China wants catapult launch carriers

Discuss air warfare, doctrine, air forces, historic campaigns, etc.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 804
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post23 Jun 2022, 00:12

tphuang wrote:This is actually a rather interesting outcome due to GWOT. USN had to order so many super hornets, that each carrier wing (once they get F-35C) probably will have twice as many super hornets as F-35C for the next 20 years. On the other hand, PLAN carrier wing probably will have 2 to 3x as many J-35s as J-15 variants in the same period. I'd be very surprised if J-35 isn't flying off CV-18 by 2025. It's just not as technically challenging project as F-35 series or J-20 series.


How will this be technically easier? The plane was already energy challenged the last time we seen it.
Do you think the challenges will get easier as the plane gets heavier? What about problems with corrosion?
What about the reliability of the RD-33?
I forsee alot of problems.
Offline

tphuang

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 204
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post23 Jun 2022, 03:16

jessmo112 wrote:
tphuang wrote:This is actually a rather interesting outcome due to GWOT. USN had to order so many super hornets, that each carrier wing (once they get F-35C) probably will have twice as many super hornets as F-35C for the next 20 years. On the other hand, PLAN carrier wing probably will have 2 to 3x as many J-35s as J-15 variants in the same period. I'd be very surprised if J-35 isn't flying off CV-18 by 2025. It's just not as technically challenging project as F-35 series or J-20 series.


How will this be technically easier? The plane was already energy challenged the last time we seen it.
Do you think the challenges will get easier as the plane gets heavier? What about problems with corrosion?
What about the reliability of the RD-33?
I forsee alot of problems.


I mean it's a less complicated aircraft than F-35 from just not having a B variant. They've also been flying various demonstrator versions since 2012, so it's gone through a lot of testing/changes by this point. The version that flew in 2021 is unlikely to see any major changes. Keep in mind that J-20 had a similar "first flight" in 2014, was sent to FTTB for test & evaluation in 2016 and then achieved operational status in 2018.

It's using the indigenous WS-21 engine, which was based on RD-33 series. The thrust from 2 WS-21s is probably around what you get with 1 F-135. That's good enough for the initial production version. They are also developing WS-19 right now, which is broadly aiming to have similar thrust performance to F414-EPE
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 804
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post23 Jun 2022, 03:53

1. The thrust is only comparable in reheat.

2. The problem is not just the thrust but the reliability issues.

3. The versions we have seen will not even look close to the full on carrier version. For instance, the F-35 and the J-31 have the same plan-form and will likely trap around the same speed and glideslope. Now if you'll notice the CEE variant has bigger wings and tails to fit into the proper glideslope parameters.
Unless the thing is made out of card board, or some supersubstance unobtanium. It will follow the same laws of physics. Having less engine power and reliability compounds the problem. It's not going to have the same wing area as an F-35A and land and take off safely.
Them even when you get the wings on you need stronger landing gear and a tail hook. This plane won't be easy, and carrier planes are never easy.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2869
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post23 Jun 2022, 04:35

A bit skeptical here. The original FC-31s used RD-93 (2x19k lbs). The prototypes appear to use WS-13s or WS-13Es (19-22k lbs). It takes years to develop new engines. Considering the speed at which the J-35 test units was redesigned from FC-31 and built, they'd have to go with matured engines which means WS-13(Es). There is always talk of new engines eg WS-19s (25k lbs) but engine investment went first into WS-15s for the J-20s and even then it took time before WS-15s went into J-20 production units. Early production units, if adopted (and that's a big IF) would fly with WS-13s.

PLAAF never went for the FC-31, since they had the J-20 and a 20k lb thrust advantage. imho, the J-35 is nowhere close to F-35 capability. Unclear what the PLA Navy direction is on J-35 adoption. Even with matured engines, it'd take years before J-35 enters production. Initial air wing should be J-15Bs. J-15 production line is already humming.
Offline

tphuang

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 204
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post23 Jun 2022, 13:55

weasel1962 wrote:A bit skeptical here. The original FC-31s used RD-93 (2x19k lbs). The prototypes appear to use WS-13s or WS-13Es (19-22k lbs). It takes years to develop new engines. Considering the speed at which the J-35 test units was redesigned from FC-31 and built, they'd have to go with matured engines which means WS-13(Es). There is always talk of new engines eg WS-19s (25k lbs) but engine investment went first into WS-15s for the J-20s and even then it took time before WS-15s went into J-20 production units. Early production units, if adopted (and that's a big IF) would fly with WS-13s.

