J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

[SinoSoldier]

In this

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, pb19980515 refutes that the J-20 or any variant of it will be a carrier-based fighter.

再加把火。。。。。


歼20怎么改都不会上舰。。。。。先天条件决定了的。总数三百的歼20只会在它应有的岗位上 完成它应有的历史使命。

Translation: "The J-20 will not be carrier-borne no matter how one modifies it; its innate characteristics have already decided this fate. A total of 300 J-20s will fulfill the project's missions."

 

[SinoSoldier]

Gongke101 on the WS-19 & the next-generation naval fighter:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

这个是13还是13E

原版13，13E据说海军看上了。

Translation:
Q: Would that be the WS-13 or WS-13E? (Responding to an earlier claim that an engine is undergoing design appraisal and export approval)
Gongek101: That would be the WS-13. The WS-13E has been said to be looked upon favorably by the Navy.

13和13E的情况可以说吗？

13E不行，13中航技看上了，准备开始技术鉴定后出口。

Translation:
Q: Could you explain the status of the WS-13 and WS-13E?
Gongke101: I can't of the WS-13E. The WS-13 will be adopted by the medium-weight fighter and will be ready for exports once it passes technical appraisal.

13E不行，是说13e保密不能说，而不是13e不给力，对吧

对的，海军看上了！

Translation:
Q: When you said that "not the WS-13E", you meant that its confidentiality cannot be breached, not that it isn't powerful enough, right?
Gongke101: Correct. The Navy is looking favorably upon the WS-13(E)!

是用于新型舰载机吗？

对的，601的消息是准备立项，611的消息是竞争，优秀的上。

Translation:
Q: Is it for the new type of carrier-based fighter? (Referring to gongke101's post from above)
Gongke101: Correct. 601 is preparing its bid, while 611 is preparing to compete. Whoever is the best will be the next-generation carrier-based fighter. (A better translation is needed here)

我记得前几个不都消息显示31中标了，海军舰载机组好像都去了沈阳了。611还用得着出方案竞标？

人家同样可以去611，虽然601中标对我们更有利，但歼20如果载改成功完全可以pk31.

Translation:
Q: I recall that a few earlier rumors claimed that 601 won the bid, and all naval contracts went to 601. Is 611 still bidding in this competition?
Gongke101: They (Navy?) can also go for the 611 bid, although 601 winning the contract would be more beneficial for us. Nevertheless, if the J-20 can be successfully modified then it can absolutely compete with the FC-31. (A better translation is needed here)

不会海四代用吧？？

舰载用的。

Translation:
Q: It won't be used by the naval 5th-generation fighter, will it? (Referring to gongke101's earlier comment that the Navy is favoring the WS-13E)
Gongke101: It will be used by the carrier-based fighter.

611拿什么机型竞争？整个集团哪来的消息？怕不是说句车轱辘话不失圆滑吧！到这时候了还说竞争的所谓大神 ...

鹘鹰海军立项是601和112传来的，611要竞争是水师装备院的人说的，20舰版，让不要过分乐观。

Translation:
Q: What design will 611 use to compete? Where did the message come from in the group? I'm afraid that .... original statement. (Translation required) At this stage we are still talking of a competition...
Gongke101: The Naval FC-31 project came from 601 and 112. The statement that 611 will compete came from the Naval Equipment Academy. Don't be too overly optimistic about the carrier-based J-20.

********

My own comments:

This goes against what many other "big shrimps" like pb19980515 have been saying. This is especially true of gongke101's claim that a naval J-20 is still in the competition, a claim that directly contradicts what pb19980515 has been saying. I would also appreciate it if someone could parse through my translations and improve upon them, since it is unclear if gongke101 is saying whether the naval contract has been decided or if the competition is still up in the air.

 

[latenlazy]

Gongke101 on the WS-19 & the next-generation naval fighter:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Translation:
Q: Would that be the WS-13 or WS-13E? (Responding to an earlier claim that an engine is undergoing design appraisal and export approval)
Gongek101: That would be the WS-13. The WS-13E has been said to be looked upon favorably by the Navy.


Translation:
Q: Could you explain the status of the WS-13 and WS-13E?
Gongke101: I can't of the WS-13E. The WS-13 will be adopted by the medium-weight fighter and will be ready for exports once it passes technical appraisal.


Translation:
Q: When you said that "not the WS-13E", you meant that its confidentiality cannot be breached, not that it isn't powerful enough, right?
Gongke101: Correct. The Navy is looking favorably upon the WS-13(E)!


Translation:
Q: Is it for the new type of carrier-based fighter? (Referring to gongke101's post from above)
Gongke101: Correct. 601 is preparing its bid, while 611 is preparing to compete. Whoever is the best will be the next-generation carrier-based fighter. (A better translation is needed here)


Translation:
Q: I recall that a few earlier rumors claimed that 601 won the bid, and all naval contracts went to 601. Is 611 still bidding in this competition?
Gongke101: They (Navy?) can also go for the 611 bid, although 601 winning the contract would be more beneficial for us. Nevertheless, if the J-20 can be successfully modified then it can absolutely compete with the FC-31. (A better translation is needed here)


Translation:
Q: It won't be used by the naval 5th-generation fighter, will it? (Referring to gongke101's earlier comment that the Navy is favoring the WS-13E)
Gongke101: It will be used by the carrier-based fighter.


