporting amphibious assault operations, all things considered.
 
Last edited:
Top