Shenyang FC-31 demonstrators / J-35 naval fighter / J-35A land-based version

Am I alone in thinking it looks like a mish mash of F-22 and YF-23?
 
TBH for me it lools EXTREMELY blank. Like absolutely lacking any personality whatsoever.
 
The choice to go with two engines is probably the result of not having a suitable engine for a single powerplant design which could still be within the requirements. This prototype probably enjoys some 180-200 kN of uninstalled thrust. Whereas even if the design was tailor made around a single WS15 engine, the thrust rating would have likely been some 30-ish kN less. And WS15 was also probably seen as a very risky, far away in the future choice back then, 10 years ago, when FC31 configuration was probably more-or-less frozen. It may very well still turn out to be an engine not to see serial production for another decade.

Of course, if it turns out that FC31 will be using engines totaling some 170-ish kn of thrust, while at the same time WS-15 manages to match that rating and somehow does become readily available by 2025 or so - then that's going to be an opportunity missed for the Chinese air forces.
 
TomcatViP said:
I wonder which side will suffer the most from friendly fire...
Perhaps F-35 will have to be escorted by A-10 and J31 by J6?
Click to expand...


Yes for sure, esp. since the PLAAF no longer operates J-6s.
 
Another let-down: ‍♂️

The image posted yesterday is PS'ed since someone took an existing image of this FC-31V2 parked on the tarmac, rotated it slightly and put it against a false background to make it appear landing or at least in the air.

(via by78/SDF)

FC-31V3 or V3 - 20200507 - full.jpg FC-31V2 grey 31003 - 20200507.jpg
 
OK, so there is still no Third prototype of J-31 yet.

Bit of a downer as among the Asian stealth fighters, this one is aside from J-20 is the most mature in terms of development.
 
possibly related

via alert5

The article said its personnel was sent to Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute or 601 Institute and the 29th Research Institute of the China Electronics Technology Group Corporation (CETC) during COVID-19 to support the aircraft’s development work.


The aircraft could either be a new variant of an existing airframe or a total new design. However, it is of note that if its a new design, it would have been written as 新型 in mandarin.
Click to expand...

Screenshot_2020-06-30-%E3%80%90%E5%A5%8B%E6%88%98%E2%80%9C%E5%8F%8C%E8%BF%87%E5%8D%8A%E2%80%9D%E3%80%91-%E8%88%AA%E7%A9%BA%E5%B7%A5%E4%B8%9A%E7%BB%BC%E5%90%88%E6%89%80%E6%9F%90%E6%96%B0%E5%9E%8B%E6%88%98%E6%9C%BA%E6%8A%80%E6%9C%AF%E5%9F%BA%E7%A1%80%E4%B8%93%E9%A1%B9%E5%85%A8%E5%8A%9B%E4%BB%A5%E8%B5%B4%E4%BF%9D%E8%8A%82%E7%82%B91.png
 
Definitely, "Eat the pudding"..... Everyone else is.
 
Grey Havoc said:
www.forbes.com

The Chinese Navy Could Save The Stealth Fighter No One Else Wants

The Chinese navy reportedly is considering acquiring a new stealth fighter to replace existing carrier-launched warplanes that have proved unreliable and unsafe.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...


Oh well, a typical David Axe report ... we all know it is nothing but the second prototype now with the confirmed serial 31003 and as such indeed the third aircraft build (with no. 02 being a static airframe eventually) but there are only two flown.

1594794661315.png
 
I will defer to those with far more aviation history background than I, but it strikes me that the Chinese aerospace sector is where the west and Soviet Russia were in the 1950's. Plenty of "barrowed" technologies in play back then as well. As a nation China strikes me as being at a point of 'acceptable risk' with less well defined and documented aero-technology in a strategic direction to become a world leading aero-engineering nation. So I agree with @TomcatViP that while a smart looking aircraft it will be interesting to see how the design morphs, or ends, as part of the national endeavor.

clearly I need to drink more today.
 
Can't help thinking

a) this is a F-35 done the "right" way - no VSTOL and lift fan to ruin the pilot rear view... even on the variants where it is not present.

b) And twin-jet like a Superbug or Tomcat...

c) Kind of "Superbug / F-35" hybrid done the right way.

d) Frack, ain't the FC-31 close from what the NATF was to be, circa 1993 ?

e)... a stealth Tomcat / A-6 replacement
...
f) And NOT the Super Bug and NOT the F-35 they got instead ?

g) Maybe the USN should take a licence ? :p
 
a) this is a F-35 done the "right" way - no VSTOL and lift fan to ruin the pilot rear view...
Click to expand...
Irrelevant thanks to the AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture (DAS)
 
Archibald said:
Can't help thinking

a) this is a F-35 done the "right" way - no VSTOL and lift fan to ruin the pilot rear view... even on the variants where it is not present.

b) And twin-jet like a Superbug or Tomcat...

c) Kind of "Superbug / F-35" hybrid done the right way.

d) Frack, ain't the FC-31 close from what the NATF was to be, circa 1993 ?

e)... a stealth Tomcat / A-6 replacement
...
f) And NOT the Super Bug and NOT the F-35 they got instead ?

g) Maybe the USN should take a licence ? :p
Click to expand...
My only qualm is it needs a bigger wing and control surfaces for carrier suitability.
 
Per the article, the model was seen on the carrier mock-up. So the inference is that the PLAN is planning to adopt it.
 
A naval J-20 would have needed a beast of a carrier aircraft to support it in any significant numbers. A naval FC-31 sounds more "reasonable". Difference between the two is like NATF and JAST...
 
A naval FC-31 was always more likely, the J-20 is a beast of an aircraft, and, although it would fit, wouldn't make much sense, from an operational, and technical standpoint. I remember reading articles back in 2017/2018 that the PLAN was having some troubles with their J-15s, and such troubles would recur with the J-20, and, I would even say, such operational problems would be amplified.
 
Archibald said:
A naval J-20 would have needed a beast of a carrier aircraft to support it in any significant numbers. A naval FC-31 sounds more "reasonable". Difference between the two is like NATF and JAST...
Click to expand...

I think it was the right idea to go for the naval JF-31 over the J-20. It will be interesting to see how the PLAN modify the JF-31 for carrier operations.
 
Wyvern said:
A naval FC-31 was always more likely, the J-20 is a beast of an aircraft, and, although it would fit, wouldn't make much sense, from an operational, and technical standpoint. I remember reading articles back in 2017/2018 that the PLAN was having some troubles with their J-15s, and such troubles would recur with the J-20, and, I would even say, such operational problems would be amplified.
Click to expand...
on a related note, I've felt the same way with the yak-141 and mig-29K over the Su-33. The latter being maybe a bit too big for that size of carrier
 
helmutkohl said:
on a related note, I've felt the same way with the yak-141 and mig-29K over the Su-33. The latter being maybe a bit too big for that size of carrier
Click to expand...

Yes, the MiG-29K would likely have been a better solution, and also given MiG the basis for a more competitive mid-weight export fighter (they hung onto the insufficient vanilla Fulcrum airframe far too long). I doubt this would have contained Sukhoi's meteoric rise, but maybe it would have provided MiG with enough clout to get the Skat UCAV project underway and thus carve out a niche for itself alongside its rival. Who knows, with the basic airframe more mature, perhaps it could have won the Indian MMRCA competition. Instead, MiG has pretty much faded into oblivion :(
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom