Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Because everything else has changed and will continue to change.

And if you were set on giving PLAN land-based, non-carrier capable tactical aircraft in future, J-20 would be a far superior choice.

What makes you suspect that one of these changes involves getting rid of the entire land-based air component?

J-20 may have a larger range & load, but things might change if the PLAN stresses commonality and logistical streamlining.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
What makes you suspect that one of these changes involves getting rid of the entire land-based air component?

J-20 may have a larger range & load, but things might change if the PLAN stresses commonality and logistical streamlining.

Cost and common sense.

If the PLAN carrier programme runs to 6-8 carriers, with at least half being nuclear supercarriers to start with, and then gradually all becoming nuclear supercarriers, then the air wing for those carriers could easily be bigger than the entire PLANAF. You need planes for all those carriers, as well as training and reserve units. On top of that, the PLAN is going to be getting lots of new AWACS and MPA and tankers. Not to mention the carriers and support warships.

That all cost money, and even the PLAN need to make choices and sacrifices. So if the choice is to keep some J10 and J11 wings, or to get more of some of the above, the obvious answer is to ditch the land based aircraft and use that money for more naval operationally relevant things.

Carrier fighters can operate from land bases, but land based aircraft cannot operate off carriers.

Any mission current land based PLANAF fighters perform could easily be carried out by carrier based aircraft operating from land bases if needs be. Those aircraft would also be able to embark on any of the carriers. OTOH, any PLAN land based aircraft becomes dead weight once the PLAN starts operating beyond the first island chain.

Operating both land based and carrier aircraft long term also creates needless logistics and training complications.

The PLANAF isn’t going to be turning in their existing land based fighters en mass anytime soon, but I would not expect them to be purchasing many more new land based fighters going forwards. Instead, all their new purchases will be carrier fighters, so that their existing land based fighter fleet could be gradually phased out and replaced with carrier fighters over the remaining useful lives of those fighters, which will probably be over the course of the next decade or two at least.

Right now, the PLANAF is drawing the best of its pilots to create new carrier wings. But once they get the training syllabus nailed down, and new carriers start coming online, I would expect entire existing naval fighter wings to convert to carrier ops.

Eventually, even with all existing land based navy fighter regiments converted to carrier wings, they may still need to found a few new regiments to have enough fighters for all their new carriers. So it’s not like they are going to have to scrap entire fighter regiments to do this conversion.
 

Lethe

Captain
plawolf basically covered it, just a couple comments:

What makes you suspect that one of these changes involves getting rid of the entire land-based air component?

I didn't say and don't think PLAN will get rid of all its land-based aircraft, only that there will be no non-carrier capable tactical/fighter aircraft purchased going forward. Bombers, transports, AEW, MPA, etc. sure.

J-20 may have a larger range & load, but things might change if the PLAN stresses commonality and logistical streamlining.

If PLAN was more interested in commonality and logistics streaming than maximising capability, they would just buy more of the carrier-capable J-31 variant...

But as per above I don't think they will buy J-20 either.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Cost and common sense.

If the PLAN carrier programme runs to 6-8 carriers, with at least half being nuclear supercarriers to start with, and then gradually all becoming nuclear supercarriers, then the air wing for those carriers could easily be bigger than the entire PLANAF. You need planes for all those carriers, as well as training and reserve units. On top of that, the PLAN is going to be getting lots of new AWACS and MPA and tankers. Not to mention the carriers and support warships.

That all cost money, and even the PLAN need to make choices and sacrifices. So if the choice is to keep some J10 and J11 wings, or to get more of some of the above, the obvious answer is to ditch the land based aircraft and use that money for more naval operationally relevant things.

Carrier fighters can operate from land bases, but land based aircraft cannot operate off carriers.

Any mission current land based PLANAF fighters perform could easily be carried out by carrier based aircraft operating from land bases if needs be. Those aircraft would also be able to embark on any of the carriers. OTOH, any PLAN land based aircraft becomes dead weight once the PLAN starts operating beyond the first island chain.

Operating both land based and carrier aircraft long term also creates needless logistics and training complications.

The PLANAF isn’t going to be turning in their existing land based fighters en mass anytime soon, but I would not expect them to be purchasing many more new land based fighters going forwards. Instead, all their new purchases will be carrier fighters, so that their existing land based fighter fleet could be gradually phased out and replaced with carrier fighters over the remaining useful lives of those fighters, which will probably be over the course of the next decade or two at least.

Right now, the PLANAF is drawing the best of its pilots to create new carrier wings. But once they get the training syllabus nailed down, and new carriers start coming online, I would expect entire existing naval fighter wings to convert to carrier ops.

Eventually, even with all existing land based navy fighter regiments converted to carrier wings, they may still need to found a few new regiments to have enough fighters for all their new carriers. So it’s not like they are going to have to scrap entire fighter regiments to do this conversion.

I'm afraid you've flown far afield with this extrapolation Bub, Naval Fighters will never supplant land based fighter aircraft,, you NEED both, for a lot of reasons..

The Naval version is likely to have a 10% higher empty weight, reducing payload everyday. That is simply unacceptable!

However, I do agree they will be demanding 4th gen Naval aircraft in significant numbers, but those WILL be balanced by the more efficient land based aircraft.
 

Lethe

Captain
I'm afraid you've flown far afield with this extrapolation Bub, Naval Fighters will never supplant land based fighter aircraft,, you NEED both, for a lot of reasons..

The Naval version is likely to have a 10% higher empty weight, reducing payload everyday. That is simply unacceptable!

Of course it is acceptable. USMC accepts just such a compromise with its F/A-18s, and USN doesn't operate non-carrier capable tactical combat aircraft. We are not talking about replacing PLAAF assets with carrier-capable aircraft, but merely PLANAF tactical combat aircraft such as today's JH-7s: a subset of a subset. The performance penalties associated with supporting carrier operations are far outweighed by the logistical, training, and operational benefits of commonality such that you can chop and change carrier squadron assignments at will.
 
Last edited:

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Of course it is acceptable. USMC accepts just such a compromise with its F/A-18s, and USN doesn't operate non-carrier capable tactical combat aircraft. We are not talking about replacing PLAAF assets with carrier-capable aircraft, but merely PLANAF tactical combat aircraft such as today's JH-7s: a subset of a subset. The performance penalties associated with supporting carrier operations are far outweighed by the logistical, training, and operational benefits of commonality such that you can chop and change carrier squadron assignments at will.

Of course you're right, I mis-understood the Wolfmans point,,, I thought he was talking about the PLA Air Force, rather than the PLANAF,, my apologies Wolfie, and you are indeed right, before the advent of the PLAN's CV-16 the PLANAF operated only land based fighter aircraft until the J-15.. so yes indeed there is no reason for the PLANAF to purchase or operate new land based Fighter aircraft, though ASW aircraft and such will continue to be operated off land bases..

My apologies, carry on gentlemen!
 
Top