Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Status
Not open for further replies.
Engineer

Engineer

Major
FA1CW.png
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
plawolf said:
The J20 as it is is not suitable as a carrier fighter. Even if you do bother to make the necessary structural reinforcements and add in a completely new landing gear design, some of it's basic design choices would make it a les than ideal carrier fighter. It is too long and large for one, and the main landing gears are too far forward. Those are the sort of things that are hard if not impossible to change without it being easier to just start fresh.
Click to expand...
In terms of size J-20 is actually shorter and more narrow than Su-33/J-15. But I agree that modifying J-20 into a carrier based aircraft would not be worth it.

plawolf said:
If there is a war with the US, the PLAN's carriers would is all likelihood not feature. Just too many eggs in one basket and they would tie down too much of the PLAN's assets to protect even if that was possible.
Click to expand...
The opposite is true. If there is a war with the US, every asset should be utilized. Carriers out at the sea will be much more difficult targets than carriers sitting in a naval base when poop hits the fan. The battle groups themselves can employ the same tactics that certain American forum members claimed can be effective against China's maritime strike assets -- EMCON, EW, operating in busy shipping lanes, etc. Also, keep in mind that China's carrier battle groups will not be operating by themselves, but with the support of land-based AWACS, fighters, tankers, missiles and OTH radars, thus offsetting deficiencies from the battle groups themselves. In short, the carrier battle groups will be able to tie up a lot of US assets, preventing US from gaining superiority without deploying even more assets, thus raising the cost of the conflict for the US.


plawolf said:
I would see the carrier fighters operating from land bases while the escorts are retasked with protecting mainland installations from cruise missiles and air strikes and proving escorts for any invasion force headed for Taiwan.
Click to expand...
They should be out at sea fighting for air dominance, without which the US cannot help Taiwan. Mainland installations can be protected by fighters on alert, and variety of anti-air defenses.

plawolf said:
Hell, AShW is probably one of the worse ways you can use the J20, right up there with CAS. A carrier battlegroup is probably one of the best suited forces to counter stealth fighters and bombers. You have a dearth of very powerful AESA radars, both ship borne and air borne, all netoworked via high bandwidth datalinks and backed up with serious processing capacity to analysis all the sensor data with the different escorts being spaced out. You would be hard pressed to come up with a better set up to counter stealth.

Remember that stealth is as much about re-directing incoming radar energy as it is about absorption. What might work against a single radar could be a disaster against a group of them, whereby your stealth shaping ends up redirecting the radar energy from on enemy ship right smack bang into the array of another.
Click to expand...
I don't think that works as stealth shaping tends to redirect radar energy perpendicular to the incoming direction, assuming the strike package is heading directly toward a carrier battle group. I also disagree with your opinion that a battle group is suited to counter stealth fighters. First, those radars within a battle group use bands specifically targeted by stealth technologies. In addition, unlike the situation faced by China and Russian, US has have no concern about defending against stealth technologies, meaning anti-stealth measures within the battle group remained a low priority until recently.

That being said, I don't think J-20 would be used for maritime strike. What I am trying to get across is that stealth fighter-bombers such as JH-7B or B2-class bombers used for maritime strike purposes will be effective countermeasure for US carrier battle groups.
 
Last edited:
N

no_name

Colonel
One more pic near the tail.

2eg5s3b.jpg


---------- Post added at 04:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:24 PM ----------
Engineer said:
I

The opposite is true. If there is a war with the US, every asset should be utilized. Carriers out at the sea will be much more difficult targets than carriers sitting in a naval base when poop hits the fan. The battle groups themselves can employ the same tactics that certain American forum members claimed can be effective against China's maritime strike assets -- EMCON, EW, operating in busy shipping lanes, etc. Also, keep in mind that China's carrier battle groups will not be operating by themselves, but with the support of land-based AWACS, fighters, tankers, missiles and OTH radars, thus offsetting deficiencies from the battle groups themselves. In short, the carrier battle groups will be able to tie up a lot of US assets, preventing US from gaining superiority without deploying even more assets, thus raising the cost of the conflict for the US.
Click to expand...

The Varyag can be used as a bait in the sense that she will reduce unknowns in the conflict for China. Though not nearly as powerful as nuclear supercarriers USN operating in the area will not be comfortable venturing further until she is eliminated. This means China would know the target of US attacks, giving her an advantage. China can even use a decoy and intentionally leak some EM intel for setting up a kill zone.
 
P

paintgun

Senior Member
not that large, the recess immediate to the tail sting/cone are where the engines will be placed

and there seems to be a healthy dose of wingspan!
for its size
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
no_name said:
One more pic near the tail.

2eg5s3b.jpg


---------- Post added at 04:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:24 PM ----------



The Varyag can be used as a bait in the sense that she will reduce unknowns in the conflict for China. Though not nearly as powerful as nuclear supercarriers USN operating in the area will not be comfortable venturing further until she is eliminated. This means China would know the target of US attacks, giving her an advantage. China can even use a decoy and intentionally leak some EM intel for setting up a kill zone.
Click to expand...

Like I said guys, the Varyag is the love boat until she gets her airwing, and if the Captain and crew of the Varyag are as knowledgable as I suspect, they won't be looking to pick a fight with the USN. Really, I don't mind bragging and a little or a lot of National Pride, but honestly China and the US have a long history of cooperation and friendship, both of our countries need the other strong and I personally believe that we both need to strengthen our own citizens. Like I said, I don't mind braggin, brag your little heads off, but some of this hypothetical war gaming doesn't build trust, but whatever turns your crank. I do think this bird is on the right track to be a viable Air Asset and love all the specualtion, but lets try to build international relations and trust between our two nations. Let me say " I am not for a New World Order kind of UN nonsence, and I am not interested in subjugating anyone, just that Biblical idea of doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. While that may sound weak or archaic, let me assure you that it is more important than ever now that we have a community on the Web, and getting to know you guys is a real pleasure, like I said brag all you want, but the US is not the big bad wolf, [no offense wolfie], and we do promote "fair play, and the rule of law"!

Like I said, beautifull bird and it seems to be on the right track, I am looking forward to further developements and updates!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top