Why do you think it seems to be related to the J-35? I know an online translation is always murky and often they speak encrypted, but I find no hind towards a new fighter ... or did I miss anything?
J-XY/J-35 carrier-borne fighter thread
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Why do you think it seems to be related to the J-35? I know an online translation is always murky and often they speak encrypted, but I find no hind towards a new fighter ... or did I miss anything?
SinoSoldier
Colonel
A lot of the discussion has been leading back to his comments. And the comments to this comment (yeah, I know) seem to be mentioning the J-XY.
The first article was about the memory of the maiden flight of FC-31from a reporter at CCTV.
What yankeesama said was thing will only be settled when that reporter makes a program about it. Thus I guess is why people interpreted related to j-xy
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Wonder if J-XY will be enlarged FC-31, if so maybe it can use WS-10C engines, the same as J-20? WS-19 and WS-15 are a long way away.
I think it is a bad idea to use the WS-10C engines. Chinese carriers are smaller than US carriers as it is, so why only use large aircraft?
What you do need is a lot of thrust to weight ratio and probably a really lightweight aircraft. That would increase the payload capability on a STOBAR carrier. So the more advanced the engines the better. The Chinese already have access to the RD-93 and WS-13 for the FC-1 fighter so they can use that. I could understand it if there was a high-low combination of larger and smaller aircraft in the future but not right now.
In the future once they have the WS-19 they can switch to that. Another possibility would be a single WS-15 engine fighter. Since that would have high thrust to weight ratio and roughly the same performance as two WS-13 engines. It would also not require designing a new engine. But the thing is the Chinese are already developing a medium weight engine of the latest generation we even have photos of that. So at least it exists in prototype stage. Why develop an engine if you don't plan to use it?
To be honest I think the best option is a twin engine aircraft with large long weapon bays between the engines like in the Su-57. That would enable the inside stowage of large anti-ship missiles. The F-35, because it is single engine, has to have a huge box shape so they can store weapons below the engines which I think is suboptimal and increases airframe weight and drag.
What you do need is a lot of thrust to weight ratio and probably a really lightweight aircraft. That would increase the payload capability on a STOBAR carrier. So the more advanced the engines the better. The Chinese already have access to the RD-93 and WS-13 for the FC-1 fighter so they can use that. I could understand it if there was a high-low combination of larger and smaller aircraft in the future but not right now.
In the future once they have the WS-19 they can switch to that. Another possibility would be a single WS-15 engine fighter. Since that would have high thrust to weight ratio and roughly the same performance as two WS-13 engines. It would also not require designing a new engine. But the thing is the Chinese are already developing a medium weight engine of the latest generation we even have photos of that. So at least it exists in prototype stage. Why develop an engine if you don't plan to use it?
To be honest I think the best option is a twin engine aircraft with large long weapon bays between the engines like in the Su-57. That would enable the inside stowage of large anti-ship missiles. The F-35, because it is single engine, has to have a huge box shape so they can store weapons below the engines which I think is suboptimal and increases airframe weight and drag.
PiSigma
"the engineer"
What's the point of all the external hard points after putting all the effort to give it internal hardpoints and stealth shaping? If they want it to carry heavy antiship missiles, then the internals should be designed for that scenario.
