PRC Peoples Liberation Army Navy

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
This recent Naval News article advances the likelihood the FC-31 will be the PLAN’s future carrier jet, not the J-20. As the article points out this jet will probably gain weight due to necessary naval modifications. Both it and the KJ-600 were seen at the concrete carrier in Wuhan. Still lots of uncertainty wrt stealth and kinematic performance.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
This recent Naval News article advances the likelihood the FC-31 will be the PLAN’s future carrier jet, not the J-20. As the article points out this jet will probably gain weight due to necessary naval modifications. Both it and the KJ-600 were seen at the concrete carrier in Wuhan. Still lots of uncertainty wrt stealth and kinematic performance.
Its actually understandable and quite logic that they have chosen the FC-31 as their future aircraft carrier fighter instead of the much heavier and larger J-20. The FC-31 has a similar size as the MiG-29K.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Its actually understandable and quite logic that they have chosen the FC-31 as their future aircraft carrier fighter instead of the much heavier and larger J-20. The FC-31 has a similar size as the MiG-29K.
Agree, will be interesting to see if this means the end of future export plans, which was the initial plan for the J-31, now rebranded as the FC-31.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

Latest analysis from CSIS on PLAN China next carrier. Nothing much being added from what being speculate on Chinese Forums. This will be equivalence to Forestall or Kitti Hawk class CV. Around 300m length on Waterline and probably up to 320m deck length. Conventional power, with potential EMALS catapult for CATOBAR configuration.

As @John Fedup post above, seems FC-31 will be the aircraft that's going to choose as standard Fighters from this carrier onward. If this carrier and it's potential EMALS catapult proved success, then those two STOBAR carriers could be the shortest carrier operational. Perhaps China should sell them to Russian, as they're seems going to retain the concept.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
One factor influencing the STOBAR carriers future with the PLAN would be the FC-31’s ramp take off performance. As for a future with the Russian navy, depends on price and perhaps pride. A Chinese version of a “B” would ensure longer life in the PLAN but so far there is no sign of this that I am aware of.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group

The satelite photo on China next carrier progress. This is just additional photo from the post #644 above. It shown the flight deck near complete.

So far it shown clearly it is Catobar lay out charateristic. The size confirm it's in the range of Forrestal or Kitty Hawk class.

The photo shown (at least from what I can see) 3 line of catapults however only 2 elevator shaft. May be just my view, but seems the angle deck is not on the degree of Kitty Hawk or Forrestal. More on the degree of Ark Royal has after it's latest rebuild in the 60's.

Anyway shown big improvement over the two Stobar now they're operating.
 
Last edited:

spoz

The Bunker Group
Actually, the angled deck looks a lot like Melbourne on steroids. I wonder why that might be?
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member

The satelite photo on China next carrier progress. This is just additional photo from the post #644 above. It shown the flight deck near complete.

So far it shown clearly it is Catobar lay out charateristic. The size confirm it's in the range of Forrestal or Kitty Hawk class.

The photo shown (at least from what I can see) 3 line of catapults however only 2 elevator shaft. May be just my view, but seems the angle deck is not on the degree of Kitty Hawk or Forrestal. More on the degree of Ark Royal has after it's latest rebuild in the 60's.

Anyway shown big improvement over the two Stobar now they're operating.
Navalnews already wrote yesterday a complete article about it. A nice image from Type 001, 002 and 003 to compare them was also posted on their Twitterpost.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Ananda

The Bunker Group
the angled deck looks a lot like Melbourne on steroids. I wonder why that might be?
If we looking on the three carriers image side by side comparison that Sandhi put above, seems the angle degree similar with the two previous STOBAR. I also thought the angle will be more similar with US design.

This degree unlike the Forrestal and Kitty Hawk. If we see the catapults line, only one catapult that can be use to launch Aircraft simultaneously when the angle deck being used. I just thought they will go with more US configuration, considering the size of the platform they are building.
 