PLAAF never went for the FC-31, since they had the J-20 and a 20k lb thrust advantage. imho, the J-35 is nowhere close to F-35 capability. Unclear what the PLA Navy direction is on J-35 adoption. Even with matured engines, it'd take years before J-35 enters production. Initial air wing should be J-15Bs. J-15 production line is already humming.


Yes, they use WS-21 (WS-13E) engines. It's been around for a while. The entire WS-13 series has basically been the de facto engine on the larger drones. Currently, any non Pakistani JF-17 export is using WS-21.

The aircraft itself is about the same size as F-35C, so the T/W ratio should be fine with just 2 WS-21. From what I can see, it looks stealthy enough. I don't see any reason why it can't be in the same rough ballpark as F-35C in radar signature. The weapon bay is sufficient large to hold enough 6 AAMs. AESA radar, EW suites and situation awareness are currently strength for the Chinese defense industry. I don't see any issues there.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1789
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post23 Jun 2022, 18:39

J-31 weapon bay showed four AAMs similar as J-20. Those are PL-15 which are longer then other medium AAM though.
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 804
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post23 Jun 2022, 21:55

tphuang wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:A bit skeptical here. The original FC-31s used RD-93 (2x19k lbs). The prototypes appear to use WS-13s or WS-13Es (19-22k lbs). It takes years to develop new engines. Considering the speed at which the J-35 test units was redesigned from FC-31 and built, they'd have to go with matured engines which means WS-13(Es). There is always talk of new engines eg WS-19s (25k lbs) but engine investment went first into WS-15s for the J-20s and even then it took time before WS-15s went into J-20 production units. Early production units, if adopted (and that's a big IF) would fly with WS-13s.

PLAAF never went for the FC-31, since they had the J-20 and a 20k lb thrust advantage. imho, the J-35 is nowhere close to F-35 capability. Unclear what the PLA Navy direction is on J-35 adoption. Even with matured engines, it'd take years before J-35 enters production. Initial air wing should be J-15Bs. J-15 production line is already humming.


Yes, they use WS-21 (WS-13E) engines. It's been around for a while. The entire WS-13 series has basically been the de facto engine on the larger drones. Currently, any non Pakistani JF-17 export is using WS-21.

The aircraft itself is about the same size as F-35C, so the T/W ratio should be fine with just 2 WS-21. From what I can see, it looks stealthy enough. I don't see any reason why it can't be in the same rough ballpark as F-35C in radar signature. The weapon bay is sufficient large to hold enough 6 AAMs. AESA radar, EW suites and situation awareness are currently strength for the Chinese defense industry. I don't see any issues there.


I'll find it later, but I already read an article recently discussing how the plane has already gained over 3k pounds. And this is with out the hook, reinforced landing gear, added wing an any other such add ones.
To say that this plane might only gain 5k in extra pounds is generous the 4-5k in added thrust will be swallowed up in development weight. I even saw pictures of the adding smaller bays in the wing roots.
I believe it was someone at Lockheed that said "empty space is heavy"
The WS-19 comes across as vapor-ware at this time.
Endless cycles of promises always promising a leap forward in engine technology, only to admit defeat years later.
Offline

drago

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2021, 01:53

Unread post24 Jun 2022, 02:47

drago wrote:
jessmo112 wrote:China has maybe 50+ J-15s ATM which isn't enough to fit 3-4 carriers. They could have the J-35 before 2030 but your betting on.

1. China to finally achieve engine parity with the west and get a credible power plant on the J-35.
As of right now the power and reliability of the
RD series of engine I'd not up to the task of what would ne required for naval deployment.
Someone mentioned before on this board about launching in only burners to achieve takeoff weight.
RD series will burn out fast with that.

2. Even if they get an engine to naval standards, do you expect to throw more wing weight, and gear on the thing, and all will go smooth?
We only need to look back to the hornet wing drop issue, and the F-35C hook issue, to see how complicated this is
To bet on no delays or problems is a bad bet.

