J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2013, 02:57
by popcorn
http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog ... for-sales/

China Says J-31 Fighter Will Compete With F-35 for Sales

A PLA Navy official has confirmed to state-run media outlets that China will export the Shenyang J-31 twin-engine fifth generation fighter jet.

According to the Taiwan-based Want China Times, Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong told the People’s Daily this week that the J-31 was never built with China’s military in mind, and it was highly unlikely that the PLA would ever operate J-31s off of its aircraft carriers. Instead, the J-31 was designed for export to China’s strategic partners and allies, particularly those that couldn’t purchase the F-35.

The J-31, often referred to as the Falcon Hawk, Falcon Eagle, F-60 or J-21, is one of China’s two prototype fifth-generation aircraft, the other being the J-20. It is built by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, and images of the aircraft first began appearing on the internet around this time last year.

Photos of the J-31 allegedly conducting its first test run surfaced last November, followed by a one-quarter scale model of the stealth fighter being showcased the same month at the China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition, China’s largest airshow. It was identified only as the Advanced Fighter Concept at the show, although reports in China’s state-run media said that prototype was a J-31. More recently, last month, the Global Times posted a picture of a J-31 doing a test run on its online edition.

Previous reports in China’s state-run media have been mixed as to whether the J-31 would serve as the PLA’s future carrier-based fighter, or whether it was intended for foreign customers. Sun Cong, the chief designer of both China’s current carrier-based aircraft, the J-15, as well as the J-31, told the People’s Daily earlier this year that future versions of the J-31 might become China next-generation carrier-borne fighter jet. However, representatives from the Aviation Industry Corporation of China, a state-owned aerospace company that displayed the prototype at the airshow last November, billed it at the time as intended for export..

More follows..

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2013, 09:19
by hornetfinn
I could definitely see J-31 being very interesting to countries not able to buy F-35 or even PAK-FA. I don't see it being much of a competitor to F-35 as it seems to have significantly lower overall capability (although it could potentially also be quite a bit cheaper to buy if also built in large numbers for PLAAF).
It could however be superior to 4th+ generation fighters, even the later ones.depending on avionics and level of stealth achieved. I see it very much like JF-17, which was designed as a cheaper alternative to F-16 and the like, but has not found much success in the market.

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2013, 13:09
by sferrin
Waiting for Solomon to start babbling about how the USMC should cancel the F-35B and buy the J-31. :lol:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 24 Jun 2015, 09:37
by abiramishankar
solmon should buy J-31 :D

Re:

Unread postPosted: 24 Jun 2015, 09:48
by Corsair1963
hornetfinn wrote:I could definitely see J-31 being very interesting to countries not able to buy F-35 or even PAK-FA. I don't see it being much of a competitor to F-35 as it seems to have significantly lower overall capability (although it could potentially also be quite a bit cheaper to buy if also built in large numbers for PLAAF).
It could however be superior to 4th+ generation fighters, even the later ones.depending on avionics and level of stealth achieved. I see it very much like JF-17, which was designed as a cheaper alternative to F-16 and the like, but has not found much success in the market.



I like it when the Russian and Chinese Bloggers start making wild claims on how many PAK-FA's and/or J-20's are going to be exported. Which, I reply name the country.........then the very quickly become quite. :doh:

Re: Re:

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2015, 11:39
by disconnectedradical
Corsair1963 wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:I could definitely see J-31 being very interesting to countries not able to buy F-35 or even PAK-FA. I don't see it being much of a competitor to F-35 as it seems to have significantly lower overall capability (although it could potentially also be quite a bit cheaper to buy if also built in large numbers for PLAAF).
It could however be superior to 4th+ generation fighters, even the later ones.depending on avionics and level of stealth achieved. I see it very much like JF-17, which was designed as a cheaper alternative to F-16 and the like, but has not found much success in the market.



I like it when the Russian and Chinese Bloggers start making wild claims on how many PAK-FA's and/or J-20's are going to be exported. Which, I reply name the country.........then the very quickly become quite. :doh:


As for J-20, zero because the Chinese government isn't planning on exporting it at all? That news came out several months ago.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2015, 13:12
by bring_it_on
According to the Taiwan-based Want China Times, Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong told the People’s Daily this week that the J-31 was never built with China’s military in mind, and it was highly unlikely that the PLA would ever operate J-31s off of its aircraft carriers. Instead, the J-31 was designed for export to China’s strategic partners and allies, particularly those that couldn’t purchase the F-35.


