J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Well, if the decision for the carrier-based operation has been clean-cut since the very beginning, why J-35 progress is so slow or rather started so late?
And the funding for FC-31 is from SAC not PLAN and it's a export project from the get go?
A lots of contradiction facts here.

By the "decision has been clean-cut" phrase, I am referring to the PLAN's decision to induct J-35 as China's carrier-based 5th-gen fighter instead of the J-20 after viewing competing proposals from both Shenyang and Chengdu. Which means, there should exist no more arguments from the so-called "Chinese experts" that somehow the PLAN made the wrong decision and should've gone with the J-20 as China's carrier-based 5th-gen fighter instead.

When was that decision made? I have no solid idea, but most likely sometime in the mid-2010s, if not the late-2010s.

To put it simply:
The FC-31 actually originated from the failed proposal from Shenyang for the PLAAF's 5th-gen fighter competition sometime in the 2000s, of which Shenyang obviously lost to Chengdu (Shenyang's proposal is essentially a stealth-up Flanker, lol). The FC-31 was indeed self-funded by Shenyang as a medium-weight 5th-gen fighter meant to be offered for overseas customers (primary) and the PLAAF (secondary) following that competition. The FC-31 eventually went through several iterations and refinements in design and engineering, before it was selected by the PLAN for carrier use as the J-35.

I don't think there are any contradictions with what pop3 has explained.

 

[Atomicfrog]

Changing the STOBAR carriers to CATOBAR after they were built would be way too expensive to make sense. It would be better just to make a new ship.

The J-35 should have much better thrust-to-weight, have better avionics and sensors, be more stealthy. Being smaller it might be possible to fit more of them on the ship. So it makes sense to replace the J-15 with it. At least part of the J-15s should be replaced.

Operating both jets will create the needs for carrying spares and tooling for both. Don't know about the commonality of toolings but it's sure that spares will need to be put somewhere.

These STOBAR carriers are at least not build to do long deployments like nuclear carriers diminishing the supply list size. Russia was doing it with Mig-29 and Su-33 so it's feasible but I'm not sure about saving place to fit more if you use two and not one type.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

By the "decision has been clean-cut" phrase, I am referring to the PLAN's decision to induct J-35 as China's carrier-based 5th-gen fighter instead of the J-20 after viewing competing proposals from both Shenyang and Chengdu. Which means, there should exist no more arguments from the so-called "Chinese experts" that somehow the PLAN made the wrong decision and should've gone with the J-20 as China's carrier-based 5th-gen fighter instead.

When was that decision made? I have no solid idea, but most likely sometime in the mid-2010s, if not the late-2010s.

To put it simply:
The FC-31 actually originated from the failed proposal from Shenyang for the PLAAF's 5th-gen fighter competition sometime in the 2000s, of which Shenyang obviously lost to Chengdu (Shenyang's proposal is essentially a stealth-up Flanker, lol). The FC-31 was indeed self-funded by Shenyang as a medium-weight 5th-gen fighter meant to be offered for overseas customers (primary) and the PLAAF (secondary) following that competition. The FC-31 eventually went through several iterations and refinements in design and engineering, before it was selected by the PLAN for carrier use as the J-35.

I don't think there are any contradictions with what pop3 has explained.

Addition:

Why is the progress so slow/started so late?

- The PLAN just got its first taste in carrier operations back in late-2012. For perspective, that's barely 11 years ago. There are fvck tons (literally) of things with carrier operations for the PLAN to learn, figure out, remedy and formulate. Of course, this is going to be very time and effort-consuming for a novice newcomer to the game which even a rather backwater country like da supapowah has been playing for decades. FYI, Liaoning only achieved initial combat readiness sometime in the mid-to-late-2010s.

- The above constrains have also compounded on the timing on which the PLAN decided on which proposals by Shenyang and Chengdu to pick as their 5th-gen carrier-based fighter. They had to be crystal-clear on the requirements for their carrier-based 5th-gen fighter before a decision can be finalized on which proposals to pick.

- Unlike the J-15, which pretty much had the Su-33 prototype from Ukraine as a solid reference material (let alone the J-11B series, which is essentially reverse-engineered and upgraded from the Soviet/Russian Su-27 series), the J-35 is essentially a clean-sheet design for Shenyang. There is no F-35C sitting somewhere on the seabed in the WestPac to refer to. Again, more effort and time will have to be consumed to develop and refine the FC-31 into the J-35, as perhaps compared to the J-15.

