J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

Kejora

Junior Member
Registered Member
Actually this is very interesting since navy variant of the J-20 will not only have better range/speed but also a larger internal payload, not to mention better sensors a well. Modifying the J-20 for the navy will arguably be cheaper as well since the J-20 is a proven platform. Yet for some reason the PLANAF went for the FC-31 instead.
Then why US didn't navalise F-22 then?
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Actually this is very interesting since navy variant of the J-20 will not only have better range/speed but also a larger internal payload, not to mention better sensors a well. Modifying the J-20 for the navy will arguably be cheaper as well since the J-20 is a proven platform. Yet for some reason the PLANAF went for the FC-31 instead.

A navalized J-20 will be too large and heavy for Type-003.
 

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
How? From top-down photos the J-20 is almost just as large as a Flanker.
As for weight I believe EMALS catapult solve the weight issue.

Personally I agree with the thought that J-20 is ready, more proven, more capable than J-35/xy because it has to be... it's larger and can accommodate more things, powered by more powerful engines. These should translate to electronic advantages not to mention better range and payload which are certainly important for any fighter. The issue is we don't have all the information from which these decision are based on. It could have been in the "wisdom" of the decision makers that on the grand scheme of things, an inferior fighter from SAC is more suitable for PLANAF simply because SAC should have the work. It could be nothing more than that (but I doubt).

The general conclusion based on this is that the J-35/xy is more suited to the carrier role because the advantage of being able to squeeze more fighters in 00x carrier more than compensates for any would be loss of capability if a J-20 navy variant was developed. All of this stuff should have been carefully calculated and likely conflict scenarios and SWOT assessment being considered. As a more regional defensive role, a smaller fighter may have been considered acceptable so that an extra one or two fighters could fit on the 003 and who knows what the plan is for 004 and onwards. They would have thought J-xy and Type 004 when making the decisions.

As for J-20 being flanker sized, well it's still larger than the J-35/xy and while the wingspan is similar, it's much longer and surely heavier.
 

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Actually from what I remember they did try to do so before the Raptor got cancelled due to budget reasons.
F-22 was the result of the US air force’s advanced tactical fighter (ATF) program to replace the F-15. The defence department envisioned the winner of ATF to also be developed into a navalized version to,replace the F-14. ATF program resulted in two competing flying prototypes, the Lockheed YF-22, and Northrop YF-23. Both companies sketched a navalized version of their prototypes.

the kicker is the navalized version of both prototypes were so radically different from their land based originals they were effectively a totally new airplane from structural and aerodynamic point of view. The naval version of YF-22 would have had variable sweep back wings like the F-14. The naval version of YF-23 was even more radically altered. Northrop got rid of land based YF-23’S characteristic V tail, moved the main wing back to the rear od the aircraft, and added canards In a comfiguration not very unlike the J-20.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Lol it's gone full circle.

I'm trying to get my head around why GT is picking up on this. Perhaps this photo was intentionally leaked and GT is told to amplify the message. Questions is why and who is it intended for.

It isn't intended for anyone. GT just publishes whatever is making the circles, same with SCMP. Since the cement carrier is smack dab in the middle of Wuhan it is only a matter of time before someone notices.
 

anzha

Captain
Registered Member
The naval version of YF-23 was even more radically altered. Northrop got rid of land based YF-23’S characteristic V tail, moved the main wing back to the rear od the aircraft, and added canards In a comfiguration not very unlike the J-20.

I am an absolute fan of the YF-23. I think it's a gorgeous plane and really wish it'd won the ATF competition. However, the NATF version was nowhere near as good looking as the J-20, IMO.



NATF-23%20diagram.gif


I find the NATF YF-23 derivative to be, frankly, ugly. I'd have preferred a YF-22 derived NATF, but TBH, the stealth coatings of that generation were not great for maintainability and the salt water corrosion would have been a constant problem.

Steering back on topic, if GT picked up the FC-31 on the concrete carrier story, as other posters have noted, then I suspect we are seeing some build up to something. Perhaps there is a chance the aircraft will be finally be seen on the ground? China has been rather interesting to watch from no other POV than how different they are in their 'signalling' to let the world what they are up to. It's on their terms and rarely a massive "SURPRISE!!!" move. There is often build up to a reveal, hints or some such. I find it ...artful. It's a great way of keeping secrecy, but also making sure other powers are not soooo alarmed there is a massive backlash.
 
Top