New single engine stealth fighter by chengdu?

delft

Brigadier
I know. But RAF interest was half a century ago, and they gave up the Harrier long before RN did and they will be operating their F-35B's from the flattops in understand. The Russians have understood their mistake. That the Thai flattop yacht is mentioned shows how strange this listing is.:)
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
I know. But RAF interest was half a century ago, and they gave up the Harrier long before RN did and they will be operating their F-35B's from the flattops in understand. The Russians have understood their mistake. That the Thai flattop yacht is mentioned shows how strange this listing is.:)
the RAF was operating the Harrier 2 until 2011 they may not have been running them out of high way tunnels but they were operating them. RAF units were deployed in with Harriers right up until the withdrawal from service less then 7 years ago, and I believe they to will have a number of F35B for use.
The Yacht was intended to be a full Vtol carrier with Harriers but the Thai economy just cover both the ship and planes.
As for the Russians look how well the Kuz has done. It's not a glowing success story ramps and traps or cats and traps are reliant on maintenance of the traps and cats or operating runways VStol types can land just about anywhere in a pinch. And take off with out a mile of prefect tarmac.
The choice was not politics it was investment and resources.
 

delft

Brigadier
the RAF was operating the Harrier 2 until 2011 they may not have been running them out of high way tunnels but they were operating them. RAF units were deployed in with Harriers right up until the withdrawal from service less then 7 years ago, and I believe they to will have a number of F35B for use.
The Yacht was intended to be a full Vtol carrier with Harriers but the Thai economy just cover both the ship and planes.
As for the Russians look how well the Kuz has done. It's not a glowing success story ramps and traps or cats and traps are reliant on maintenance of the traps and cats or operating runways VStol types can land just about anywhere in a pinch. And take off with out a mile of prefect tarmac.
The choice was not politics it was investment and resources.
The flattop Flanker is vastly more capable than the Yak-141 and less expensive - using two engines of the same type rather than three engines of two types - so Russia will not return to VTOL or STOVL. It is indeed a matter of investment and resources.
The main STOVL aircraft is F-35B and I don't see one every being operated from an improvised field base and Yak-141 couldn't either
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Guys !!! ... Please stay on topic and I don't know how much a discussion on Harrier vs. Flanker as a better carrier-borne fighter is related to CAC's new fighter.
 
Last edited:

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
you're right Deino,
Besides I just don't think the Chinese want a Vtol fighter right now, They really Don't have a need just yet. Nato pushed the concept as they were worried about Russian forces bombing runways and needing to operate in bunkers and makeshift air bases built from highway tunnels. The PRC is not in that kind of mode to need to think about that yet.

So if we eliminate the Vtol argument. what reason is there to need a single engine?
F16 is single engine to reduce costs compared to the YF17 if flew against. Event today If you compare it to it's global rivals the F16 vs the Mig 29, although both have impressive lists units built of F16 smokes Mig 29. on the other hand A twin engine gives you more thrust, greater lifting capacity and generally a redundancy of emergency engine.
Navies tend to prefer twin engine fighters but that is just a preference not a law set in stone.
Air forces by contrast are happy either way.


Personally If this single engine is real I think it might have been created as a competitor to the Shenyang. and I would love to see a open fly off of both machines.
 
Top