FC-31 stealth fighter thread.

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

jessmo112

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 228
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post26 May 2020, 02:35

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1189444.shtml





Channels

China’s FC-31 stealth fighter jet making new progress, photos show
By Liu Xuanzun Source:Global Times Published: 2020/5/25 18:18:16
70

A Chinese FC-31 stealth fighter has its test flight ahead of the 10th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition in Zhuhai, South China's Guangdong Province, Nov 10, 2014. File photo: Xinhua



New photos of a prototype FC-31, China's second type of stealth fighter jet, have been appearing frequently on Chinese social media since May, years after disappearing from the public eye. Now painted in a silver gray coating, its development is making smooth progress, experts said on Monday.

A new set of photos of what seems to be an FC-31 fighter jet on a test flight was posted on Sina Weibo on Saturday. This is not the first time the aircraft has made an appearance recently, as some photos were also posted by another Sina Weibo user on May 18, Shanghai-based news outlet eastday.com reported.

Unlike photos taken in previous years, the FC-31 prototype in the new photos is painted with silver gray coating, eastday.com said. It seems to be an upgraded version with modifications made to its aerodynamic design just like the prototype that made its maiden flight in 2016, instead of the original version that made its public debut at Airshow China in 2014.

The authenticity of the photos, including the time and location they were taken, cannot be verified.

The photos soon sparked heated discussions among military enthusiasts, as they were reposted on forums on military affairs and overseas social media like Twitter.

Fu Qianshao, a Chinese air defense expert, told the Global Times that the new painting could be a sign that the FC-31 was testing its stealth capability and low-observability against the naked eye.

Fu said that while the photos could not show exactly how much progress had been made, the aircraft is confirmed to be conducting new test flights and making significant steps.

Based on the results of the test flights, improved prototypes could be made, Fu said.

Military observers have long speculated that the made-for-export FC-31 could be put into domestic military service. Some claimed an upgraded FC-31 could serve as China's next-generation carrier-based fighter jet.

The Chinese Air Force, Navy and foreign clients could all be interested in this advanced stealth fighter jet, Fu said, noting that the FC-31 will likely continue its development and be equipped with new engines and devices in the

And yes, I used the search feature and could not find the stand alone thread for the J-31. So please if there is one..
No I insist that you merge it.

As far as the J-31 is concerned I don't see how your going to get this thing carrier ready.
We already know that the plane is underpowered.
Western journalists noticed that the plane needed after burner years ago to stay straight and level.
Now trying to fit it with radar, esm boxes and carrier STUFFS will likely add 5000+ lbs
To be honest I think they should have abandoned the Mig-29s engine and built the plane around the Su-35s engine. They would have gotten a more reliable engine

The Rd-33 is

Performance
Maximum thrust: 50.0 kN (11,230 lbf) dry, 81.3 kN (18,285 lbf) afterburning.

The plane itself has to be well over 25k empty Probably closer to 30.
The plane is in an energy black hole with the Rd-33

Powerplant: 2 × Saturn AL-41F1S afterburning turbofan engines, 86.3 kN (19,400 lbf) thrust each dry, 142 kN (32,000 lbf) with afterburner

The only way this airframe flies off of a carrier is with 2 AL-41F1S..

Ohh yeah and the wing isnt optomized for slow carrier speeds either.
Offline

jessmo112

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 228
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post26 May 2020, 02:49

2 × General Electric F414-GE-400 turbofans
Dry thrust: 13,000 lbf (62.3 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) each

F-135
Maximum thrust:
28,000 lbf (128 kN) military thrust,
43,000 lbf (191 kN) with afterburner

2 × General Electric F404-GE-402 afterburning turbofan engines, 11,000 lbf (49 kN) thrust each dry, 17,750 lbf (79.0 kN) with afterburner

