J-XY/J-35 carrier-borne fighter thread

by78

General
Snippets from an academic paper that examines the performance requirements of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
used by carrier arresting gears. The paper uses the parameters of a certain carrier fighter to carry out simulations of the sheave dampers.

Translation of the text in the first image:
This paper takes a certain type of carrier-based aircraft as an example, using the nonlinear motion model of equations (1) to (4), the departure speed from carrier is 52m/s, the angle of attack is 0°, and the engine thrust is 8.7 ×10^4 N, the initial roll angle and sideslip angle of the aircraft are mainly affected by the motion of the carrier deck, and the model of the deck motion is given by equations (5) and (6). The aircraft is fixed on the deck of the aircraft carrier before leaving the ship, so it can be considered that the roll angle of the carrier-based aircraft when it leaves the ship is equal to the roll angle of the aircraft carrier, the yaw angle is equal to the course yaw angle of the aircraft carrier, and the sideslip angle depends on the aircraft carrier's roll angle. The angle between the direction of travel and the direction of the sea breeze. In order to reduce the interference of the lateral wind, the forward direction of the aircraft carrier is usually adjusted so that the angle of the deck wind is not greater than 30°. Select the initial phases of two typical aircraft carrier deck motions, obtain the initial angle and angular velocity when the aircraft leaves the ship through calculation (see Table 2), and set a state without initial deviation for comparison...
52314577286_1d7469c4a0_o.jpg




Table 2 mentioned in the first image. It lists the fighter's takeoff weight as 18 tons, with landing speed of 55m/s.
52315004804_673dc41cf0_o.jpg
 
Last edited:

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Snippets from an academic paper that examines the performance requirements of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
used by carrier arresting gears. The paper uses the parameters of a certain carrier fighter to carry out simulations of the sheave dampers.

Translation of the text in the first image:

52314577286_1d7469c4a0_o.jpg




Table 2 mentioned in the first image. It lists the fighter's takeoff weight as 18 tons, with landing speed of 55m/s.
52315004804_673dc41cf0_o.jpg
I am bit confused by the texts in Chinese and the table. The texts talks about take-off speed of 52m/s (why), but the simulation and table 2-1 is about the arresting. The table also shows the landing speed being 55m/s, shouldn't the mass of the aircraft 18t being the landing mass instead of takeoff mass?
 

by78

General
I am bit confused by the texts in Chinese and the table. The texts talks about take-off speed of 52m/s (why), but the simulation and table 2-1 is about the arresting. The table also shows the landing speed being 55m/s, shouldn't the mass of the aircraft 18t being the landing mass instead of takeoff mass?

Here's the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. I haven't got the time to read through the thing, but I think the answer lies with the scope of the paper, which is much larger than just simulating the arresting gear.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Abstract: The various factors affecting the carrier aircraft catapult take-off safety are analyzed in detail. The nonlinear six-degree-of-freedom motion model of the aircraft in climbing phase is established. The effect of the rolling and yaw motion and crosswind on the catapult take-off characteristics is simulated and analyzed, and it is found that the main influences on the rolling and side-slip movement of the carrier aircraft after leaving the ship are the deck rolling motion and crosswind disturbance respectively. The nonlinear dynamic inverse control method is proposed to keep the nonlinear features of the model, make the result more precise, and realize the decoupling control of directional and lateral motion states. The simulation result indicates that the designed lateral control law can ensure that the rolling angle of the aircraft meets the safety criterion of not exceeding 5° within 3 seconds after leaving the ship and that there will be no obvious side-slip phenomenon due to crosswind disturbance, which can guarantee the safe take-off of carrier aircraft.
 
Last edited:

Interstellar

Junior Member
Registered Member
I am bit confused by the texts in Chinese and the table. The texts talks about take-off speed of 52m/s (why), but the simulation and table 2-1 is about the arresting. The table also shows the landing speed being 55m/s, shouldn't the mass of the aircraft 18t being the landing mass instead of takeoff mass?
They are from different papers.
 

ReneDad

New Member
I am bit confused by the texts in Chinese and the table. The texts talks about take-off speed of 52m/s (why), but the simulation and table 2-1 is about the arresting. The table also shows the landing speed being 55m/s, shouldn't the mass of the aircraft 18t being the landing mass instead of takeoff mass?
18t is only mentioned in "Tab.2-1 Parameters of the sheave damper simulation model." Sheave Damper is a component of arresting gear, so 18t is the landing mess of the aircraft of the simulation model.
 

Schwerter_

Junior Member
Registered Member
18t is only mentioned in "Tab.2-1 Parameters of the sheave damper simulation model." Sheave Damper is a component of arresting gear, so 18t is the landing mess of the aircraft of the simulation model.
If I may hazard a rough guess: 14.5t empty weight, 1.5t fuel (in case it needs to bolter) and 2t for munitions which is more than adequete for 4 x PL-15. Take this with a HUGE grain of salt sinse we literally have no figures for the empty weight of J-35. Also I believe standard procedure for superhornet (with 2 x F414 which would likely be very roughly comparable to WS-13 or whatever the J-35 is currently using) is to carry 2000lb of fuel when landing so the 1.5t from my estimates may be a bit overkill.
 

Stealth35

New Member
Registered Member
Could the J-35 be an option for the Russian Navy? Not like they could afford to develop and field a Naval Su-57 anytime in the foreseeable future!
 
Top