DDG38

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
If we looking on the three carriers image side by side comparison that Sandhi put above, seems the angle degree similar with the two previous STOBAR. I also thought the angle will be more similar with US design.

This degree unlike the Forrestal and Kitty Hawk. If we see the catapults line, only one catapult that can be use to launch Aircraft simultaneously when the angle deck being used. I just thought they will go with more US configuration, considering the size of the platform they are building.
I think you'll find @spoz was referring to how the PLAN studied ex-HMAS Melbourne closely in order to develop their carrier program in the 80s. This article talks about it : The Chinese Navy Studied an Australian Carrier Bound for the Scrap Heap
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
how the PLAN studied ex-HMAS Melbourne closely in order to develop their carrier program in the 80s.
Ahh I see. While for me, I see it more on evolution design from their two STOBAR. Which means more on evolution of Sovyet design. Well I see more on the design of their angle deck and lay out of their flight deck.

However I do agree that they also must be taking lesson from British design from old Melbourne.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Another article analysis on China’s J-31, the future carrier jet. Needless to say, lots of unknowns.


Here’s Breaking Defence take on China’s carrier jet. Apparently they prefer J-35.

 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Another article analysis on China’s J-31, the future carrier jet. Needless to say, lots of unknowns.


Here’s Breaking Defence take on China’s carrier jet. Apparently they prefer J-35.

We'll see. I read that article yesterday (Saturday NZ time) and with the PRC being somewhat economical with the details about their defence programmes, we are reduced to analysing tea leaves and sheep entrails. It doesn't help that the MSS and PLA Intelligence have penetrated western intelligence agencies, government and military organisations, commercial and educational organisations, with some traitors from those western intelligence agencies giving up western assets within the PRC. Hence very little if any information forthcoming because the CCP deals quite firmly with foreign intelligence officers working within its borders, and any PRC nationals caught working for foreign intelligence agencies or militaries are dealt with extreme prejudice.
 

TaiChen

New Member
Another article analysis on China’s J-31, the future carrier jet. Needless to say, lots of unknowns.


Here’s Breaking Defence take on China’s carrier jet. Apparently they prefer J-35.

J-31 and J-15 complement in the lo hi combo., the way F-35 and F-18 complement in the lo hi combo.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
We'll see. I read that article yesterday (Saturday NZ time) and with the PRC being somewhat economical with the details about their defence programmes, we are reduced to analysing tea leaves and sheep entrails. It doesn't help that the MSS and PLA Intelligence have penetrated western intelligence agencies, government and military organisations, commercial and educational organisations, with some traitors from those western intelligence agencies giving up western assets within the PRC. Hence very little if any information forthcoming because the CCP deals quite firmly with foreign intelligence officers working within its borders, and any PRC nationals caught working for foreign intelligence agencies or militaries are dealt with extreme prejudice.
The most concerning aspect of the J-31 is the extent of stolen technology. The financial advantage of having “free development” on a 5th Gen is huge! Hopefully all the JSF electronic kit is mostly secure.
 

TaiChen

New Member
@TaiChen Text and image deleted for failure to follow the rules. No one line posts. Not linking to source of image. This is the third intervention by a Moderator regarding your posting behaviour. Therefore this is your first formal warning. Follow the forum rules and improve your posting behaviour or the Moderator team will sanction you. Three demerit points for two months.

Ngatimozart.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ananda

The Bunker Group

This month article from Jamestown.org seems interesting on highlight PLAN effort on using civilian Ro-Ro ferry as additional emergency LPD. Seems they are experimenting with modified civilian ramp on the Ferry, to enable doing amphibious recovery in the water.

Seems they know their own amphibious assets will not enough to transport divisions wide strength accross Taiwan straits. Perhaps they have calculate there will be significant casualties on the transport assets, thus adding the number with civilian ferry will be needed.
 

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
Agreed, also would provide the lift for a potential semi covert landing using a civilian vessel. Perhaps running the ferry along a regular line for some time before using it for a military application. Cruising off the coast of a disputed island on a regularly scheduled route while embarking amphibious forces
 
Top