Just to give some perspective the Rd-33 is a engine that is firmly in the 4th gen range.
You are basically building a 5th generation fighter
In the medium weight class (28-30k weight class)
With a light fighter engine..
The Chinese must find a way to get the thrust to within F-35s weight level if they are going to copy an F-35.
Either the plane gets lighter or the thrust increases
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6901
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 May 2020, 03:31

jessmo112 wrote:2 × General Electric F414-GE-400 turbofans
Dry thrust: 13,000 lbf (62.3 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) each

F-135
Maximum thrust:
28,000 lbf (128 kN) military thrust,
43,000 lbf (191 kN) with afterburner

2 × General Electric F404-GE-402 afterburning turbofan engines, 11,000 lbf (49 kN) thrust each dry, 17,750 lbf (79.0 kN) with afterburner

Just to give some perspective the Rd-33 is a engine that is firmly in the 4th gen range.
You are basically building a 5th generation fighter
In the medium weight class (28-30k weight class)
With a light fighter engine..
The Chinese must find a way to get the thrust to within F-35s weight level if they are going to copy an F-35.
Either the plane gets lighter or the thrust increases


No, the J-31 is a 5th Generation Fighter with 4th Generation Engines. Yet, so is the AMCA, TFX, and K-FX.

As for the wing of the J-31 not being suited for Carrier Operations. You could say the same about the F-35A. Yet, it's sister the F-35C is ideally suited....So, what was your point???

Oh, and some public sources claim the initial version of the J-31. Will use a version of the RD-93 that makes ~ 20,000 lbs of thrust each. While, later version will use the WS-13 at ~ 22,000 lbs plus.
Offline

jessmo112

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 228
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post26 May 2020, 03:49

The F-35A and C dont use the same wings.
The C model uses more wing, which weighs more.
My point was that even if you can squeeze out an extra 2k lbs of thrust its going to be offset by the increase
In weight.
The plane not only has a thrust issue, which is dangerous at low speeds, but also a trap speed glide slope issue.
Can the plane glide in at 145 knots?
Is it controllable? Does it have the excess power forca bolter? Even if you dont make a carrier version the plane was overweight with 0 avionics weapons or systems.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6901
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 May 2020, 04:15

jessmo112 wrote:The F-35A and C dont use the same wings.
The C model uses more wing, which weighs more.
My point was that even if you can squeeze out an extra 2k lbs of thrust its going to be offset by the increase
In weight.
The plane not only has a thrust issue, which is dangerous at low speeds, but also a trap speed glide slope issue.
Can the plane glide in at 145 knots?
Is it controllable? Does it have the excess power forca bolter? Even if you dont make a carrier version the plane was overweight with 0 avionics weapons or systems.


Yes, and a Carrier Based J-31 would also weight more and have a larger wing than it's land base cousin. Just like the F-35A and F-35C. We all know that...So, again what's your point???

Also, as for power we don't know the true numbers. Nor, would it be a surprise that China is playing down the numbers. In order to keep people guessing.
Offline

jessmo112

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 228
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post26 May 2020, 05:48

The problems with this plane are manifold which was the point. And not solvable with current Chinese Tech unless.

A. The Chinese use 2 Su-35 engines.

B. The Chinese shave off close to 10k lbs

The problems with your playing down numbers senario are also numerous because:

1. The Rd-33 (and its spin offs) are a know quantity at this point. There is no hiding it. There is no magical cure for an engine thats been around 40 years.

2 . There is visual evidence to suggest that the plane struggles to stay level without AB.

The MiG official may be correct. An aircraft of this type designed with Russian assistance would probably perform better.

The FC-31's flight routine shows that it "bleeds" too much energy -- so when it enters into a turn it begins to lose altitude. Even during straight and level flight the pilot has to engage the engine's afterburners in order to keep the aircraft from sinking to a lower altitude. These are defects in the aircraft's aerodynamic design that a Russian design team would not have made.

https://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/world/as ... index.html
This was noticed by Russians and amAmericans.

3. It is a fact that China has struggled with engine tech.
.
You asked me to sum up my point.
My point is Chinese engine tech sucks
Chinese fighters suck because of the 1st point.
The Chinese military will always be sub-par until they fix these issue, therefore they Suck.
Did I make my point clear?
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6901
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 May 2020, 06:57

jessmo112 wrote:The problems with this plane are manifold which was the point. And not solvable with current Chinese Tech unless.

