J-10H - Carrier Variant (2024)

The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency revealed that the J-10 carrier-based model had been successfully tested on December 18, 2008. This means that Chinese aircraft carriers will become a reality. China approved the development of the J-10 project in January 1986. On March 23, 1998, the J-10 flew for the first time. On December 29, 2006, China announced the J-10 for the first time. As early as 2001, China began to develop the J-10 carrier-based model. After 7 years of research, the J-10 carrier-based model finally took off. From the speed of research and development, China's speed is relatively slow. It took 12 years to develop the J-10, and it took 7 years to develop the J-10 carrier-based type. This shows that China's carrier-based aircraft technology is almost from scratch. Yan Feng, a pilot of the J-10, said at the Zhuhai Air Show on November 8, 2010 that the J-10's carrier-based version will soon be available.

The J-10 carrier-type is almost the same as the J-10 supporting type. However, the thrust was increased from 122 kN to 152 kN, and the running distance was shortened to less than 50 meters. Like the J-10, in addition to maintaining normal level flight, the J-10 carrier-type has enough thrust to meet the needs of performing various maneuvering actions, which greatly improves the performance of horizontal acceleration, climb, and hovering, and even You can climb up and down effortlessly in aerial combat.A Russian analyst has speculated that China was interested in the AL-31FN thrust vector engine because of its intention to build a single-engine J-10 fighter. He believes that the duck wing layout of the J-10 fighter aircraft, coupled with accurate computer control and thrust vectors, may make the J-10 fighter aircraft achieve slow landing, which is the key factor for the safe operation of carrier-based aircraft on aircraft carriers. However, this requires a substantial strengthening and modification of the fuselage and landing gear. The shipborne J-10 fighter must prove that it is more reliable and safe than the twin-engine Su-33 fighter.

The Chinese Navy's future carrier-based fighters have always been a big mystery. Which one will China choose to be an improved version of the domestic J-10 fighter? Or introduce Russia's SU33 carrier fighter? This has become a new focus topic for China's future aircraft carriers. In 2008, the Canadian "Hanhe" Defense Weekly also made a report on China's intention to introduce SU33. Jane's Defense Weekly reported that the future carrier-based aircraft of the PLA Navy are: SU33 carrier-based fighter aircraft; according to relevant sources in the Russian armament industry, Russia had approached the Chinese Navy to reach a cooperation plan for the future procurement of Chinese carrier-based aircraft.

An American source exposed that the Chinese Navy is considering the possibility of equipping its aircraft carrier with J-10AH fighters. The Navy favors the price and refueling capabilities of this fighter. The source pointed out that the combat range of the J-10A was 800 kilometers. In this regard, the J-10A is inferior to the US and European fighters of the same generation. The article also said that the J-10A may carry a new-generation C-705 anti-ship missile with a range of 75 kilometers, or a C-802A anti-ship missile with a range of close to 250 kilometers.

With regard to the J-10's launch, Chinese experts have also made two analyses. The more affirmative party believes that the J-10 is a very good air defense fighter and also has the ability to board aircraft carriers, which has the potential to become a good fleet air defense fighter. However, first of all, it should be clear that the purpose of the J-10 on board is to make up for the insufficient number of large fleet long-range interceptors due to the large area occupied. In order to reduce the area, the folding wings have become the homework of the J-10. At present, the J-10 can be considered to be folded from the leading edge chamfer position of the wing span, which can ensure the strength and not damage the structure as much as possible, and the span direction is at the same position as the front wing tip. Use as much space as possible. However, if you choose to fold at this point, the J-10 needs to redesign the trailing edge flaperon and rewrite the control system. Compared with the land-based Su-27, the Su-33 carrier-based aircraft not only redesigned the trailing edge flap ailerons, but also adopted double-slotted wings.

The view is that the J-10, as a light fighter, has some limitations in converting it to a carrier-based fighter. There is a big difference between the landing method of a carrier aircraft and the landing method of an ordinary aircraft. When the carrier-borne aircraft descends on board, it has a large descent speed. Considering the possibility of the carrier deck lifting itself, the maximum sinking speed of the carrier-borne aircraft during landing is more than double that of the ordinary aircraft when landing.

The J10 did not consider the needs of the ship at the beginning of the design. To change to a carrier-based aircraft, major changes to the landing gear and airframe structure were required. With reference to the differences between the F-18L and the FA-18, it is expected that the aircraft will increase by another 1000 kg. The basic performance of the aircraft after weight gain is estimated to have declined to some extent. Therefore, it is difficult for the ship-borne J-10 to undertake long-range interception and long-range attack missions that penetrate deep into local inland areas, and it cannot compare with the "Super Hornet" in terms of performance. In addition, the aircraft must be able to withstand the corrosion of the sea air. It is best to use ladders and other fine tools during deck maintenance, which may reduce the efficiency of deck operations and even increase danger.

In addition, carrier-based aircraft has higher requirements for reserve fuel. Because the carrier-based aircraft may circle in the air for a long time when returning to the carrier, waiting for other aircraft to land. And the difficulty of landing is far greater than the difficulty of landing. If the landing is unsuccessful, you need to go around and then land again. Therefore, the carrier-based aircraft needs to reserve a large amount of residual fuel before it enters the ship, which will lead to a further shortening of the range after the J-10 is changed to a carrier-based aircraft. In addition, the J-1O is a large sweep angle delta wing layout with a long fuselage and a narrow wingspan. This shape feature is not conducive to the placement of external points. The J-10 needs to carry 3 anti-ship tanks, which are located at the main hanging point under the fuselage and the inner hanging point under the wing. The small hanging point under the fuselage carries the electronic warfare pod. There are only four under the wing. If the J-10 carried two air-to-air missiles for self-defense, it can only carry two anti-ship missiles.

The biggest difference between this view and the affirmative side is about folding wings. The J-10's wings are not suitable for folding. If folded on the outside of the wing, the folded part of the wing is small and the effect is not obvious; if folded on the inside, because the delta wing chord is longer, the structure of the folded position is not easy to handle. The carrier-based version of similar Rafale fighters was not designed to fold wings. If the J-10 is not folded, it will not have any advantages in terms of space compared with the J-15.

Another point concerns the issue of overall operational effectiveness. The range and maximum bomb load of the J-15 carrier have obvious advantages over the J-10. For example, carrying a mission with the same weight of ammunition, the range of the J-10 is about half that of the J-15. With the same combat distance, the J-15's ammunition load can be nearly 50% more than the J-10's. In air-to-air combat, the longer the aircraft, the longer the combat time, and the aircraft with a short air time need to be rotated continuously. When fighting on the ground, there are more airport and ground commanders who can invest in support, and the impact is not great, but for aircraft carrier formations, frequent takeoffs and landings are a very unfavorable factor for combat command.