J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

[Phead128]

Wow you guy sure about this? there was a break of about 7 years where nothing happened, then a while ago the J35 popped up again, and now you guys saying its heading into final testing phase. lol if thats true thats absolutely stealthy development lol, pun intended.

Much of the tech such as sensors and avionics benefit from J-20 development. Plus, the shorten development cycle is because China has a lot better experience and modern processes from J-20 development.

Personally, the most likely a conflict will be on high-seas, so I would pump money into naval J-35 and naval 6th gen fighter for first and second island chain projection, less on land variants.

 

[Blitzo]

Wow you guy sure about this? there was a break of about 7 years where nothing happened, then a while ago the J35 popped up again, and now you guys saying its heading into final testing phase. lol if thats true thats absolutely stealthy development lol, pun intended.

There are two FC-31 tech demonstrators, essentially developed by the institute not intended for PLA service. The first flew in 2012, the second flew in 2016.

The carrier based derivative of FC-31, dubbed J-35/J-XY is intended for PLA service (PLAN), first flew in 2021, externally appearing in a relatively advanced state of completion more similar to the J-20 201X prototypes.

From 2021 to now, we have confirmation of at least two J-35/XY prototypes are flying, but it is very likely to be more.

The first J-20 201X prototype (S/N 2011) first flew in early 2014, and the first J-20 LRIP airframe's were seen in PLA colours and handed to PLA in late 2016.
(Keep in mind the first J-20 tech demonstrator prototype flew in 2011.)


So yes, given it is now late 2023, about two years from when the J-35/XY first flew, it should be in late stages of flight testing, and I would anticipate the initial LRIP airframes to be handed over to PLA in the next year or so, even if we account for various differences between the J-20 program then and the J-35/XY program now.
Ultimately the J-XY/35 prototype that flew in late 2021 should be viewed as an approximate to the J-20 prototype S/N 2011 that flew in year 2014.

Based on all of the above, it's actually pretty straightforward and not that surprising to say J-35/XY should probably be in late stages of testing.

 

[pipaster]

There are two FC-31 tech demonstrators, essentially developed by the institute not intended for PLA service. The first flew in 2012, the second flew in 2016.

The carrier based derivative of FC-31, dubbed J-35/J-XY is intended for PLA service (PLAN), first flew in 2021, externally appearing in a relatively advanced state of completion more similar to the J-20 201X prototypes.

From 2021 to now, we have confirmation of at least two J-35/XY prototypes are flying, but it is very likely to be more.

The first J-20 201X prototype (S/N 2011) first flew in early 2014, and the first J-20 LRIP airframe's were seen in PLA colours and handed to PLA in late 2016.
(Keep in mind the first J-20 tech demonstrator prototype flew in 2011.)


So yes, given it is now late 2023, about two years from when the J-35/XY first flew, it should be in late stages of flight testing, and I would anticipate the initial LRIP airframes to be handed over to PLA in the next year or so, even if we account for various differences between the J-20 program then and the J-35/XY program now.
Ultimately the J-XY/35 prototype that flew in late 2021 should be viewed as an approximate to the J-20 prototype S/N 2011 that flew in year 2014.

Based on all of the above, it's actually pretty straightforward and not that surprising to say J-35/XY should probably be in late stages of testing.

It is interesting how SAC and the PLANAF are dealing with the risk programme management risk compared to CAC and the J-20. Particularly as a lot is contingent on a working CATOBAR to test off of. I assume this is in part at least why this programme is relatively behind.

 

[Blitzo]

It is interesting how SAC and the PLANAF are dealing with the risk programme management risk compared to CAC and the J-20. Particularly as a lot is contingent on a working CATOBAR to test off of. I assume this is in part at least why this programme is relatively behind.

What makes you think it is behind?

 

[TK3600]

I am expecting carrier 003 to start sea trial late this year or early next year. After few month later in sea trial I think we can expect J-35 start testing naval landings. If that is all good we can see it starting serial production mid 2024.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Personally, the most likely a conflict will be on high-seas, so I would pump money into naval J-35 and naval 6th gen fighter for first and second island chain projection, less on land variants.

China won't have a sizeable carrier force until the early-2030s at the earliest. The best estimate available right now is 2x STOBAR CVs and 1-2x CATOBAR CV(N)s in active PLAN service by 2030.

