Chinese carrierborne fighter - what will they go for?

[B777LR]

What would it take to make the J-11 carrier able? How would the gear need to be upgraded?

Probably their own navalized version of the J-11. Be honest here, people -- the Chinese have not come up with anything original as far as a fighter, ever. All they do is copy other countries' (mainly Soviet) fighters, then make "improvements". 

That is, of course, if they ever get it into service. They're mainly still using 1960s-vintage tech with the exception of a handful of J-11s and J-10s. 

I wouldn't say they cannot come up with their own. Look at the Q-5, JH-7, J-10, FC-1/JF-17, J-8III, JL-8, L-7 and L-15 (although it looks like a certain plane from Yak and Aermacchi).

Why develop something new and expensive, if hoardes of decently upgraded MiG-15s, MiG-17s, MiG-19s, MiG-21s, Su-27s and various other planes will do the job? Besides, i read somewhere that most MiG-15s and MiG-17s in China have been remanufactured into makeshift unmanned cruise missiles

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/aircraft.asp

[Sauragnmon]

I'm honestly with B787 on the "haven't come up with anything of their own" aspect - the J-10 is an indiginous design, all claimed resemblance to the aborted IAI bird is rather vague in all truth.  It's a delta-canard, but so's the Typhoon, and the Rafale.  It's got a ventral intake, again like the Typhoon, but also like the F-16.  Take a good close look, the resemblance between the two fades significantly.  The J-8II is a rather radically modified design, and one could reason that with the drastic alterations to the airframe, it actually constitutes its own aircraft and not a modification.

How to navalize the J-11?  Stronger landing gears most likely, perhaps even a catapult shackle on the nose gear if the Chinese are going to go with a catapult design - personally I say nose ski-jump with a couple catapults on the side, but that's always been my way of thinking.  Bigger wing area, to generate more lift, especially for operations off Shi Lang, shoulders and canards would be a plus.  Tail hook is a must, as the Shi Lang is STOBAR, and any carrier these days is Arrested Recovery with a handful of exceptions.

To quote George Carlin "But that's just One Fellow's Opinion.."

[GTX]

I wouldn't say they cannot come up with their own. Look at the Q-5, JH-7, J-10, FC-1/JF-17, J-8III, JL-8, L-7 and L-15 (although it looks like a certain plane from Yak and Aermacchi).

Q-5:  Highly developed MiG-19;
JH-7:  Original. Though one might argue the engines are western (at least originally) and the concept is somewhat of a super-Jag (Note, I'm not implying it is that);
J-10:  Original;
FC-1/JF-17:  Original, though I have seen references that it is actually based on a MiG design (can anyone confirm) - could make an interesting alternative to the J-10 on Carriers;
J-8 series:  Highly developed MiG design based on Ye-152 if I recall;
L-7:  Based on the design of the Yakovlev Yak-152; and
L-15:  I strongly suspect Yak may have had a hand in this.

Regards,

Greg

[sotoolslinger]

UMMMM I don't know much about Chinese stuff so I went and looked up a few . The J10 is a canard F-16  the FC-1 is an F-20

[rallymodeller]

I disagree about the J-10. According to FAS, the J-10 was designed in collaboration with Israel; the Lavi was to be the prototype for both Israel and China's fighters. The design began to diverge when it was realized that the Israelis needed a ground-attack and close-support aircraft and the Chinese were looking for an air-superiority fighter. Therefore it might be fair to say that apart from the Russian-sourced engine of the J-10 the difference between it and the Lavi is the same as the difference between the Tornado GR.1 and the F.3. End result? It's not really their design, more the US and Israel's. 

All their other designs are based entirely or in part on TsAGI aerodynamics. I will provide an exception for the JF-17, but the Q-5 is a straight-ahead modification of a MiG-19; the J-8 is a scaled-up MiG-21 (as was the Ye-152), and the others appear to be reverse-engineered from photographs of Western aircraft. It's not as if the Chinese did not have access to Western planes.

[Sauragnmon]

That's FAS, and I've come to realize, their information isn't always perfect though.  The J-10 differs in a fair number of places, if you look at the Lavi vs the J-10.  They've differentiated from the Lavi a lot on the progress for the J-10.  A lot of the internals are all domestic, and consider the time difference between the Lavi and the J-10, there's a noticable time gap if I am not mistaken.

So the J-8 is based off the Ye-152, the later models toss the nose intake, which is a sizable differentiation from the original airframe.

One could also point out that there are a lot of similarities between all sorts of aircraft in the world, and bring to question how much of the world is actually original design anymore?  The 262 and the Kikka were rather different, though externally similar, considering that's all the Japanese had to go from - pictures and blueprints for an engine.  They're catching up on technological ability, and the technological problems were what stopped them in the 70's from catching up in leaps and bounds with the original J-10, J-11 and J-12 aircraft.  Great ideas, but they couldn't produce them.

[Shasper]

The J10 is a canard F-16  the FC-1 is an F-20

While the J-10 can be debated 'til kingdom come, the FC1/JF-17 has N O T H I N G in common with the F-20 except a similar layout & size. After that its just like the J-10/Lavi, just another critter in the foodchain.


Shas

[B777LR]

The J-10 does not even look like the Lavi, and the Fantan does not look like the MiG-19 either. Aircraft looking the same does not make them copies.

As for the J-10 and Lavi being in "family", they have the same in common as the Rafale and Eurofighter, or Mirage 4000 and Rafale - nothing.

[anthonyp]

According to an article in International Air Power Review from last year, there is a family connection between Lavi and J-10.  Wish I could find the book right now, else I'd quote it.

[ChernayaAkula]

<...> the Fantan does not look like the MiG-19 either. Aircraft looking the same does not make them copies. As for the J-10 and Lavi being in "family", <...>

Of course, the Fantan is not a copy of the MiG-19, but it's definitely based on it. From the cockpit backward, it's more or less the same aircraft.

I believe the shape of the J-10 has to do with the Israelis selling them the concept of an aerodynamically unstable aircraft and the associated software problems. The Chinese then probably decided that it would be easiest to design an aircraft with a similar lay-out as the Israelis. Minimizing risk and all that.

But the underlying issue here is, why should they design their own aircraft, when they copy much less demanding (development-wise) hardware such as missiles, firearms or vehicles? Going by that it would be madness not to base their first aerodynamically unstable aircraft on a predecessor.

[Nick]

My money's on the Chinese setting out with a mixed helo group to gain experience and to explore the need for a dedicated commando carrier.
That's just until they get a squadron or two of jets and pilots ready to fly from the carrier. During this time they will undertake sea trials and learn what they need in order to operate a carrier.

Helo types could include the Harbin Z-9 (Dauphin) for SAR and ASW role, probably a permanent fixture. Then there's the Chenghe Z-8 (Super Frelon) for large troop transport and moving spare parts.
They also operate the Kamov Ka-27 in the ASW role so expect to see some of those.

[sotoolslinger]

Hey I'm not saying the Chinese steal ideas or anything .... some sources do say the Lavi was based on the F-16 .....Hmmmm

[Captain Canada]

A navalized J-10 sounds pretty cool to me. I think China is building to many diferent types of a/c, and are going to end up screwing themselves.....

[noxioux]

I'm predicting they'll end up outright owning an insolvent global neighbor, and help themselves to a nice new batch of F/A-18 E's and F's. . .

[Dork the kit slayer]

Rafaels.....................................made by the East is Red  peoples tractor construction and prune blasting factory.

In some very exotic scheme.