JL-9G - Chinese Naval Trainer Aircraft
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
JL-9G - Chinese Naval Trainer Aircraft
Chinese equivalent of the T-45? Note the cat hook on the nose wheel. It is only a single wheel though, I suppose it might change between the prototype and production model.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guizhou_JL-9
Alert 5 » Folding wing on JL-9? Carrier-base variant? - Military Aviation News
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guizhou_JL-9
Alert 5 » Folding wing on JL-9? Carrier-base variant? - Military Aviation News
Gear doesn't look robust enough for carrier ops with student naval aviators, if that's one of the intended jobs. Sweep looks pretty rakish for carrier ops as well.
Looks like the love child of a one night stand between a MiG-21 and a F-5.
Looks like the love child of a one night stand between a MiG-21 and a F-5.
You may be right that it's a catapult attachment point, but I don't think it is.
1. The Chinese do not have any catapult-equipped aircraft carriers. They might have them in mind, but are a long way off, so it seems odd to have a training aircraft ready now.
2. The towing bit, if it pivots down at all, would get nowhere near deck level. In my experience, the bit of the catapult that sticks above deck level, doesn't stick up very far.
3. The single nose-wheel, from my limited observation of catapult ops of nose-tow and bridle-launched aircraft, suggests it isn't the former*
4. As does the complete lack of a drag-link (or whatever it's called) between the nose-leg and fuselage. I suppose the Chinese may have put the world's stongest mounting at the top of the nose-leg, made the leg itself out of nano-tube reinforced unobtainium and have a ready-market for one-careful-owner bent nose-legs, but I think more probably there's another answer.
There are no really evident bridle pick-up points on the wings though. So it might be a naval trainer, but so was the Jetstream T2
1. The Chinese do not have any catapult-equipped aircraft carriers. They might have them in mind, but are a long way off, so it seems odd to have a training aircraft ready now.
2. The towing bit, if it pivots down at all, would get nowhere near deck level. In my experience, the bit of the catapult that sticks above deck level, doesn't stick up very far.
3. The single nose-wheel, from my limited observation of catapult ops of nose-tow and bridle-launched aircraft, suggests it isn't the former*
4. As does the complete lack of a drag-link (or whatever it's called) between the nose-leg and fuselage. I suppose the Chinese may have put the world's stongest mounting at the top of the nose-leg, made the leg itself out of nano-tube reinforced unobtainium and have a ready-market for one-careful-owner bent nose-legs, but I think more probably there's another answer.
There are no really evident bridle pick-up points on the wings though. So it might be a naval trainer, but so was the Jetstream T2
Note the cat hook on the nose wheel
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
West Coast,
You can also add the location of the air brake, But there has to be a reason for the wingfold - and it fits in with past announcements.
You can also add the location of the air brake, But there has to be a reason for the wingfold - and it fits in with past announcements.
Is there a picture of the wing fold somewhere as it does not look like one in the pictures above?
Indeed, apart from the intake it looks like an unremarkable design.
Indeed, apart from the intake it looks like an unremarkable design.
Last edited by Just This Once...; 23rd Dec 2016 at 06:14.
Not really if you think of the size difference between the 2 aircraft. The thin wing of the JL-9 would not provide the internal volume required for such a sleek installation of the wing-fold mechanism.
Sorry, just not seeing what you are seeing. Aside from the intake it looks like a rather conventional 1970's design.
Sorry, just not seeing what you are seeing. Aside from the intake it looks like a rather conventional 1970's design.