- And even with Shenyang's proposal being selected by PLAN over Chengdu's, there are still going to be lots of back-and-forth between the PLAN and Shenyang with the J-35's development as both sides worked towards refining the J-35's design and engineering details before a version which fully satisfies the PLAN's needs can be finalized and inducted for service. Coupled with the above two points, long developmental runs and delays (if any) are to be expected.

- The J-35, being not just a 5th-gen fighter, but a carrier-based one, means that the operational requirements are going to be more stringent and demanding than her land-based counterpart. I don't think that any further explanation is necessary on this one.

 

[taxiya]

Well, if the decision for the carrier-based operation has been clean-cut since the very beginning, why J-35 progress is so slow or rather started so late?

We don't know when J-35 was officially established as a program. Its "late" appearance to general public means nothing about the actual time line.

And the funding for FC-31 is from SAC not PLAN and it's a export project from the get go?

There is no real meaning of whether it is SAC or PLAN founding FC-31 because it is actually CMC funding both of them.

A lots of contradiction facts here.

The contradictions and confusions are mostly caused by people assuming things, romours and made-up stories. Once again, it is important to remember that we are talking about China, not US. . In US the government has to openly anounce the establishment of a program with a date. It has to regularly report the progress to congress. Nothing of such is available in China. This lack of open infor encourages story-making which leads to seemingly contradictions.

 

[minime]

According to original material pop3 posted, from 2004 they decided 5th gen(Chinese 4th gen) will be on a CATOBAR carrier.
And initially J-20 is the chosen one. Eventually they choose the SAC proposal after numerous reasons.
How is that a clean-cut decision?

There is no real meaning of whether it is SAC or PLAN founding FC-31 because it is actually CMC funding both of them.

Well, I gotta give kudos to the SAC lobbying ability.

 

[Deino]

...

To put it simply:
The FC-31 actually originated from the failed proposal from Shenyang for the PLAAF's 5th-gen fighter competition sometime in the 2000s, of which Shenyang obviously lost to Chengdu (Shenyang's proposal is essentially a stealth-up Flanker, lol). The FC-31 was indeed self-funded by Shenyang as a medium-weight 5th-gen fighter meant to be offered for overseas customers (primary) and the PLAAF (secondary) following that competition. The FC-31 eventually went through several iterations and refinements in design and engineering, before it was selected by the PLAN for carrier use as the J-35.
...

Sorry to contradict, but that's not correct for the first part and highly speculative - at least IMO it makes no sense anymore - so that I come to a slightly different story!

1. The FC-31 actually DID NOT originate from the failed proposal from Shenyang for the PLAAF's 5th-gen fighter competition sometime in the 2000s, of which Shenyang obviously lost to Chengdu (Shenyang's proposal is essentially a stealth-up Flanker, lol).




No, SAC's contender was IN NO WAY a larger stealthy Flanker derivate, but simply a very large and as it seems complex heavy fighter.

After SAC lost the competition for the PLAAF's heavy fifth generation fighter, it turned back to the drawing board - maybe reused earlier smaller iterations for the haevy fighter proposal - and developed and built the FC-31 (V1) as a clean-sheet design.

2. And now comes my theory: IMO this fighter, allegedly "self-funded by Shenyang as a medium-weight 5th-gen fighter meant to be offered for overseas customers (primary) and the PLAAF (secondary) following that competition" was never a privately only and self-founded fighter but always aimed for the PLAN's fifth generation fighter program. my point is: How likely is it that in China a state-owned company and high-end military complex is allowed to develop a high-end fifth generation fighter on its own funds aimed for export customers which are almost not existent? In fact ZERO! The CMC provides founding for such projects and not an individual company. The JF-17 is a very much different type and had in fact already from day one a partner ... as such I'm almost convinced, this "export fighter proposal" initially called F-60 was most of all a cover-up story to hide the true intentions and maybe only secondary to test, what's the foreign interest in such a type. If I'm not mistaken, it even appeared first on a competition for landing RC-models on deck of a simulated carrier!



