Yeah I think 32 tons is pretty much theoretical max weight that will pretty much never get to in practical loadout. Maybe the photo is when it was testing a simulation load, the cart thing. For sure J-35 in clean config will never get to 32 tons unless they have some cybertron compression tech
CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Yeah I think 32 tons is pretty much theoretical max weight that will pretty much never get to in practical loadout. Maybe the photo is when it was testing a simulation load, the cart thing. For sure J-35 in clean config will never get to 32 tons unless they have some cybertron compression tech
The thing is, many people think of catapult technology as a linear ladder, where you have to go up one level to get to the next.
But the frequent problems with the US EMALS prove that steam catapults and electromagnetic catapults are so different in engineering that knowledge cannot be transferred in parallel.
If we consider the electromagnetic catapult in engineering (rather than deck scheduling) as starting over, then the experience of the PLAN is not that the USN is too far behind. And to be modest, 10-15 years ago, China's level of science and engineering in electricity is not inferior to that of the United States.
But the frequent problems with the US EMALS prove that steam catapults and electromagnetic catapults are so different in engineering that knowledge cannot be transferred in parallel.
If we consider the electromagnetic catapult in engineering (rather than deck scheduling) as starting over, then the experience of the PLAN is not that the USN is too far behind. And to be modest, 10-15 years ago, China's level of science and engineering in electricity is not inferior to that of the United States.
Last edited:
F-35C does ~70000lbs MTOW or 31800kg, J-35 is a good size larger so it could be heavier still
So you get my point, it is just they way people think, it is not necessarily true.
The funny thing is that you point out some of those mechanical principles before that the engineers probably have a great deal of understanding of to be confident that they can skip the steam catapult.
Also, the post was just talking about "people", not necessarily "experts". They may or may not understand that HP steam system is a basic energy source. Steam catapult is just very basic energy release from higher to lower pressure to do work. They probably also wouldn't realize that steam catapult is really inefficient as a lot of energy is converted into waste heat rather than work.
This is pretty much probably the driving principle of the EM catapult team, it is just a much better way to do it.
What I meant is while it can take off at 32 tons or even more, in practice it will never reach that number. Like the other member said, full internal load + 4 big EFT is pretty much as heavy as it get in practice.
Though I'm sure the EM Cat is tested at that figure with simulation load, which is what I think the picture is about
Usually this number means there exists at least a theoretical way to achieve such weight. I.e. very often mtow changes due to change of pylon configuration and new weapons; not often, but sometimes concise manufacturers trim it down when weapons are retired and old numbers are not achievable anymore.
But how? Although J-35 is slightly longer than F-35C, its fuselage is much slimmer and its wing area is much smaller. How could it possibly exceed F-35C's max takeoff weight?
F-35C has MTOW of 32t. Why can't J-35 have that level of MTOW? Its nose is thicker than J-15. I also don't see why you would know the true MTOW of J-15 off CV-18. That is classified data.
I put this out there just to see if anyone has seen a photo of it. Still looking.
The top CG is just incorrect, J-35 is overall just a larger aircraft