So how exactly does it AIM at the "F-35 market" There's exactly one F-16 customer that I can think of that is likely to strongly consider the J-31 and most likely because it has little chance to get any F-35's given its strategic realignment with China.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2015, 13:17
by sferrin
bring_it_on wrote:
According to the Taiwan-based Want China Times, Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong told the People’s Daily this week that the J-31 was never built with China’s military in mind, and it was highly unlikely that the PLA would ever operate J-31s off of its aircraft carriers. Instead, the J-31 was designed for export to China’s strategic partners and allies, particularly those that couldn’t purchase the F-35.


So how exactly does it AIM at the "F-35 market" There's exactly one F-16 customer that I can think of that is likely to strongly consider the J-31 and most likely because it has little chance to get any F-35's given its strategic realignment with China.


Pakistan? At this point I'd be twitchy about selling them to Turkey either.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2015, 13:22
by borg
Add to that the Russian state export, said during Le bourget, that the Pak-Fa is not on their current export list.
So lets not get carried away on the comparison export Charts.

Its not about whom cant afford the Pak-Fa.
The Pak-Fa is pretty much in the same shoe as F-22. There are severe restrictions on Pak-Fa export.

Pak-Fa will first and formost be fielded among VVS and IAF, any other AF is not even Worth debating at this time, it is so far into the future.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2015, 13:31
by bring_it_on
sferrin wrote:
bring_it_on wrote:
According to the Taiwan-based Want China Times, Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong told the People’s Daily this week that the J-31 was never built with China’s military in mind, and it was highly unlikely that the PLA would ever operate J-31s off of its aircraft carriers. Instead, the J-31 was designed for export to China’s strategic partners and allies, particularly those that couldn’t purchase the F-35.


So how exactly does it AIM at the "F-35 market" There's exactly one F-16 customer that I can think of that is likely to strongly consider the J-31 and most likely because it has little chance to get any F-35's given its strategic realignment with China.


Pakistan? At this point I'd be twitchy about selling them to Turkey either.


Yeah Pakistan, at least with Turkey you are supplying a NATO member and the collective capability of NATO. With Pakistan now deeply aligned with China strategically it makes little sense, to give them more cutting edge stuff. They do have the AMRAAM C now i think so they already have access to some of the more important and sophisticated systems. I believe the Chinese are planning to have a submarine operate out of Pakistan in the near term as well.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 27 Feb 2017, 22:00
by spazsinbad
Oh well - no one can compete with the F-35 'short range' or BULLSHITE! But at least some F-35 capabilities acknowledged.
Here’s how the F-35 stacks up to Russia and China’s 5th-generation aircraft
23/27 Feb 2017 Alex Lockie

"...the F-35 doesn’t offer any significant upgrades in range, weapons payload, or dogfighting ability over legacy aircraft, while its competition does....

...while the US’s fifth generation hinges on controlling the battle from range [probably means BVR] and at the jump-off point, Russia’s PAK-FA seems to focus on close-up fights, which the designers of the F-35 didn’t concentrate on....

...The F-35 does everything well and seeks the informational high ground with massive computing power, all-aspect stealth, and the ability to network with almost every set of eyes and ears in the US military.

The F-35 has limited range and ability for close combat, but unlike the Chinese and Russian fifth-gens that try to score kills on their own, the F-35 plays like a quarterback, sending targeting information to any platform available.

As the F-35 software develops, pilots will be free to take on more demanding missions, but China’s and Russia’s fifth-gens will still be confined to relatively narrow ones."

Source: http://hrana.org/articles/2017/02/heres ... -aircraft/
OR
Original: http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-vs- ... tning-ii-1

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2017, 01:55
by citanon
At the rate things are going perhaps China should hire Pierre Sprey as a sales consultant and sell some to Canada. :mrgreen:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2017, 03:52
by Corsair1963
citanon wrote:At the rate things are going perhaps China should hire Pierre Sprey as a sales consultant and sell some to Canada. :mrgreen:



:lmao:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2017, 03:55
by Corsair1963
spazsinbad wrote:Oh well - no one can compete with the F-35 'short range' or BULLSHITE! But at least some F-35 capabilities acknowledged.
Here’s how the F-35 stacks up to Russia and China’s 5th-generation aircraft
23/27 Feb 2017 Alex Lockie

"...the F-35 doesn’t offer any significant upgrades in range, weapons payload, or dogfighting ability over legacy aircraft, while its competition does....

