Posted on 04/24/2011 7:21:41 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
China’s Jump Jet Mystery
April 25, 2011By David Axe
Are Chinese internet rumours about the development of a J-18 jump jet fighter really credible?
The Chinese aviation industry has begun testing a short-takeoff, vertical-landing naval fighter optimized for small aircraft carriers, according to English-language military trade publications. The reports last week cited rumours circulated by Chinese aviation blogs. ‘It is difficult to substantiate Internet chatter,’ US-based Defense News cautioned.
But ‘given the PLA's naval power projection ambitions, it is probable there is (a) VSTOL or STOVL (short-takeoff and vertical-landing) fighter programme,’ Richard Fisher, from the International Assessment and Strategy Center in Washington, D.C., told the publication.
The reports raise as many questions as they answer. If they're true, it's unclear why the Chinese navy would even want a vertical-landing fighter, considering the limitations associated with such designs—and also considering China's many alternatives to a so-called ‘jump jet.’
Again if true, it's possible that Beijing is developing a jump jet in response to Taiwanese interest in an American vertical-landing fighter currently in testing. It's also possible, but not likely, that a Chinese jump jet hints at as-yet-undisclosed naval shipbuilding plans.
Defense Newsechoed Chinese blog comments that the new fighter, apparently designated ‘J-18,’ is ‘similar to the Russian Su-33 carrier-based fighter.’ That seems unlikely, as the Su-33 weighs 66,000 pounds fully loaded, three times as much as the world's only successful jump jet, the Anglo-American AV-8 Harrier.
The Americans are also working on the F-35B, a 50,000-pound stealthy jump jet that could enter service as early as 2016, but which has encountered serious problems with weight, engine heat, parts failures and software readiness.
The US Marine Corps is planning on buying hundreds of F-35Bs to fly from the Navy's 11 800-foot-long assault ships. In addition to performing an amphibious assault role, these vessels serve as smaller back-ups to the Navy's 11 larger super-carriers that operate conventionally-launching and -landing planes. Italy, Spain and several other navies with small carriers are also likely F-35B customers.
Historically, jump jets such as the Harrier have been a necessary evil, justified only by the small size of assault ships and light carriers and the prohibitive costs of large fleets of full-size carriers. For its first 40 years of service starting in the 1960s, the Harrier was accident-prone and outclassed in most scenarios by conventional aircraft. Only recently have improved maintenance and training plus lightweight ‘smart’ weapons somewhat levelled the playing field.
All the same, the only other once-operational jump jet—the long-defunct Yak-38 flown by the Soviet navy in the 1970s and ’80s—was nearly useless, owing to range and payload limitations. It’s unclear that the Chinese could do better with their own design, particularly if the 30-tonne Su-33 is the starting point.
It seems plausible that Chinese bloggers have mistaken a short-takeoff fighter for a true jump jet. Fitted with vectored-thrust engines that are now common on many planes, the 1980s-vintage Su-33 might be able to operate from smaller carriers. The J-18 could, in reality, be a misnomer for the J-15, a recent Chinese copy of the Su-33 that appeared in a naval paintjob around the same time the J-18 rumours surfaced.
The J-18 could also be the product of a propaganda campaign launched in response to Taiwanese interest in the F-35B, which spiked last spring when Air Force Gen. Ger Hsi-hsiung told parliament that only a jump jet flying from camouflaged highway bases would be protected against Chinese missile attacks.
That said, Chinese bloggers accurately predicted the first flight of the new J-20 stealth fighter-bomber in December. If they're right again and the J-18 actually exists, it could represent a new niche capability for the PLAN—but one that isn’t, as yet, justified by the Chinese naval order of battle. China has nearly finished work on a refurbished Russian light carrier, renamed Shi Lang. The vessel could enter service this year or next in a limited training role, most likely operating J-15s or a modified version of the air force's J-10 fighter. Shi Lang is big enough for traditional planes and doesn’t actually require a jump jet.
Indeed, China neither possesses—nor has publically-acknowledged plans for—an assault ship that would benefit from an operational jump jet. If the PLAN is developing both a small carrier design plus a vertical-landing jet to fly from it, the jet would seem to be far ahead of the vessel—although the vessel is likely an easier thing to build.
Whatever the case, the J-18 rumours are at least evidence of a vigorous military aerospace industry—one that at least renders talk of a new fighter plausible, if not always true.
How’s that “free trade” thing working out America?
we get lead toys.
It’s doubtful the Chinese can effectively build that which has been operational in the West for 25 years.
The interest on the debt they hold is basically funding their military.
