J-XY - maybe J-35 - next generation carrier-borne fighter

[Figaro]

IMO the long expected J-35

So it is confirmed the carrier fighter that is going to be a new version of the FC-31 (J-35)?

I don't think that you can generalise that "611 has a better reputation than 601" at all, especially given the success of SAC's Flanker family. Also I'm sure that besides pure military considerations, also industrial things must be considered since it would make CAC/611 the sole provider for fighters for decades and as such I would rate it an important aspect to keep two competitors alive and third, for a carrier-borne fighter I don't thin that SAC has a lower reputation than CAC.

Hmm but the F-35 is also the carrier borne 5th generation fighter. Why can CAC not do the same if that's what the US did?

 

[serenity]

About the J-35. Basically the navy's version of FC-31 or J-31. It is talked like a new fighter because J-31/FC-31 are prototypes and before PLA financed it. Now this is referring to final PLA fighter for aircraft carriers. So it is what has been called J-35 for more than one year. It is developed from those J-31 prototypes.

This is not mysterious or any surprise. Known for many years navy will choose the fighter developed from J-31 and built by SAC. It is just now they announce it should be in flying test around next year.

 

[vi-va]

About the J-35. Basically the navy's version of FC-31 or J-31. It is talked like a new fighter because J-31/FC-31 are prototypes and before PLA financed it. Now this is referring to final PLA fighter for aircraft carriers. So it is what has been called J-35 for more than one year. It is developed from those J-31 prototypes.

This is not mysterious or any surprise. Known for many years navy will choose the fighter developed from J-31 and built by SAC. It is just now they announce it should be in flying test around next year.

AWACS detect 4th generation jet(with weapon) in 300-400 km. AWACS detect jet in 70-150 km, depends on angle of the jet.

Unlike land base radar network, naval radar network is very limited. In stealthy era, AWACS detection range is not enough at all. Carrier air defense heavily depends on jet patrolling, much more than 4th generation era. This is huge difference.

What is even worse, you need 2 jets patrolling in every directions, so that 2 jet's electro-optical system manage a mini network for angle/distance measurement.

In 4th generation era, AWACS is deployed forward. So that threat can be mitigated. In 5th generation era, it's not.

In 4th generation era, one jet can cover 1-2 directions. In 5th generation era, you need 500 km air defense, 2 jets can cover 1 direction only.

In 2000s, AAM is about 50-75km. Now it's 160 km. Future it will be longer and longer.

The stress of carrier air defense is much heavier than before. You need at least 2-3 times jets for CAP only, and CAP is 24*7.

Once you get into the details of real operation, you will know what China carrier need.

I knew what's needed for carrier many many years ago. J-20 won't fit.

 

[ILC]

Does WS13/13E is ready for J-35? how is it different from Russian RD? Because I think WS-19 is many years from being ready.

 

[LKJ86]

Via 舰船知识

 

[Ali_Baba]

It would be interesting to see if China does modify the J-35 to have folding wings.

 

[vi-va]

It would be interesting to see if China does modify the J-35 to have folding wings.

That's for sure. J-20 is not ideal for aircraft carrier, a little too big.

 

[sheik]

I knew what's needed for carrier many many years ago. J-20 won't fit.

"In 5th generation era, you need 500 km air defense."

If that's the case, isn't range more important for the new carrier-borne fighter?
That means we need a heavy fighter that has a range similar to J-15.

 

[sheik]

First of all I don't know how reliable this rumour is, however at ...... (where I found this one) is currently a heated debate going on:

https://www.weibo.com/1240246333/FDnc4zkUX





What do you think?

Deino

Now checking again 2.5 years later it seemed that guy WAS right...

 

[Paul2]

"In 5th generation era, you need 500 km air defense."

If that's the case, isn't range more important for the new carrier-borne fighter?
That means we need a heavy fighter that has a range similar to J-15.

Indeed it is, the longer range, heavier carrier-borne multi-role planes are needed to keep the carrier out of harms way, but we don't have a carrier for them, nor have one in plans.

The biggest one in plans is just a stretched version of Kiev, possibly with some catapult.

But here comes a question, what do you want to do with your carriers? Small carriers with small fighter/bombers are best when you work against suppressed air defence, and you don't need to worry about some super duper missile coming your way.

Bigger carriers, with bigger, longer range, and more heavily armed planes should be able to safely work against the enemy with more potent air, and coastal defence.

China has no adversary nearby with any of that. Even Japan's, and SKs long range air defence is a joke, and they have no coastal defence as such.

 

[Grandy]

China’s J-20 carrier-based jet fighter influenced by US – not Soviet – thinking, designer says

• As the race to find the best platform for a modified fighter hots up, designer wins critics’ support by selling the American angle
• PLA Navy ‘should choose a reliable platform that has a long combat range and potential for development … and the best choice is the J-20,’ expert says

Minnie Chan
Published: 10:00pm, 2 Aug, 2020

The chief designer of the J-20 said the plane was a better match for US fighters.


The chief designer of the J-20 said the plane was a better match for US fighters. Photo: Xinhua

As tensions between Beijing and Washington continue to rise, China’s military aircraft designers are racing to develop a next-generation fighter jet for use on the nation’s aircraft carriers capable of competing with their American rivals.

