J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

[Maikeru]

I thought that the F-18L variant didn’t go through mainly because of internal politics and squabbles between Northrop and McDonald Douglas, the idea itself was quite good and would in theory provide more performance than the contemporary naval F-18 (less weight, more fuel, extra pair of hard points and G-limit raised to 9G, etc)

Maybe so, but the point remains that the absence of a (better in raw performance terms) land based model did not seem to harm F18 sales around the world. It also slotted nicely between the top of the range F15 and the cheap and cheerful F16 in terms of cost and capability.

 

[Blitzo]

Prime example of double standards and using ignorance as justification for, in my personal opinion, unacceptably uneducated claims and low quality posts.

Speechless.

well at least allow me to try cheer everybody up with this: may be a repost but apparently there is an EODAS window on the nose before the cockpit. Seems like these J-35 prototypes either have most (if not all) of the sensors already installed or SAC left space and plans
to install them during tests. Either way it’s a lot quicker than I expected as afiak early prototypes are mainly used to test flight performance and not sensor integration. This should be a good sign that the project is progressing quickly.View attachment 94081

I'm 99.9% sure that image is a CGI.

Of course, from the higher quality images of the prototypes (especially the recent one of 350003), we can see what appears to be apertures for the 360 degree EOPDS on parts of the airframe (let's not call it EODAS, that's a trademarked product name for the F-35's system).
We have also noted the chin EOIRST of course since the first prototype.

Overall, it just further confirms that these prototypes are likely the equivalent of the J-20 201X series of prototypes, rather than the 200X series of TDs/prototypes.

So I agree with your point, but the picture is not a good example of what you're trying to say.

 

[Schwerter_]

I'm 99.9% sure that image is a CGI.

Of course, from the higher quality images of the prototypes (especially the recent one of 350003), we can see what appears to be apertures for the 360 degree EOPDS on parts of the airframe (let's not call it EODAS, that's a trademarked product name for the F-35's system).
We have also noted the chin EOIRST of course since the first prototype.

Overall, it just further confirms that these prototypes are likely the equivalent of the J-20 201X series of prototypes, rather than the 200X series of TDs/prototypes.

So I agree with your point, but the picture is not a good example of what you're trying to say.

Thanks for pointing this out!

 

[Tiberium]

Maybe so, but the point remains that the absence of a (better in raw performance terms) land based model did not seem to harm F18 sales around the world. It also slotted nicely between the top of the range F15 and the cheap and cheerful F16 in terms of cost and capability.

I actually believe there would be a psycological reason beyond the so called "land version has better perfromance" thingy: historically speaking US never sold equipment they did not use themselves well, including F-20, F-16/79, both of which never made sale.
The reasoning behind this is quite simple: if you don't equip yourself, it is hard to believe you would take it seriously. As an importer I would rather buy *established* equipment, which means you use it yourself.
Actually JF-17 has encountered this problem. And that's why Pak is much more motivated to push it to the global market. There is a rumor said that SAC would export FC-31v2, not J-35, and I think it is stupid. Any country which can afford a 5gen fighter would rather buy J-35 which is in service in PLANAF or PLAAF, not some crude and rushed export-only model.

 

[LCR34]

I actually believe there would be a psycological reason beyond the so called "land version has better perfromance" thingy: historically speaking US never sold equipment they did not use themselves well, including F-20, F-16/79, both of which never made sale.
The reasoning behind this is quite simple: if you don't equip yourself, it is hard to believe you would take it seriously. As an importer I would rather buy *established* equipment, which means you use it yourself.
Actually JF-17 has encountered this problem. And that's why Pak is much more motivated to push it to the global market. There is a rumor said that SAC would export FC-31v2, not J-35, and I think it is stupid. Any country which can afford a 5gen fighter would rather buy J-35 which is in service in PLANAF or PLAAF, not some crude and rushed export-only model.

China tried to market J10CE, which is they themselves uses. So far only Pakistan bought them.

 

[delta115]

Chinese fighter gonna be hard to sell because US will threaten to sanction anyone that have interested in them. Just like they did with Russia.

 

[tch1972]

Buyers will perceive FC-31 v2 as 'unfinished' product or 'work in progress' since it evolves into J35. It will be relatively easier to market a land based variant of J35 which the navy themselves used (naval version) compare to FC31 V2.

 

[Blitzo]

Sorry to interrupt the cripplefight, I'd just like to add that I see no particular reason why naval J-35 cannot achieve export success. Many international customers bought the fully navalized classic F/A-18 for land use, despite Northrop/MDD/Boeing proposing a lighter, de-navalized 'L' variant, which never took off either literally or figuratively.

It's entirely possible that the naval J-XY/35 may be able to achieve export success.

But in the case of J-XY/35, we already expect a land based variant to emerge in the near future for the PLAAF as well -- a "J-XY/35-L" variant will exist.


So for foreign customers, the question is whether they will want to buy an export variant of the J-XY/35, or an export variant of the "J-XY/35-L," or an export variant of FC-31V2.

Personally I expect the J-XY/35-L based airframe to be most viable and popular.

 

[stannislas]

speaking of exporting naval version jet, does Canadian CF-188, or Australian F-18 have any differences to regular USN F-18 and can it still land on a aircraft carrier?
if so, then there shouldn't be any issue for foreign countries to buy J-35 directly or for PLANAF to deploy some J-35 on land

 

[tch1972]

It's entirely possible that the naval J-XY/35 may be able to achieve export success.

But in the case of J-XY/35, we already expect a land based variant to emerge in the near future for the PLAAF as well -- a "J-XY/35-L" variant will exist.


So for foreign customers, the question is whether they will want to buy an export variant of the J-XY/35, or an export variant of the "J-XY/35-L," or an export variant of FC-31V2.

Personally I expect the J-XY/35-L based airframe to be most viable and popular.

Yes.
Why would they want to take that weight penalty for something they don't need?

A land based variant would be a good option if they have a choice.

FA18 don't have land variant(or do they have? ) Buyers can only take what available.