J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

[by78]

A high-resolution version.

 

[Deino]

A high-resolution version.

Again this looks like an older image released only now but here the catapult bar is attached.

Is this the prelude to the public presentation in Zhuhai?

 

[Deino]

@huitong ... I think there is a typo in your "update-site!



Both recent images show 350003 aka 3503 and not 3505!

 

[Alfa_Particle]

Just an interesting tidbit.

Ayi saying the J-35 is a step above the J-20 in terms of stealth.

 

[jnd85]

Can we stop doing this?

I don't think saying this is "pretty much confirmed" is useful unless someone is actually able to hang their credibility on the line with consequence.

(Heck, I even think it is possible that J-35 may show up at Zhuhai, but there is nothing in the written text that actually presents new information which makes us think it is "pretty much confirmed")


====

I'm seeing people some people youtube and twitter now writing the idea that J-35 had flown from Liaoning, which is just the result of people playing telephone due to unconfirmed rumours and vague statements being stated overconfidently on places like SDF, permeating to twitter, and then exaggerating that to conclusions which are outright false or unconfirmed.


Given SDF is a place where some people are also on other sites/youtube/twitter, and we probably have a population of lurkers that post elsewhere, IMO it is very important that members here who have active social media or on other platforms, as well as senior posting members here, exert some restraint and ensure that claims are written with minimum exaggeration and maximal evidence base, and for all of us to be selective about what we actually post to other social media platforms.

If something is unconfirmed or if something seems a bit too tantalizing, IMO stop and just don't post it -- there is no benefit to be the "first" if the risk is that you make a mistake in the general public space and then it brings disrepute to PLA watching credibility. And even if it is asking questions widely to the general public on somewhere like twitter, asking questions too publicly and openly also damages PLA watching credibility if it is done so to a space where others do not know how to interpret it.
Sometimes things are better left in this forum and explicitly NOT posted elsewhere until we have a grasp or a degree of sufficient confidence about something.

@Deino, @5unrise

Misuse of the phrase "this confirms" has been a pet peeve of mine for a long time. It is a problem not just in forums, but everywhere including major media outlets. Irresponsible and cavelier statements like that create echo-chambers and false narratives.

 

[Cloud_Nine_]

I guess it's not exactly surprising, considering the J-35 is "cleaner" with fewer visible bumps.

 

[sequ]

Just an interesting tidbit.

Ayi saying the J-35 is a step above the J-20 in terms of stealth.
View attachment 136964

You see, canards do compromise stealth!1!1!

 

[gelgoog]

It is smaller and does not have canards. But the biggest deal will be replacing the J-15. Which was now obsolete 1990s level technology.

 

[Totoro]

Its also 10 years newer. It would be strange if radar absorbing materials have not progressed in said timeframe.
Sure, some newer j20 subvariant may also be designed to use those but comparisons usually tend to pit oldest models of something vs newest ones, to accentuate the difference.

 

[phrozenflame]

It does have a wide fuselage for its size, and that's because it has a proper sized ventral IWB. The lack of side bays doesn't make it "kind of small".
5th generation fighters with IWBs will inevitably be larger than their 4th generation predecessors of an equal payload category, and have an appearance that looks "large" similar to heavier weight 4th generation aircraft.

I understand that.

I was referring to the picture comparing the IWB of J-20 and J-35. If it's same size as J-20 with no side bays, then thats 2 less A2A missiles it can carry in stealth mode.