J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

phrozenflame

Junior Member
Registered Member
We've never really seen an image of the 35 from the top before, could very well be this wide.
Just a thought: with no side bays, the main bay could be wider to make up for it? Additionally, bit more space for more range given the battlefield. Dont really see the downside to it being wider. Also more payload in beast-mode. I think China's past the point where Engines hold things back.
 
Last edited:

THX 1138

New Member
Registered Member
The J-35 is smaller than the J-20. Maybe some of the avionics located elsewhere on the J-20 had to be relocated to the areas of the J-35 where the side weapons bay were supposed to be.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Just a thought: with no side bays, the main bay could be wider to make up for it? Additionally, bit more space for more range given the battlefield. Dont really see the downside to it being wider. Also more payload in beast-mode. I think China's past the point where Engines hold things back.

Why?
The J-35 having a ventral weapons bay that is equal in dimensions to J-20's ventral weapons bay is already quite an impressive achievement for an aircraft which is overall smaller and lighter than J-20.

There should be no expectations that it should need side weapons bays or that lacking side weapons bays is some sort of deficiency.
 

henrik

Senior Member
Registered Member
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.

At some point they will probably mass produce the stealthier J-35 over the J-20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pkj

stannislas

Junior Member
Registered Member
Why?
The J-35 having a ventral weapons bay that is equal in dimensions to J-20's ventral weapons bay is already quite an impressive achievement for an aircraft which is overall smaller and lighter than J-20.

There should be no expectations that it should need side weapons bays or that lacking side weapons bays is some sort of deficiency.
uhmm, I will question if J-35 actually has the main weapons bay in the same dimensions to J-20's
I know a lot of noises from China says that J-35 has the same weapon bay as to J-20, but back in the day, someone did post this
FC-31 vs other weapon bays.png
from left to right are: J-20/F-22/F-35/FC-31(V2?V3?),
Yes, this is a rough estimation based on the weapons bay cover, but it should give an idea that J-35 may have a slightly small weapon bay in compare with J-20.
 

MasterChief291

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Can you stop using this forum as your personal ask jeeves?

As it has been written on CDF to you as well, maybe try to do some of your own research, and maybe read the thread, to see if an answer is available before posting a question.
What’s CDF?
 

votran

New Member
Registered Member
Why?
The J-35 having a ventral weapons bay that is equal in dimensions to J-20's ventral weapons bay is already quite an impressive achievement for an aircraft which is overall smaller and lighter than J-20.

There should be no expectations that it should need side weapons bays or that lacking side weapons bays is some sort of deficiency.
some people still think real aircombat are similar as DCS AI control aircombat wargame : where modern fighter keep heading toward each other after launching their active radar one to the point both side can lock and fire IR missile toward each other

bonus : AI control aircraft in DCS alway choose acrobatic dodge maneuver first when they detect enemy BVR missile head toward them (hope enemy missile miss so they can fire missile back right away ) instead of ....360 degree after burner back and GTFO in opposite direction , then wait for another+better chance

personally i think stealth fighter jet only need side weapon bay for short range IR missile if real life pilot do extractly the same as DCS AI pilot
 
Top