A. The Chinese use 2 Su-35 engines.

B. The Chinese shave off close to 10k lbs

The problems with your playing down numbers senario are also numerous because:

1. The Rd-33 (and its spin offs) are a know quantity at this point. There is no hiding it. There is no magical cure for an engine thats been around 40 years.

2 . There is visual evidence to suggest that the plane struggles to stay level without AB.

The MiG official may be correct. An aircraft of this type designed with Russian assistance would probably perform better.

The FC-31's flight routine shows that it "bleeds" too much energy -- so when it enters into a turn it begins to lose altitude. Even during straight and level flight the pilot has to engage the engine's afterburners in order to keep the aircraft from sinking to a lower altitude. These are defects in the aircraft's aerodynamic design that a Russian design team would not have made.

https://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/world/as ... index.html
This was noticed by Russians and amAmericans.

3. It is a fact that China has struggled with engine tech.
.
You asked me to sum up my point.
My point is Chinese engine tech sucks
Chinese fighters suck because of the 1st point.
The Chinese military will always be sub-par until they fix these issue, therefore they Suck.
Did I make my point clear?



China is making considerable progress and is quickly surpassing Russia in many respects. As a matter of fact with the failure of the Su-57 Felon. They pretty much have given the future Non-Western Fighter Market to the Chinese....

:shock:
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6901
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post26 May 2020, 06:59

As a matter of fact one day. We may even see a Chinese J-20 and/or J-31 in Russian Colors....... :wink:
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4157
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post26 May 2020, 15:23

They seem to have done well with the J-10B/C and the new domestic engine that powers it. Although, this aircraft is clearly another ball game. It's going to take two engines, and the suggestion of using the Flankers is logical... but I doubt they'd fit, unless there was a substantial re-design?

It's ironic how they seem to have had an easier time building the J-20, a much larger and more complex aircraft. Once you get down to a smaller size, it's apparently a challenge. You've got to carry the weapons, the fuel and all that whizbang tech/avionics internally and.... need the power.

They'll figure it out - eventually. But it's probably going to take some time. Thankfully with the SU-57 is going nowhere, they have plenty of it...
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3602
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post26 May 2020, 18:50

Corsair1963 wrote:
jessmo112 wrote:The problems with this plane are manifold which was the point. And not solvable with current Chinese Tech unless.

A. The Chinese use 2 Su-35 engines.

B. The Chinese shave off close to 10k lbs

The problems with your playing down numbers senario are also numerous because:

1. The Rd-33 (and its spin offs) are a know quantity at this point. There is no hiding it. There is no magical cure for an engine thats been around 40 years.

2 . There is visual evidence to suggest that the plane struggles to stay level without AB.

The MiG official may be correct. An aircraft of this type designed with Russian assistance would probably perform better.

The FC-31's flight routine shows that it "bleeds" too much energy -- so when it enters into a turn it begins to lose altitude. Even during straight and level flight the pilot has to engage the engine's afterburners in order to keep the aircraft from sinking to a lower altitude. These are defects in the aircraft's aerodynamic design that a Russian design team would not have made.

https://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/world/as ... index.html
This was noticed by Russians and amAmericans.

3. It is a fact that China has struggled with engine tech.
.
You asked me to sum up my point.
My point is Chinese engine tech sucks
Chinese fighters suck because of the 1st point.
The Chinese military will always be sub-par until they fix these issue, therefore they Suck.
Did I make my point clear?



China is making considerable progress and is quickly surpassing Russia in many respects. As a matter of fact with the failure of the Su-57 Felon. They pretty much have given the future Non-Western Fighter Market to the Chinese....