3. Full integration.

The J-15 is a dead end. It's already coming to the fleet outdated. And it's seriously flawed.
IMO if they wanted to copy a 4th generation fighters they should have copied the Super bugg design.
A massive naval aviation short fall is China problem.

China has solved the engine problem now, China has no heart disease now, China has two systems of steam catapult and electromagnetic catapult, China's electromagnetic catapult energy conversion rate is 90%, ten years later, the United States will not be able to build a real electromagnetic catapult system , Ford has been in service for 5 years and has no combat effectiveness. The 003 service allows the world to see what a real electromagnetic catapult system is.
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 804
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post24 Jun 2022, 04:30

I have seen these claims over and over for the last 10 years, and yet China has yet to demo a plane that can supercruise. Very few are lining up to buy Chinese fighters. Its the same dog and pony show over and over.
Its not that I hate the Chinese or find them inferior.
I just have less respect for someone who seeks to leap frog me by stealing my ideas. Like I said naval stuff is hard. And I don't suspect that everything will go without a hitch.
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 804
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post24 Jun 2022, 04:43

A good article about Chinese weapons and tech.

https://eurasiantimes.com/pakistan-navy ... es-us/?amp

Chinese frigates=flawed.
J-17 =flawed
Chinese UAVs=flawed
Chinese tanks=flawed.

So don't be offended. I'm not dismissive of China.
I'm only skeptical.
Offline

madrat

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3491
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post24 Jun 2022, 12:11

Over the past thirty years there has been a fair number of different stronk claims. It's all just fanaticalism. When it comes to this website's namesake, the F-16, there is validation to support claims. That kind of evidence of capability is pretty unique in the aviation world.
Offline

tphuang

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 204
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post24 Jun 2022, 14:05

jessmo112 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:A bit skeptical here. The original FC-31s used RD-93 (2x19k lbs). The prototypes appear to use WS-13s or WS-13Es (19-22k lbs). It takes years to develop new engines. Considering the speed at which the J-35 test units was redesigned from FC-31 and built, they'd have to go with matured engines which means WS-13(Es). There is always talk of new engines eg WS-19s (25k lbs) but engine investment went first into WS-15s for the J-20s and even then it took time before WS-15s went into J-20 production units. Early production units, if adopted (and that's a big IF) would fly with WS-13s.

PLAAF never went for the FC-31, since they had the J-20 and a 20k lb thrust advantage. imho, the J-35 is nowhere close to F-35 capability. Unclear what the PLA Navy direction is on J-35 adoption. Even with matured engines, it'd take years before J-35 enters production. Initial air wing should be J-15Bs. J-15 production line is already humming.


Yes, they use WS-21 (WS-13E) engines. It's been around for a while. The entire WS-13 series has basically been the de facto engine on the larger drones. Currently, any non Pakistani JF-17 export is using WS-21.

The aircraft itself is about the same size as F-35C, so the T/W ratio should be fine with just 2 WS-21. From what I can see, it looks stealthy enough. I don't see any reason why it can't be in the same rough ballpark as F-35C in radar signature. The weapon bay is sufficient large to hold enough 6 AAMs. AESA radar, EW suites and situation awareness are currently strength for the Chinese defense industry. I don't see any issues there.


I'll find it later, but I already read an article recently discussing how the plane has already gained over 3k pounds. And this is with out the hook, reinforced landing gear, added wing an any other such add ones.
To say that this plane might only gain 5k in extra pounds is generous the 4-5k in added thrust will be swallowed up in development weight. I even saw pictures of the adding smaller bays in the wing roots.
I believe it was someone at Lockheed that said "empty space is heavy"
The WS-19 comes across as vapor-ware at this time.
Endless cycles of promises always promising a leap forward in engine technology, only to admit defeat years later.


Keep in mind that F-35C is 15.7t in empty weight, which is 2.5t more than F-35A. So, it would actually be normal for naval version to be 4 to 5k lb heavier. I have no insight on how much heavier J-35 is over the land based FC-31.

You will see that J-35 has taken the same changes that F-35C did like larger wing/jail fin + the hump behind the cockpit (compared to the land based version). I think the two aircraft are about the same size/weight and 2 WS-21 will generate the same thrust as 1 F-135. Even if it's T/W ratio is a little worse than F-35C, it's not end of the world as long as its radar signature/weapons/radar/EW suite as in the same ballpark.