...while the US’s fifth generation hinges on controlling the battle from range [probably means BVR] and at the jump-off point, Russia’s PAK-FA seems to focus on close-up fights, which the designers of the F-35 didn’t concentrate on....

...The F-35 does everything well and seeks the informational high ground with massive computing power, all-aspect stealth, and the ability to network with almost every set of eyes and ears in the US military.

The F-35 has limited range and ability for close combat, but unlike the Chinese and Russian fifth-gens that try to score kills on their own, the F-35 plays like a quarterback, sending targeting information to any platform available.

As the F-35 software develops, pilots will be free to take on more demanding missions, but China’s and Russia’s fifth-gens will still be confined to relatively narrow ones."

Source: http://hrana.org/articles/2017/02/heres ... -aircraft/
OR
Original: http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-vs- ... tning-ii-1


Absurd article.... :doh:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2017, 04:04
by Corsair1963
popcorn wrote:http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2013/09/27/china-says-j-31-fighter-will-compete-with-f-35-for-sales/

China Says J-31 Fighter Will Compete With F-35 for Sales

A PLA Navy official has confirmed to state-run media outlets that China will export the Shenyang J-31 twin-engine fifth generation fighter jet.

According to the Taiwan-based Want China Times, Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong told the People’s Daily this week that the J-31 was never built with China’s military in mind, and it was highly unlikely that the PLA would ever operate J-31s off of its aircraft carriers. Instead, the J-31 was designed for export to China’s strategic partners and allies, particularly those that couldn’t purchase the F-35.

The J-31, often referred to as the Falcon Hawk, Falcon Eagle, F-60 or J-21, is one of China’s two prototype fifth-generation aircraft, the other being the J-20. It is built by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, and images of the aircraft first began appearing on the internet around this time last year.

Photos of the J-31 allegedly conducting its first test run surfaced last November, followed by a one-quarter scale model of the stealth fighter being showcased the same month at the China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition, China’s largest airshow. It was identified only as the Advanced Fighter Concept at the show, although reports in China’s state-run media said that prototype was a J-31. More recently, last month, the Global Times posted a picture of a J-31 doing a test run on its online edition.

Previous reports in China’s state-run media have been mixed as to whether the J-31 would serve as the PLA’s future carrier-based fighter, or whether it was intended for foreign customers. Sun Cong, the chief designer of both China’s current carrier-based aircraft, the J-15, as well as the J-31, told the People’s Daily earlier this year that future versions of the J-31 might become China next-generation carrier-borne fighter jet. However, representatives from the Aviation Industry Corporation of China, a state-owned aerospace company that displayed the prototype at the airshow last November, billed it at the time as intended for export..

More follows..


The J-31 is not a threat to the F-35 Export Market. It's a threat to the Russian Fighter Export Market. As the PAK-FA has questionable performance and will be both costly to own and operate. Honestly, one of the biggest mistake Russia has ever made. Was to develop the PAK-FA instead of the Mikoyan LMFS or similar program. (IMHO)

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2017, 13:18
by mixelflick
I agree the J-31 is no threat to the F-35. It's always going to be sold as, "as good as the F-35" so.... why purchase the pretender if you can get the genuine article?

If they start selling it as, "superior" to the F-35 - that's a big claim. And big claims demand big evidence. Evidence that until they meet head to head, is going to be sorely lacking. The world has taken note that the F-35 is really what, 3rd generation stealth? (F-117, B-2, F-22/35). You don't just jump on the stealth bandwagon and starting pumping out 3rd gen stealth/5th gen jets..

But what do I know? I'd also agree the Russian's erred in pursuing PAK FA vs. a dedicated export model. If the early reports out of RF are true (20-1 for the F-35), the game has changed. I'd like to see that replicated withOUT the F-22, but it sounds like it was solid nonetheless.

Mig has a golden opportunity here, IMO. And it had better be something other than a stealth bolt on of the Mig-29...

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2017, 14:23
by hornetfinn
I think that there is no way that any company in the world could develop a real 5th generation fighter jet without massive support and money coming from governments. MiG is definitely not going to have money nor other resources to develop anything other than MiG-29 upgrades themselves. Russia does not have money to develop two new fighters simultaneously as they seem to have serious trouble developing PAK-FA to a real operational fighter jet.