Translation:
Q: What design will 611 use to compete? Where did the message come from in the group? I'm afraid that .... original statement. (Translation required) At this stage we are still talking of a competition...
Gongke101: The Naval FC-31 project came from 601 and 112. The statement that 611 will compete came from the Naval Equipment Academy. Don't be too overly optimistic about the carrier-based J-20.

********

My own comments:

This goes against what many other "big shrimps" like pb19980515 have been saying. This is especially true of gongke101's claim that a naval J-20 is still in the competition, a claim that directly contradicts what pb19980515 has been saying. I would also appreciate it if someone could parse through my translations and improve upon them, since it is unclear if gongke101 is saying whether the naval contract has been decided or if the competition is still up in the air.

The competition is still up in the air according to gongke, though it sounds like SAC’s bid is more ready than CAC’s, at least according to him. The discrepancy could be accounted for by pb19980515 being from SAC, and thus assuming at this point that SAC winning is a forgone conclusion. Recall my warning about lower level leakers. They sit much further from the decision making and have a much better purview of the projects that are in their own immediate surroundings or which they immediately touch than those that sit outside their own domain of projects, so their word isn’t always definitive. Not every leaker has perfect knowledge over what they speak. Don’t just read into the information, but also the source.

 

[Klon]

Recall my warning about lower level leakers. They sit much further from the decision making and have a much better purview of the projects that are in their own immediate surroundings or which they immediately touch than those that sit outside their own domain of projects, so their word isn’t always definitive.

About this - which sources are supposed to be "higher level" and what is their position? I can't really think of any.

 

[latenlazy]

About this - which sources are supposed to be "higher level" and what is their position? I can't really think of any.

For aviation, Pupu. For ships, pop3 and fzgfzy (also known as Big Cat).

 

[Klon]

For aviation, Pupu. For ships, pop3 and fzgfzy (also known as Big Cat).

The other part of the question was just as important. As far as I know, the people you named aren't any "higher" than the ones you classified as "lower level".

That is, I don't think any of them are close to the decision-making or have firsthand information about most things they comment on in their "domain". Of course, their sources and connections may be extensive and reliable, allowing them to be very informed and usually correct, but that can be the case for any other insider as well.

 

[latenlazy]

The other part of the question was just as important. As far as I know, the people you named aren't any "higher" than the ones you classified as "lower level".

That is, I don't think any of them are close to the decision-making or have firsthand information about most things they comment on in their "domain". Of course, their sources and connections may be extensive and reliable, allowing them to be very informed and usually correct, but that can be the case for any other insider as well.

They are. All three of those sources are senior members of their affiliated organizations. Fzgfzy is part of management at CSSC. Pop3 is a retired PLAN officer. Pupu, if I remember correctly, is a PLAAF officer. Gongke is an aerospace engineer at GAIC and Pb119950515 is a software engineer at SAC. Officers and industry management generally have broader and more complete purview of decisions over procurement and development than engineers do.

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

What about the notion (I don't know how well established it is) that the air force bought up all of CAC's J-20 capacity for the next decade? Wouldn't that make SAC the winner-by-default in the J-XY competition?

 

[gelgoog]

Gongke101 on the WS-19 & the next-generation naval fighter:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

...

Translation:
Q: Is it for the new type of carrier-based fighter? (Referring to gongke101's post from above)
Gongke101: Correct. 601 is preparing its bid, while 611 is preparing to compete. Whoever is the best will be the next-generation carrier-based fighter. (A better translation is needed here)


Translation:
Q: I recall that a few earlier rumors claimed that 601 won the bid, and all naval contracts went to 601. Is 611 still bidding in this competition?
Gongke101: They (Navy?) can also go for the 611 bid, although 601 winning the contract would be more beneficial for us. Nevertheless, if the J-20 can be successfully modified then it can absolutely compete with the FC-31. (A better translation is needed here)


Translation:
Q: It won't be used by the naval 5th-generation fighter, will it? (Referring to gongke101's earlier comment that the Navy is favoring the WS-13E)
Gongke101: It will be used by the carrier-based fighter.


Translation:
Q: What design will 611 use to compete? Where did the message come from in the group? I'm afraid that .... original statement. (Translation required) At this stage we are still talking of a competition...
Gongke101: The Naval FC-31 project came from 601 and 112. The statement that 611 will compete came from the Naval Equipment Academy. Don't be too overly optimistic about the carrier-based J-20.
...

Just some quotes for those who don't know the OKB or whatever numbers of Chinese institutes:
601 Aircraft Design Institute, Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute, designed the J-11, J-15, J-16.
611 Research and Design Institute, Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute, designed the J-10, J-20, and CAC FC-1/JF-17.

As for the WS-13, it's a clone of the RD-33 (MiG-29) engine, so I would have to assume they could leverage technology from the RD-33MK (MiG-29K,MiG-35) engine or just simply buy them outright if the WS-13E engine program gets delayed for some reason.

 

[PiSigma]

Just some quotes for those who don't know the OKB or whatever numbers of Chinese institutes:
601 Aircraft Design Institute, Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute, designed the J-11, J-15, J-16.
611 Research and Design Institute, Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute, designed the J-10, J-20, and CAC FC-1/JF-17.

As for the WS-13, it's a clone of the RD-33 (MiG-29) engine, so I would have to assume they could leverage technology from the RD-33MK (MiG-29K,MiG-35) engine or just simply buy them outright if the WS-13E engine program gets delayed for some reason.

People here have known what 601 and 611 are for at least a decade. In fact I only use their department numbers because names change too often in China. And I'm old, everyone in my family that works in chengdu still call themselves 611 workers even though they are all civilians now.