J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread

[Deino]

That thing clearly has folding wings

And it seems as if the fin-tip is no longer flat on top.

 

[sinophilia]

@huitong has updated his site with a larger and slightly better image of the alleged J-35 (?) mock-up at the Wuhan carrier mock up.

(Image courtesy of MMQR via Huitong's CMA-Blog)

View attachment 74309

Is there any reason to be sure its a mockup and not a static testframe?

 

[Blitzo]

Is there any reason to be sure its a mockup and not a static testframe?

There are no reasons for us to expect this to be a static test frame.

The purpose of static test frames is generally to test loads, weathering etc, in dedicated facilities for it.
This carrier mock up is not for that purpose.
Furthermore, all previous and current aircraft on top of this carrier mockup have also all been mockups.

Remember this carrier mockup is not structurally representative of a carrier, rather it's just a building that looks like a carrier.
Putting a static testframe of a real aircraft (i.e.: which has the representative weight of said real aircraft) on top of a building would be insane.

 

[Blitzo]

@huitong has updated his site with a larger and slightly better image of the alleged J-35 (?) mock-up at the Wuhan carrier mock up.

(Image courtesy of MMQR via Huitong's CMA-Blog)

View attachment 74309

Hard to definitively make out, but it seems like the overall wingspan is somewhat larger than the normal FC-31, though of course it's difficult to tell confidently without knowing if any other parts of the aircraft's proportions as a whole have also changed.

The "fold lines" (assuming they are indeed meant to represent fold lines on this mock up) seem to be right at the span of the horizontal tails, suggesting the "folded wingspan/width" of the aircraft will be the same as the span of the horizontal tails.



I suppose what we need now is a satellite image of this facility lol.

 

[sinophilia]

There are no reasons for us to expect this to be a static test frame.

The purpose of static test frames is generally to test loads, weathering etc, in dedicated facilities for it.
This carrier mock up is not for that purpose.
Furthermore, all previous and current aircraft on top of this carrier mockup have also all been mockups.

Remember this carrier mockup is not structurally representative of a carrier, rather it's just a building that looks like a carrier.
Putting a static testframe of a real aircraft (i.e.: which has the representative weight of said real aircraft) on top of a building would be insane.

Yea that makes sense. Apologies for clearly a very stupid thought.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Hard to definitively make out, but it seems like the overall wingspan is somewhat larger than the normal FC-31, though of course it's difficult to tell confidently without knowing if any other parts of the aircraft's proportions as a whole have also changed.

It's only an impression at this point, but they seem to have changed.
Hard to tell for sure with this quality of photo.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Hard to definitively make out, but it seems like the overall wingspan is somewhat larger than the normal FC-31, though of course it's difficult to tell confidently without knowing if any other parts of the aircraft's proportions as a whole have also changed.

The "fold lines" (assuming they are indeed meant to represent fold lines on this mock up) seem to be right at the span of the horizontal tails, suggesting the "folded wingspan/width" of the aircraft will be the same as the span of the horizontal tails.



I suppose what we need now is a satellite image of this facility lol.

That's to be expected for a carrier variant. Just compare the wingspan of F-35A and F-35C.

 

[Richard Santos]

There is also no reason for the mock up to have hinged rudders on vertical stabilizers.

 

[by78]

@huitong has updated his site with a larger and slightly better image of the alleged J-35 (?) mock-up at the Wuhan carrier mock up.

(Image courtesy of MMQR via Huitong's CMA-Blog)

View attachment 74309

Even bigger, plus a speculation on where the wings are folded.

 

[Richard Santos]

And it seems as if the fin-tip is no longer flat on top.

The right fin tip definitely seems squared off and flat on top. The left fin tip is obscured by the rudders, which are both deflected outboard. The top of the rudders are slanted.

If the simultaneous outward deflection of the rudder is not just dropping under gravity, then it suggest the aircraft has no dedicated air brake, the rudders are deflected to act as air brake.