Fair enough, but I thought the tails were vaguely backwards-swept compared to the orthodox trapezium tails of the F-22.
Highly doubt it'll happen anyways. The most they'll get is probably the FC-31.
J-XY/J-35 carrier-borne fighter thread
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Highly doubt it'll happen anyways. The most they'll get is probably the FC-31.
I would be a bit surprised if they haven't already done land based catapult tests at this stage of their flight testing.
MwRYum
Major
Truth be told, we hardly see any pic of them actually use the land catapult to test anything.
That's quite a remote location with limited field of overview.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
That’s because people know taking such photos would be a big no-no that will get them in trouble.
That's the whole point.
Speaking of which, an update:
Roughly translated:
Have a closer look at the older wheel chock:
And compare it with the newer wheel chock:
The older wheel chocks have 11 "blades", while the newer wheel chocks have 14 "blades". Also, the widening of the wheel chocks involved adding additional "blades" inwards (i.e. towards the center).
On one hand, this should confirm that the J-35s is indeed STOBAR-capable and will be capable of operating from Liaoning (and Shandong after her mid-life upgrade sometime in the future).
On the other hand, comparing the newer, wider wheel chocks at the PLAN NAU to the even wider wheel chocks on the Kuznetsov CV:
We can see that while each of the twin wheel chocks on the Kuznetsov are divided into two halves with 11 "blades" on each halves (i.e. 22 "blades" in total), such that the outer halves are used for the SU-33 while the inner halves are used for the MiG-29K - The newer, wider wheel chocks at the PLAN NAU are operated as a whole.
This should mean that spacing between the rear undercarriages of the J-35 is pretty wide. Not as wide as the J-15, but certainly nowhere as narrow as the MiG-29K.
Original video segment of the wheel chocks:
@Deino @Blitzo FYA.
Roughly translated:
Have a closer look at the older wheel chock:
And compare it with the newer wheel chock:
The older wheel chocks have 11 "blades", while the newer wheel chocks have 14 "blades". Also, the widening of the wheel chocks involved adding additional "blades" inwards (i.e. towards the center).
On one hand, this should confirm that the J-35s is indeed STOBAR-capable and will be capable of operating from Liaoning (and Shandong after her mid-life upgrade sometime in the future).
On the other hand, comparing the newer, wider wheel chocks at the PLAN NAU to the even wider wheel chocks on the Kuznetsov CV:
We can see that while each of the twin wheel chocks on the Kuznetsov are divided into two halves with 11 "blades" on each halves (i.e. 22 "blades" in total), such that the outer halves are used for the SU-33 while the inner halves are used for the MiG-29K - The newer, wider wheel chocks at the PLAN NAU are operated as a whole.
This should mean that spacing between the rear undercarriages of the J-35 is pretty wide. Not as wide as the J-15, but certainly nowhere as narrow as the MiG-29K.
Original video segment of the wheel chocks:
@Deino @Blitzo FYA.
Last edited:
It's useful circumstantial indicators to add, but I think it is also more of an academic exercise.
We've seen the J-35/XY mockup on Liaoning; regardless of how the details pan out, we already had an overwhelming basis to expect it to be part of the STOBAR carrier's airwing.
TBF PLAN design is better than Ru Navy, as J-35 and J-15 use an identical set of SOP, which is simpler. On the Kuznetsov the operator need to choose inner or outer chock for different plane.
However, the next question would be: is it possible to operate KJ-600 on CV-16/17? The widened chock just eliminated the possibility of KJ-600 on liaoning, or KJ-600's landing gear is as much wide as J-15/35?
However, the next question would be: is it possible to operate KJ-600 on CV-16/17? The widened chock just eliminated the possibility of KJ-600 on liaoning, or KJ-600's landing gear is as much wide as J-15/35?
Why should a wider "chock just eliminated the possibility of KJ-600 on liaoning"? IMO it even more is a hint, it might be possible even if I still don't believe a KJ-600 will ever be operated off the Liaoning or Shandong.