....................The Americans are also working on the F-35B, a 50,000-pound stealthy jump jet that could enter service as early as 2016...............................
Let’s ask Bubba and Hitlery if they also gave the Chi-Coms the plans to the F-35B, like all the other plans that they sold!
Sure they can, we have been giving them the tooling and the ability to produce modern aircraft for a while now.
They were given the tooling for the MD-90, and they have now come out with their version of, much improved.
They were given the tooling for the Airbus A-320, and soon they will be coming out with a version of that, too.
They have long been trusted with designs and then used them for “home grown” products.
Etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_ARJ21
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=azVVfZO4YElM
Yet the Chinese continue to purchase the overwhelming majority of their airframes from the Russians, Europeans and Americans.
Even assuming your contention that it's an airframe that makes a modern fighter they are still decades behind modern nations in their ability to build advanced machines.
The precision manufacturing processes are quite complex.
China continues to purchase their military aircraft engines from Russia as they cannot yet master the processes required to keep a turbine from blowing up. Russia and the West had these processes mastered 50 years ago.
No, but they can damn sure copy it!
China makes plenty of turbine engines.
GE is heavily into China with jet engine technology, and avionics technology, so it won’t be long before Chinese engines and aircraft improve, if they haven’t already.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/business/global/18plane.html
http://www.gereports.com/joint-aviation-venture-with-china-to-create-200-us-jobs/
ping
With jump jets, every Chinese container ship becomes a carrier.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
They blew up their working relationship with Sukhoi by reverse-engineering and cloning the Su-33 as the J-15 ..... they are now, as our fellow-poster above informs us, trying to develop an engine that will deliver something like the Su-33's performance level w/o blowing up itself, the airframe, and a highly-trained Su-33 driver.
They're quite determined to own civil aviation.
Meanwhile, Boeing tries to build a greenfield second assembly line for the 787 in South Carolina -- in the States -- and gets nailed 18 months later by a tag-team of the IAM, the Obaminoid-dominated NLRB, and the Chicago Machine, that demands that Boeing junk the (completed) SC facility and open their new production line in the Puget Sound area instead.
I thought they'd learned their lesson in the 60's and left that smallthink/backyard-smelter stuff behind with the other wreckage (and body counts) of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution?
No disaster is greater than underestimating the enemy.
I don't believe that is true. I believe China currently make most of their own jets under license from Russia. However, I do agree with your overall assessment that China has a long ways to go in military.
The reason why I would agree with you is based on how China is doing in the civilian world. China is still catching up in areas like autos, aviation, etc. And this is after having direct access to technology in the world's leading companies. I give it 15 years before Chinese companies can compete head to head with the Toyotas, Dailmer Benz and GM in autos (even if significant exports occur much sooner) and Boeing and Airbus in aerosapce.
China does not have such direct access in the area of military. So, yes, in many ways, many of the postings on the FR is alarmist in nature. I give it 25+ years before China catches up in military. China may have 7-8 carriers by 2035, but it won't be until her 9th or 10th carrier that would be comparable to America's next generation of Nimitz class carriers (Gerald Ford class due in 2015).
China can do quantiy (even greater than the US if she wanted to), but has a ways to go in quality. In the meantime, China will not build significant numbers of equipment until she has caught up in quality.
they're still buying Russian engines for their military fleet...and have copied all major designs they claim are indigenous.
Almost all of their military aircraft that are supposed to be of Chinese look precisely like their Russian counterparts.
I'm not saying they'll never get there. I am saying it's going to take them a very long time.
We'll have our successors to the Raptor in the air by then.
Of China's 2500 non-military jets (1500 commercial and 1000 regional and smaller), almost all of them are made in the West and a few in Brazil. However, they are trying to change that so that they are mostly made in China.
As for their Russian copies of military jets, I would sort of agree with you except I do believe the Chinese have made improvements on them. Keep in mind, China still have greater resources than Russia. So, that while she further behind, once having acquired Russian designs, she can improve on them even easier than the Russians can. That's why Russia is reluctant to do any more business with China. China will not only improve on their designs, but undercut them on the open market.
And yes, the Chinese still buying Russian engines. But I do believe, by 2020, China won't need the Russians anymore (though still significantly behind the US).
Overall, the Chinese, by their own admission, have a long ways to go. Part of the reason is to deflect criticism of their military spending, but mainly they are telling the truth.
There is one area, ironically, where China may catch up a little quicker than traditional weapons such as fighter jets and aircraft carriers, and that is in the production of drones. It is new for both the US and China and less ground for them to catch up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.