As such, the PLAAF was never interested and never the aimed future customer since the PLAAF was solely focusing on its J-20 ... and that explains also quite nicely the slow start for the FC-31/J-3X program: In fact the PLA was not sure if and how successful the J-20 would be. We need to remember the J-11D as a lover-risk alternative in case the J-20 would fail. In the end, development, testing and introduction proceed much more smoothly than expected and it performed better than expected, so that the PLAAF is now focusing totally on the J-20 and the PLAN was able to start its own competition, which in the end was won by this alleged "export fighter proposal" ... what a surprise!

So, that's my theory!

 

[gelgoog]

Actually it is quite common for funds to be given to government institutions for them to use to do R&D at their own discretion.
These are typically small funds. The FC-31 project started out allegedly as a way to gain experience with new design methodologies to make aircraft. And this is entirely plausible. It used off-the-shelf engines and seems to have been done with a shoestring budget.

The practice of making prototype systems, that lose out in competition to gain serial production and use in the PLA, later being offered for export by China is also nothing new. Just look at the Type 15 vs VT-5 tank for example.

Something similar to the Chinese 4th generation fighter program selection has also happened in the US. For example the competition to develop the lightweight fighter for the US. In which what became the F-16 was selected. The F/A-18 being developed for the US Navy based on the losing design in the competition.

 

[taxiya]

Actually it is quite common for funds to be given to government institutions for them to use to do R&D at their own discretion.
These are typically small funds. The FC-31 project started out allegedly as a way to gain experience with new design methodologies to make aircraft. And this is entirely plausible. It used off-the-shelf engines and seems to have been done with a shoestring budget.

The practice of making prototype systems, that lose out in competition to gain serial production and use in the PLA, later being offered for export by China is also nothing new. Just look at the Type 15 vs VT-5 tank for example.

Something similar to the Chinese 4th generation fighter program selection has also happened in the US. For example the competition to develop the lightweight fighter for the US. In which what became the F-16 was selected. The F/A-18 being developed for the US Navy based on the losing design in the competition.

I think what you are saying is in harmony with what @Deino is saying in post #2,806. F-16 and F-18 were state funded when they were X-planes. F-18 failed for USAF, but later picked up by USN. Without the initial USAF funding, there won't be a F-18, same as FC-31. None of these aircrafts started as desires of the companies alone. The difference is that in US a company won't continue spending its own money for no customer, in China the company is not allowed to spend state money for no potential usage. Potential export of such weapon is purely CMC's decision. Even that "own discretion" is at the state's approval, it is akin to an employee asking for a training course that the company must believe is useful for the company.

 

[taxiya]

Well, I gotta give kudos to the SAC lobbying ability.

If you insist on putting things in that angle, then CAC's "lobbying ability" was better in getting PLAAF to select J-20. So at the end, what is lobbying, or they are just honest decisions made by PLA.

 

[Blitzo]

Well, if the decision for the carrier-based operation has been clean-cut since the very beginning, why J-35 progress is so slow or rather started so late?
And the funding for FC-31 is from SAC not PLAN and it's a export project from the get go?
A lots of contradiction facts here.

How is that contradictory?

The timeline for this actually seems quite reasonable to me:
- early/mid 2000s: PLA identifies a need for a future 5th generation carrierborne fighter for its future carriers.
- in the early/mid 2000s, the only 5th generation fighter being actively developed would be the aircraft that would eventually become J-20 by CAC, so during the process of the 2000s, the "generic need" for a 5th generation carrierborne fighter is conceptualized as just a "carrierborne" variant of J-XX/J-20.
- later and eventually, as the "5th generation carrierborne fighter" program/project actually becomes realized in terms of requirements, desirable traits, etc, the options offered by SAC and CAC are considered, and SAC's offering is found to be better suited for the role than what CAC was offering.


Putting it another way, the idea of a "navalized J-20" being the initial basis for a 5th generation carrier based fighter is likely a reflection of immature thinking at the time, lack of definition of requirements, and also the fact that J-20 (or J-XX) was the only credible 5th generation fighter project that China had at the time.
However, as time passed, and FC-31 emerged, and as SAC and CAC both refined their 5th generation options and capabilities, and as the PLAN actually properly refined the requirements and traits they wanted for their 5th gen carrierborne project, then a navalized J-20 became unsuitable.


Heck, we don't even ultimately know what CAC's final candidate for the PLAN 5th generation carrierborne fighter was. For all we know, it was not merely a carrierborne J-20 variant but a significantly reworked design or even a new design altogether that competed against SAC's design that would become J-35/XY.