PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
- Status
USN have some better engines as China could use, sorry, but ...
Intrepid
Major
The aft pilot house has a small corner with windows you can look into the sky. I think, that is a kind of Pri-Fly.
Last edited:
But what? Has any of J-15 crashed yet? Does J-15 has any of the inferior thrust than F-18E? The only thing that stop J-10 from being a carrier borne fighter will be its short legged. If CAC could come out a twin engine conventional J-10. It can be a candidate.
I believe a single engine J-10 could be an effective candidate as a PLAN Naval aircraft for the carrier if it were navalized and its landing gear strengthened. In flight refueling could solve most of the range problems, particularly if they perfect buddy stores.
The J-10 would make an excellent complimentary aircraft to the J-15 aboard Chinese carriers. Effective, maneuverable, good ground attack/support capabilities, very good air to air capabilities and cheap. Until a large number of something like the J-31 is available (if they go into production)...and that is many years away...the J-10 would very effectively fill the gap if the PLAN desired.
I doubt if the J-10 airframe is suitable for a sea faring life. The pounding of arrested landings takes a toll on the best airframes engineered for sea duty. It takes a very sturdy and specially engineered airfame so an aircraft will have "Sea Legs".
Observe..
[video=youtube;xJG4R3bJNEM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJG4R3bJNEM[/video]
Last edited:
i don't think those of us who haven't served in the carrier force or seriuosly followed carrier aviation can really appreciate the amount of pounding a naval aircraft takes or the amount of maintenance work required to protect the air frame from sea water, wind and whatever else the nature might throw out in the ocean. Always interesting to learn this stuff.
From a design and engineering perspective, they could navalize the J-10 design.
It would require that they do a number of things and would not be the type of thing where they would retrofit older planes. They would have to be new builds.
They would have to do the engineering to allow for, and then build into the aircraft the following:
1) A strengthened undercarriage and landing gear that could take the pounding.
2) An arrestor hook and the underlying structure to handle the traps.
3) An exterior coating that was resistant to and protected the aircraft and its innards from the salt water environemnt.
4) Appropriate changes if necessary for refueling.
5) Adding, if necessary folding wings to minimize space.
If the J-10 met their functional requirements in terms of payload, function, etc., and was projected to do so for a couple of decades into the future, thenn it would be cheaper to do these things than to design and build another aircraft from the ground up. The question is simply whether this is something the PLAN feels would meet its requirements and needs.
If not, then there is no sense considering it. If so, then they will (if they haven't already) take a hard look at it.
Not every country ahs the luxury that the US does to have purpose built aircraft purely for naval air operations. Even the Chinese J-15 is a derivitive of their J-11s.
The US Navy E2-C/Ds, the US Navy A/F-18C/D/E/Fs, the US Navy EA-6B Prowlers and E/A-18G Growlers are all current aircraft that are purpose built for the US Navy for carriers (and used by the Marines there too). In the past, aircraft like the A-4, the F-8, the A-6, the F-14 etc were too. The A-7 is an aircraft that was designed by the Navy and then adopted by the Air Force.
But, in other navies, where they operate their own aircraft, like the French now, you have the Rafael serving both needs but a variant, the Rafael M for the Navy which is not just an upgrade. It is a seperate build. Like the PLAN, the Russians used a variant of their SU-27 and made it the SU-33. The new Mig-29s are a navalized version of their air force Migs.
Not many people operate their own aircraft off of carriers. MOst buy them from others. The UK will operate the JSF, which was built to serve the needs of all three branches and are different variants of the same aircraft.
Will the PLAN develop and ever use a navalized J-10? I do not know. I know they could if they wanted...but it would not be a simple matter of upgrading existing aircraft. They would be new builds like the J-15s are, like the SU-33s were, like the Rafael Ms are, like the Mig0-29Ks are, etc.
Last edited:
I remember the first time I heard an F-4 land aboard the JFK. I was ditty bopping down the hangar deck and I heard this loud bang! and something like a wire whipping around. That startled me. That was a typical Phantom landing..loud. So loud you can hear it hit the deck in the hangar. When the boltered you could hear them power up and roar away.
- Status