:shock:


Quantify considerable progress, with regard to engine tech? What have they demonstrated, since the underpowered performance of the flight demo? Russia and China are both struggling to catch up, each with weaknesses in different areas.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6901
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post27 May 2020, 01:04

wrightwing wrote:
Quantify considerable progress, with regard to engine tech? What have they demonstrated, since the underpowered performance of the flight demo? Russia and China are both struggling to catch up, each with weaknesses in different areas.


I was talking across the board. That said, even in engines China has made considerable progress. As today many of the Flanker Series are using Chinese WS-10's and not Russian AL-31F's. As a matter of fact all the J-15's and J-16's are using WS-10's and I believe so are the J-10C's.

This while China is going all out to perfect their Military Aircraft Engines. Which, is not to say they are close to matching the West. Yet, making steady progress and won't be long before they surpass Russia. (not saying much)
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6901
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post27 May 2020, 01:08

mixelflick wrote:They seem to have done well with the J-10B/C and the new domestic engine that powers it. Although, this aircraft is clearly another ball game. It's going to take two engines, and the suggestion of using the Flankers is logical... but I doubt they'd fit, unless there was a substantial re-design?

It's ironic how they seem to have had an easier time building the J-20, a much larger and more complex aircraft. Once you get down to a smaller size, it's apparently a challenge. You've got to carry the weapons, the fuel and all that whizbang tech/avionics internally and.... need the power.

They'll figure it out - eventually. But it's probably going to take some time. Thankfully with the SU-57 is going nowhere, they have plenty of it...


China is making considerable progress that is for sure. Honestly, really impressed with the quality of the Fit and Finish of the J-10C, J-20, and J-31. While, the Russian Su-57 is very crude in comparison....
Offline

jessmo112

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 228
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post27 May 2020, 05:03

Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
Quantify considerable progress, with regard to engine tech? What have they demonstrated, since the underpowered performance of the flight demo? Russia and China are both struggling to catch up, each with weaknesses in different areas.


I was talking across the board. That said, even in engines China has made considerable progress. As today many of the Flanker Series are using Chinese WS-10's and not Russian AL-31F's. As a matter of fact all the J-15's and J-16's are using WS-10's and I believe so are the J-10C's.

This while China is going all out to perfect their Military Aircraft Engines. Which, is not to say they are close to matching the West. Yet, making steady progress and won't be long before they surpass Russia. (not saying much)


Its a clone of an old engine. I dont understand how that is progress they are several generations of engine behind the west. The west had a 5th generation engine 20 years ago. The AL-31 is equal to a F-100 which is a 40+ year old design. I cant stress enough that this area of tech is the linchpin to the entire Chinese national defense strategy.
No advanced engine= no advanced fighter..
No advances fighter = 2nd or third rate military
No 1st class military means no air superiority..
And you get the point.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6901
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post27 May 2020, 05:19

jessmo112 wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
Quantify considerable progress, with regard to engine tech? What have they demonstrated, since the underpowered performance of the flight demo? Russia and China are both struggling to catch up, each with weaknesses in different areas.


I was talking across the board. That said, even in engines China has made considerable progress. As today many of the Flanker Series are using Chinese WS-10's and not Russian AL-31F's. As a matter of fact all the J-15's and J-16's are using WS-10's and I believe so are the J-10C's.

This while China is going all out to perfect their Military Aircraft Engines. Which, is not to say they are close to matching the West. Yet, making steady progress and won't be long before they surpass Russia. (not saying much)


Its a clone of an old engine. I dont understand how that is progress they are several generations of engine behind the west. The west had a 5th generation engine 20 years ago. The AL-31 is equal to a F-100 which is a 40+ year old design. I cant stress enough that this area of tech is the linchpin to the entire Chinese national defense strategy.
No advanced engine= no advanced fighter..
No advances fighter = 2nd or third rate military
No 1st class military means no air superiority..
And you get the point.


As time goes it appears the J-20 is going to be much more capable than the Su-57. Which, will use the same Russian Engine or a Chinese "equivalent".

So, what don't you get??? :?
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2429
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post27 May 2020, 05:38

The J-20 and Su-57 use different engines and will do so even for future planned engines.
Next

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 37 guests