I also don't think that J-31 is any way even remotely as capable as F-35. It's being developed by a single, fairly small company. There is simply no money for them to develop it to true 5th generation standard. Besides, they would need to develop a lot of basic technologies to I think it's more like X-35 currently with mostly off-the-shelf components (like RD-93 engines) with 4th generation avionics inside 1st generation Chinese stealth shell. It might help selling F-35 more than be a real threat to it. Without Chinese government investing heavily in it, I don't believe it will ever become a real 5th generation aircraft with advanced avionics and engines.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2017, 14:58
by sprstdlyscottsmn
mixelflick wrote:The world has taken note that the F-35 is really what, 3rd generation stealth? (F-117, B-2, F-22/35).

Well, the SR-71 design that was chosen was done so for stealth reasons, as was the paint chosen, so that makes it Gen 1 and push the F-22 to gen 4. The RAM of the F-35 is fundamentally different than the F-22 in that the skin IS the RAM, while the F-22 still has it as a coating. So that would make the F-35 the 5th gen stealth for the US.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 11:03
by inst
The J-31 does have some advantages, even though I doubt its viability. First, the J-31 will likely be cheaper than the F-35, second, the J-31 will likely be more maneuverable (in a traditional, sustained maneuverability sense), and third, it's not a knock-off of the F-35, it's a knock-off of the F-22, a comparison of the two aircraft makes it more obvious, except that the J-31 is at a reduced scale.

And let's put it another way; there are countries like Malaysia, which, while in the US orbit, buy Russian equipment on occasion; the RMAF maintains both F-18s and Su-27s. Here, there's potential for the J-31 to come into contest with the F-35 is more obvious.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 13:48
by wrightwing
inst wrote:The J-31 does have some advantages, even though I doubt its viability. First, the J-31 will likely be cheaper than the F-35, second, the J-31 will likely be more maneuverable (in a traditional, sustained maneuverability sense), and third, it's not a knock-off of the F-35, it's a knock-off of the F-22, a comparison of the two aircraft makes it more obvious, except that the J-31 is at a reduced scale.

And let's put it another way; there are countries like Malaysia, which, while in the US orbit, buy Russian equipment on occasion; the RMAF maintains both F-18s and Su-27s. Here, there's potential for the J-31 to come into contest with the F-35 is more obvious.

Why do you suppose that the J-31 is more maneuverable? It certainly has never demonstrated noteworthy agility. It has demonstrated smokey engines, and losing altitude in tight turns. Price will be the only metric, where it it'll have an advantage. The only markets where it will sell, is to countries that wouldn't be allowed to buy F-35s.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 13:57
by popcorn
Probably because the J-31 design was never compromised by having to accommodate a STOVL variant remember? The J-31 is everything the F-35 should have been... :doh:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 14:01
by juretrn
popcorn wrote:Probably because the J-31 design was never compromised by having to accommodate a STOVL variant remember? The J-31 is everything the F-35 should have been... :doh:

A MiG-29 bolt-on stealth kit?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 14:49
by steve2267
popcorn wrote:Probably because the J-31 design was never compromised by having to accommodate a STOVL variant remember? The J-31 is everything the F-35 should have been... :doh:


The F-35 design was not compromised by "accomodating" STOVL capabilities.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 15:49
by gta4
popcorn wrote:Probably because the J-31 design was never compromised by having to accommodate a STOVL variant remember? The J-31 is everything the F-35 should have been... :doh:


1. To have the same amount of thrust, twin engine will compromise more weight than single engine
2. J31 has too big wing sweep, which will result in weaker subsonic performance

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 15:50
by gta4
J-31 is basically Mig-29 with internal weapon bays, and given the empty weight of Mig29, the empty weight of J-31 is unlikely to be inferior than 13000kg. Note that even Mig-29K weights 12700kg.

Hint: weapon bay + retractable mechanism = at least 1500 kg.

So J-31 needs an new engine of at least 9750kg thrust to achieve the same T/W as F-35, which is very unlikely because the new engine is an derivative of RD-33. Even the most powerful RD-33 derivative so far (the one that Mig-29K equips) delivers only 8700kg thrust in normal mode, and 9000kg thrust in special mode.

And, no aerodynamic proof has shown that flatness has anything to do with the drag, especially subsonic drag. For instance, no piston fighters are slimmer of flatter compared to modern jets, but they are more efficient in subsonic. However, the bigger wing sweep of J-31 gives it more induced drag. Note that F-35 has the smallest wing sweep among all 4th and 5th gen (except hornet). If you look carefully, all Chinese and Russian 5th gen prototypes employ bigger wing sweep than F-22 and F-35, that is a trade-off (subsonic vs supersonic) considering the fact that they need to use weaker engines to achieve supercruise.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 16:18
by ricnunes
steve2267 wrote:
popcorn wrote:Probably because the J-31 design was never compromised by having to accommodate a STOVL variant remember? The J-31 is everything the F-35 should have been... :doh:


The F-35 design was not compromised by "accomodating" STOVL capabilities.