Hence, the J-35s should be mostly sufficient for China's naval aviation power projection capability in the WestPac until the end of this decade. In fact, the US is still procuring F-35Cs for their CVNs, and is on track to do so well into the 2030s, even as the F/A-XX program is well underway right now (parallel to the NGAD).

Also, while the US has to contend with massive distances of the Pacific and being far away from home, China's expected theater of war is right on her doorstep. Plus, considering that the J-20's combat radius is already somewhere around 1500-2000 kilometers by now, China's land-based 6DJ-XX should just keep piling onto that advantage. Having a combat radius capable of reaching the 2IC, whether with (~3000 kilometers) or without (~4000 kilometers) aerial refueling support should make do.

In the meantime, until the PLAN has substantial CSG fleets based around at least 5-6x CVs (with at least 3-4x being CATOBAR), we shouldn't really envision Chinese CVs to venture far beyond the vicinity of the 1IC in a hypothetical Pacific War 2.0. Therefore, until then, the J-35s (alongside the J-15s) would most likely be supporting and complementing the land-based J-20s and 6DJ-XXs in operations across the WestPac theater.

Of course, this doesn't mean that China should slow down or outright stop the development of carrier-based 6DJ-XX. In fact, it would be best for China's carrier-based 6DJ-XX to enter service with the PLAN no later than 5 years after her land-based counterpart with the PLAAF.

 

[THX 1138]

I'm wondering about the J-35's prospects for operating out of a STOBAR carrier.

I'm not sure what determines an aircraft's ability to launch out of a ski jump, but I assume it has mostly to do with its thrust-to-weight ratio. So I've made some rough estimates. A 28-ton J-15 with two 125KN engines can launch from a STOBAR's forward launch position with no headwinds. A 26-ton J-35 will need two 116KN engines just to match the J-15's thrust-to-weight ratio. Unfortunately, the slides from earlier this year indicated that the WS-19 engineering prototype provided only 95 KN.

Was I misguided for hoping the J-35 can even launch out of a ski jump? The J-35 belongs in the same weight and thrust class as a F/A-18E. And I

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

that Boeing tried to sell India on the idea of using F/A-18E for their STOBAR carriers. That's why I was hoping that eventually the J-35 could also operate out of STOBAR carriers.

 

[HighGround]

It is interesting how SAC and the PLANAF are dealing with the risk programme management risk compared to CAC and the J-20. Particularly as a lot is contingent on a working CATOBAR to test off of. I assume this is in part at least why this programme is relatively behind.

Considering the Type 003 carrier is fitting out and is about to enter trials, it actually seems like the J-35 has been timed perfectly. At least that's what it looks like to me.

 

[sunnymaxi]

I'm wondering about the J-35's prospects for operating out of a STOBAR carrier.

I'm not sure what determines an aircraft's ability to launch out of a ski jump, but I assume it has mostly to do with its thrust-to-weight ratio. So I've made some rough estimates. A 28-ton J-15 with two 125KN engines can launch from a STOBAR's forward launch position with no headwinds. A 26-ton J-35 will need two 116KN engines just to match the J-15's thrust-to-weight ratio. Unfortunately, the slides from earlier this year indicated that the WS-19 engineering prototype provided only 95 KN.

Was I misguided for hoping the J-35 can even launch out of a ski jump? The J-35 belongs in the same weight and thrust class as a F/A-18E. And I

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

that Boeing tried to sell India on the idea of using F/A-18E for their STOBAR carriers. That's why I was hoping that eventually the J-35 could also operate out of STOBAR carriers.

WS-19 total thrust will be 10+ tons.. around 100KN

 

[gelgoog]

I don't get how you came to the conclusion that the J-35 will have a much worse empty mass fraction when it uses much more advanced materials and construction than the J-15. The J-35 uses modern composite materials and additive manufactured parts. The thing is the empty mass fraction for J-35 is neither known nor published. Even the MiG-35 has lower weight than your guess for the J-35. The MiG-29K can takeoff the Admiral Kuznetsov so I don't get why you think the J-35, with more advanced airframe and more powerful engines, wouldn't be able to takeoff the Chinese CATOBAR.