J-15 Carrier Multirole Fighter thread

Discussion in 'Navy' started by Jeff Head, May 30, 2011.

  1. SinoSoldier
    Offline

    SinoSoldier Major

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,921
    Likes Received:
    6,472
    I think it has to do with the fact that they're developed in two different geographic regions and that folks tend to resort to look favorably upon people from their "area".
    It's stupid but it happens there.
     
    sangye and Air Force Brat like this.
  2. Higgle
    Offline

    Higgle Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2015
    Messages:
    237
    Likes Received:
    970
    As with most rumors, everything is still up in the air. No one knows who is right and who is wrong, we should just be aware that certain rumors exist. It is certainly possible that the next-generation carrier-based fighter will be based on the J-31/FC-31. The only thing we can say with some degree of confidence is that SAC will produce the aircraft, and it will be a next-generation fighter compared to the J-15.
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  3. Deino
    Online

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    8,941
    Likes Received:
    21,644
    Ok ... I must admit that it is the first time I heard this, that besides a FC-31-based design also some sort of clean sheet design is on the table.
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  4. Air Force Brat
    Offline

    Air Force Brat Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,940
    Likes Received:
    9,337
    I would venture that its extremely likely that the FC-31 and J-15 will continue to be developed and produced concurrently with one another, just as USN will continue to Fly the F-18 and F-35C side by side.... two different animals completely, but highly complimentary!!

    a new clean sheet design would be at least 3 to 5 years from first flight,, and why??? the Chinese, like USN/USMC need capability NOW!
     
  5. Richard Santos
    Offline

    Richard Santos Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    582
    Likes Received:
    923
    I think the term “clean slate” should be used with caution. Avionics, engines, and material science account for majority of th4 design effort of a modern fighter. The actual airframe design is a comparatively smaller portion. It seems entirely possible that a derivative of j-20 or j-31 entirely dedicated to carrier operation is in the works, and externally the derivative may look so drastically different from j-20 or j-31 that they would be called a clean slate design by external observers based on shape and layout. but in fact they share majority of underlying engineering, components, and power plant with j-20 and j-31.

    Look at how drastically different Northrop’s intended carrier derivative of the YF-23 is from the land based version.
     
    Air Force Brat likes this.
  6. Air Force Brat
    Offline

    Air Force Brat Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,940
    Likes Received:
    9,337
    Actually Richard the Airframe is the major part of any development, look at the J-20, while it may bear a passing resemblance to the Mig 1.44, it is indeed a clean sheet design, and has been a long time in the making, they have been able to fly the AL-31FN as a power plant in the interim, and the J-20 has proven a stellar performer with what is basically the powerplant from the Flanker...

    while I am skeptical of the galactic numbers put up for WS-15 thrust, it will be a magnificent improvement and offer increased climb rate and agility by virtue of a much higher thrust to weight ratio, top speed will improve, but not nearly as much as we might hope as it takes an excessive amount of additional thrust to move the speed dial up as drag increases exponentially as the dial moves up incrementally...

    in any regard the J-20 was in development a similar amount of time to the F-22, so development is a long lead as we move into 5th gen, and expect even longer to move up to a 6th generation, now we could be ready for 5.5 and we should definitely build a 5.5 fighter aircraft as a stepping stone to 6th gen...

    when it comes to the J-20, I don't use clean sheet lightly, the J-20 is a real performance leap from any of the 4.5Gens.... particularly in L/O and electronics....
     
    antiterror13 and Yodello like this.
  7. by78
    Offline

    by78 Major

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    3,793
    Likes Received:
    20,261
    A nice image from the latest issue of Modern Ships magazine.

    (2048 x 1448)
    [​IMG]
     
    Equation, davidau, newbird and 9 others like this.
  8. A.Man
    Offline

    A.Man Major

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,201
    Likes Received:
    4,755
    China Naval Aviation Carrier Force looking for Top Pilots Video:

     
  9. SinoSoldier
    Offline

    SinoSoldier Major

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,921
    Likes Received:
    6,472
    Courtesy of @huitong:

    This photo shows two freshly-built J-15 airframes which are suspected to be of the J-15B variant. These cannot be of the J-15T iteration since the "T" prototype only a technology demonstrator. However, pb19980515 has mentioned that the J-15B would be CATOBAR-compatible as well.

    Huitong's original text:
    Rough summary:
    • CCTV reported that a naval aviation unit has conducted day-and-night combat training
    • A video still shows the J-15A taking off with two unpainted J-15s in the background
    • It is suspected & hypothesized that they could be the J-15B (note to Huitong: they are not likely to be J-15Ts since the J-15T isn't a production model)
    • It is expected that the J-15B will be transferred from a land-based training to the CV-16 later this year in preparation for combat duties aboard the Type 002
    URL: https://www.weibo.com/5596911390/HbIgYwbNy

    15.jpg
     
  10. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Lieutenant General

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    11,683
    Likes Received:
    13,838
    One of the aircraft (the one huitong chose to mark as "J-15T") has a position marker on its tail, meaning it could certainly be the old "J-15T" tech demo for catapults, but the picture isn't very clear for us to be able to ID a catapult bar on the nosegear (for either of the two aircraft).

    On the other hand, we know older J-15 prototypes also had position markers on their tail, so it's possible it could merely be an older J-15 prototype (though unlikely).

    It is also possible that both aircraft are actually of the same type, i.e.: the "J-15B". The aircraft with the position marker is currently conducting certain tests where those markers are needed and the other aircraft is conducting other tests where they are not. Unfortunately we are unable to identify nosegear again to tell if either of them have a catapult bar.
     
    DGBJCLAU and Equation like this.
Loading...

Share This Page