The two contenders are Chengdu Aircraft Design Institute (CADI), which is working on a modified version of its J-20, and Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute, which is adapting its FC-31.

While both aircraft have been in development for many years, CADI’s chief designer, Yang Wei, said recently the J-20 was a better match for US fighters.

The aircraft was inspired by American theories on air combat and jet development, he said in a recent article published in the Chinese journal Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica.

Military observers said that by openly stating he had learned from American ideas, Yang was trying to promote the modified J-20 as a superior option to the adapted FC-31, which is based on much older, Soviet, designs.

The designer also said in the article that the US military had been able to develop a carrier-based jet fighter and put it into mass production in less than six years.

“If the [Chinese] leadership decides to use the FC-31 as the platform for the new carrier-based fighter, it would be at least 10 years before it was ready for full deployment, by which time the Americans would be even further ahead,” said a person with links to the military, who asked not to be named.

Yang said in the article, which was widely shared on military news websites, it was essential that the next-generation fighter had a long combat range, enhanced stealth capabilities and a bigger weapon load.

Beijing-based military expert Zhou Chenming said Yang wanted to prove the J-20 was not only a fifth-generation fighter, but could be a platform for “advanced induction reaction devices and other new technologies” capable of targeting the shortcomings of its American rival, the F-22 Raptor.

Fifth-generation fighters feature stealth technology, supersonic cruising speeds, super manoeuvrability and highly integrated avionics.

Zhou said that in the past, China’s aircraft designers had been heavily influenced by Russian thinking and because of that focused almost exclusively on the fighting capabilities of their jets. But Yang, he said, stressed the need to consider other factors as well.

“Because of the Russian influence, Chinese designers ignored things like avionics systems and weapons,” Zhou said. “Russia’s MiG-29, for instance, had no chance of competing with its American counterpart, the all-weather multirole F-16.”


China’s FC-31 is up to 12 tonnes lighter than the J-20. Photo: Weibo

One possible disadvantage of the J-20 as a carrier-based fighter is that it is much heavier than the FC-31. China’s newest aircraft carriers will be fitted with an electromagnetic catapult launch system, which although reducing take-off times comes with a weight restriction.

With a maximum weight of 25 tonnes, the FC-31 is up to 12 tonnes lighter than the J-20 and about three metres (10 feet) shorter.

The FC-31 was developed to match the United States’ F-35, which was built by Lockheed Martin and the platform for the carrier-based F-35B and F-35C.

Despite that comparison, Macau-based military expert Antony Wong Tong said the FC-31 was no match for the F-35 in terms of manoeuvrability or firepower.

“Based on China’s current technology and production capacity, the PLA Navy should choose a reliable platform that has a long combat range and potential for development. And the best choice for that is the J-20,” he said.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: J-20 carrier-based fighter ‘influenced by US ideas’

 

[Deino]

Oh PLEASE NOT Minnie Chan again!!!

 

[vi-va]

"In 5th generation era, you need 500 km air defense."

If that's the case, isn't range more important for the new carrier-borne fighter?
That means we need a heavy fighter that has a range similar to J-15.

It means you need more jets patrolling.

In the 4th generation era. E-2 Hawkeye AEW can provide the early warning. Now E-2 itself is a target which can be shot down from a far distance.

In the 4th generation era, E-2 is deployed forward, because it can find threat from at least 400-500 km away. There is enough time for F/A-18 to safe guard the defense front line.

In the 5th generation era, E-2 is deployed backward, unless E-2 upgraded to Anti-Stealth radar, such as metric-wave radar. The threat can be found by infrared sensor instead, but in a much shorter distance.

All in all, threat is much more lethal, defense is much harder nowadays.

 

[Paul2]

In the 4th generation era, E-2 is deployed forward, because it can find threat from at least 400-500 km away. There is enough time for F/A-18 to safe guard the defense front line.

In the 5th generation era, E-2 is deployed backward, unless E-2 upgraded to Anti-Stealth radar, such as metric-wave radar. The threat can be found by infrared sensor instead, but in a much shorter distance.

All in all, threat is much more lethal, defense is much harder nowadays.

Even this way, a stealth attacker flying low, and slow will likely be able to approach undetected to the striking distance.

Even "mild stealth" with average 29db signature reduction gets very close to 150km-100km range of modern long range BWR missiles.

A proper >31db stealth will certainly do that, and the next gen >34db materials will likely close the range to that of WWII era dogfighting.

A lot of the coming "5G" drones are purposefully subsonic.

 

[vi-va]

Even this way, a stealth attacker flying low, and slow will likely be able to approach undetected to the striking distance.

Even "mild stealth" with average 29db signature reduction gets very close to 150km-100km range of modern long range BWR missiles.

A proper >31db stealth will certainly do that, and the next gen >34db materials will likely close the range to that of WWII era dogfighting.

A lot of the coming "5G" drones are purposefully subsonic.

dog fighting is not possible any more. Infrared sensor is good enough to make sure no fight within 50km-70km.

flying low will not be helpful. AEW will see you even further if your back exposed. The best height for stealthy jets is around 20,000 feet, the temperature, cloud, air density, humidity helps.