If I were SAC, I'd be a little embarrassed about how much J-35 looks like F-35C, but that seems to be all the are capable of. CAC, who developed J-20 and is likely the 6th gen developer, is far more capable of developing new stuff.

Keep in mind that China does not export its best stuff or even close to it. It only just now exported 054A and J-10C to Pakistan. Both of which are reaching the end of their production run in China.
Offline

pigmode

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2015, 20:28

Unread post24 Jun 2022, 22:53

jessmo112 wrote:A good article about Chinese weapons and tech.

https://eurasiantimes.com/pakistan-navy ... es-us/?amp

Chinese frigates=flawed.
J-17 =flawed
Chinese UAVs=flawed
Chinese tanks=flawed.

So don't be offended. I'm not dismissive of China.
I'm only skeptical.



As long as China adheres to the so called long game, which should probably be renamed lo-o-o-ong game strategy, they might be fine. All this pressure on Taiwan lately. What does Sun Tzu say about military ambitiousness?
Offline

drago

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2021, 01:53

Unread post25 Jun 2022, 03:07

weasel1962 wrote:A bit skeptical here. The original FC-31s used RD-93 (2x19k lbs). The prototypes appear to use WS-13s or WS-13Es (19-22k lbs). It takes years to develop new engines. Considering the speed at which the J-35 test units was redesigned from FC-31 and built, they'd have to go with matured engines which means WS-13(Es). There is always talk of new engines eg WS-19s (25k lbs) but engine investment went first into WS-15s for the J-20s and even then it took time before WS-15s went into J-20 production units. Early production units, if adopted (and that's a big IF) would fly with WS-13s.

PLAAF never went for the FC-31, since they had the J-20 and a 20k lb thrust advantage. imho, the J-35 is nowhere close to F-35 capability. Unclear what the PLA Navy direction is on J-35 adoption. Even with matured engines, it'd take years before J-35 enters production. Initial air wing should be J-15Bs. J-15 production line is already humming.

J-35 cuatro pl15 enlaces de datos duales, guía A de lanzamiento B, conciencia súper situacional, combate sistemático kj-600, el ejército de los EE. UU. Todavía está usando el antiguo sistema del siglo XXI, la última vez que el avión de alerta temprana f-35 y E3 estaban bloqueados, fueron los resultados de combate sistematizados de China, el f-35 y los aviones de alerta temprana estadounidenses y el sistema de combate son solo basura, nadie duda de la capacidad de los Estados Unidos para construir nuevos cazas furtivos y aviones de alerta temprana, pero es muy difícil de abolir el sistema actual y crear un nuevo sistema de combate, y tomará mucho tiempo Resultado arrogante.
Offline

drago

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2021, 01:53

Unread post25 Jun 2022, 03:11

weasel1962 wrote:A bit skeptical here. The original FC-31s used RD-93 (2x19k lbs). The prototypes appear to use WS-13s or WS-13Es (19-22k lbs). It takes years to develop new engines. Considering the speed at which the J-35 test units was redesigned from FC-31 and built, they'd have to go with matured engines which means WS-13(Es). There is always talk of new engines eg WS-19s (25k lbs) but engine investment went first into WS-15s for the J-20s and even then it took time before WS-15s went into J-20 production units. Early production units, if adopted (and that's a big IF) would fly with WS-13s.

PLAAF never went for the FC-31, since they had the J-20 and a 20k lb thrust advantage. imho, the J-35 is nowhere close to F-35 capability. Unclear what the PLA Navy direction is on J-35 adoption. Even with matured engines, it'd take years before J-35 enters production. Initial air wing should be J-15Bs. J-15 production line is already humming.

J-35 four pl15 dual data links, A launch B guidance, super situational awareness, kj-600 systematic combat, the US military is still using the old system of the 21st century, the last time the f-35 and E3 early warning aircraft were locked, it was China Systematized combat results, f-35 and American early warning aircraft and combat system are just garbage, no one doubts the ability of the United States to build new stealth fighters and early warning aircraft, but it is very difficult to abolish the current system and create a new combat system, and it will take a long time. Arrogant result.
PreviousNext

Return to Air Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests