I'm sorry but this post is so ill informed that it's wasted like 3-4 pages of discussion.
No, it would not make sense to operate J-35 from Sichuan, for the same reason it doesn't make sense for F-35Bs to operate from American LHAs.
The lack of a high performance VSTOL combat aircraft is a wise decision by the PLA, and the existence of the F-35B (and the overall entire VSTOL endeavor by the USMC) is arguably a deadweight and compromise for the overall JSF program.
At this stage there is no reason to think 076 should operate anything other than UCAVs/UAVs as part of its regular/routine fixed wing complement.
Dreams/hopes of 076 operating manned tactical fighters (whether it's J-35, or some hypothetical "future high performance VSTOL aircraft") is making the mistake of viewing US LHA+F-35Bs as if they are a desirable capability for the PLA to emulate.
No it is not.
The short range, limited payload of F-35Bs means that US LHAs operating them in a high intensity conflict would be unable to operate at useful distances in a high intensity westpac conflict.
If you are bullying a nation without much of an air force or in an area where the enemy has no long range anti-ship/surface capabilities, or where the rest of the joint force is able to suppress the enemy to allow your LHAs to get in relatively close during war time, then sure F-35Bs will be able to outfight the enemy.
But such a capability for the US in a high intensity conflict against China is arguably a waste of finite developmental/industry resources -- and for China in a high intensity conflict against the US, such an equivalent type of platform is also a waste of resources not to mention a waste of an 076's deck space.
More relevant than "overwhelming numerical disparity" is the "relevant numerical disparity in context of geostrategic parameters".
If your VSTOL 5th generation fighter from a LHA lacks the range to operate with useful endurance and payload when operating at distances outside of an opfor's expected anti-surface and ISR capability, then what use does your LHA have?
If your 076 is operating J-35s as part of its airwing but it can barely generate a fraction of the sortie rate of a proper carrier, then why even bother giving it J-35s and why not use its fixed wing airwing to operate a type of aircraft where sortie rate is less demanding and less important -- something like UCAVs/UAVs, where they are still able to be useful despite lower sortie rates due to having greater endurance than manned aircraft while still possessing useful range?
My advice to you is to work with the underlying statement: "076 from the beginning was said to accommodate UCAVs/UAVs as its primary fixed wing complement" -- and then work your way backwards to try to reverse engineer out the idea for why manned tactical aircraft like J-35 are not part if its primary fixed wing complement.
If you accept that "J-35/notional VSTOL fighter on 076 as part of primary airwing complement" is a terrible idea to start with, then you will gradually come up with reasons for why it actually genuinely doesn't make sense.
You have your opinion and i have mine, and i think it should be wise not to believe ones opinion is inherently superior hence all others are to be disparaged. Pro and co argumentation is of course welcomed and in fact necessary on a defence forum, because that's what's discussed on such places mostly, military strategy.
Having said that, my opinion might be" ill-informed", but probably better to aim such characterization first at the services and navies that are or will operate F-35Bs from various ships, many smaller than the 076 or even 075s. Despite it's inherent limitations in payload and range, VTOL fighters are obviously seen as necessary to be had rather than not by who has the tech and who can afford it, giving a great tactical boost to ships that otherwise could only carry helos (except the brits, they were obviously drunk when they designed the QEs). The AESA radars and A-A/A-G missiles on a VTOL are just as advanced as land-based counterparts hence practically as lethal, while bringing their capabilities to the operational area that otherwise would not be possible by just helo-equipped LHAs or are too many for conventional CVs to cover. Not to mention of course the air defence capability provided.
Now, what J-35 would offer on Sichuan in comparison is an inherently superior platform compared to F-35B because it does not compromise for the VTOL requirement, so more range, more payload, more performance. This would also be another way for PLAN to having a superior fighter platform compared to the opponent flying from the respective LHAs.
Anyway, i think what PLAN will do with Sichuan in the next few years will clearly show what they chose, so it will be wise to wait until then before passing judgement on the undesirability of J-35 or even notional VTOL fighter on PLAN's LHAs (actually, come to think of it, i think PLAN needs both, but i'll address that in the 075 topic at some point).