I believe that popcorn was being sarcastic :wink:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 16:41
by ricnunes
inst wrote:...the J-31 will likely be more maneuverable (in a traditional, sustained maneuverability sense), ...


Really you have to drop that "cliché" that the F-35 while very good in Stealth, etc... it lacks in maneuverability compared to any other modern fighter aircraft. That simply isn't true.
The F-35 is in fact an extremely agile and maneuverable aircraft which combines the turning agility/maneuverability of the F/A-18 (high AOA, etc...) with the energy agility/maneuverability of the F-16 (sustained turn maneuverability, recover lost energy fast, etc...). This alone indicates that we're talking about an aircraft that's extremely agile/maneuverable and better at this compared to the F-16 and F/A-18 and that again tells us, a lot.

Here, read more about the F-35's agility/maneuverability in the link below (English part in the page's second lower half):
http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfl ... ed-so-far/

Finally, an essential part of an aircraft agility/maneuverability is the powerplant or engine and the fact that a "small" aircraft like J-31 uses two engines (instead of one) may indicate a weakness in the Chinese aerospace industry which is the apparent inability to develop effective engines and the J-31 may be underperforming in terms of thrust-to-weight namely when compared to the F-35.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 18:44
by steve2267
ricnunes wrote:
steve2267 wrote:
popcorn wrote:Probably because the J-31 design was never compromised by having to accommodate a STOVL variant remember? The J-31 is everything the F-35 should have been... :doh:


The F-35 design was not compromised by "accomodating" STOVL capabilities.


I believe that popcorn was being sarcastic :wink:


My bad. :oops:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 20:58
by sferrin
popcorn wrote:Probably because the J-31 design was never compromised by having to accommodate a STOVL variant remember? The J-31 is everything the F-35 should have been... :doh:


So said B.S. :lmao:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 23:38
by gta4
J-31 is the worst possible JSF configuration:

1) Twin engine sacrifices more weight for the same thrust class
2) Twin engine sacrifices more cross-section aera for the same thrust class
3) High leading-edge sweep results in poor subsonic L/D

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 22 Mar 2017, 23:54
by count_to_10
Not that the J-31 isn't likely a much bigger threat than anything China currently has to offer.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 00:03
by inst
The F-35 has poor STR compared to 4.5th gen fighters, as well as the F-22, due to its high wing loading, and stated STR is only somewhat superior to the F-16's. My point about "traditional maneuverability" is that in the age of HOBS WVR missiles STR is never going to allow you to dodge missiles, so ITR, which the F-35 has in spades, is key as a last-ditch missile dodge tactic.

I don't see the J-31 as a viable "counter" to the F-35 due to its poor avionics loadout; it has the same radar aperture as the F-35, it has EOTS, but not EODAS, but the question is whether the J-31 can sell. For a banana-republic airforce more used to traditional dogfighting, the J-31 can outperform the F-35 at lower cost, even if, in a real combat environment, it'd be outclassed by the F-35. And the J-31, as a fifth-gen, will still counter the neighbors' F-16s and MiG-29s.

One other thing, the J-31 is not really a stealth MiG-29, if you look at lineage, it bears more similarities to the Sino-Pakistani JF-17, a development of the MiG-21. Likewise, if you compare it to the F-22, it's obviously taken a lot of cues from the F-22's aerodynamic formula.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 01:10
by vanshilar
inst wrote:The F-35 has poor STR compared to 4.5th gen fighters, as well as the F-22, due to its high wing loading, and stated STR is only somewhat superior to the F-16's.


I'm confused. Isn't saying that a plane's STR is "only somewhat superior to the F-16's" like saying that a new bomber's payload is "only somewhat superior to the B-52's" or saying that a new plane's combat radius is "only somewhat superior to the F-111's"?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 01:21
by gta4
inst wrote:The F-35 has poor STR compared to 4.5th gen fighters, as well as the F-22, due to its high wing loading, and stated STR is only somewhat superior to the F-16's.


1) That is simply becasue F-35 is carrying too much (8300 kg) fuel, and it's tecctical maneuvering weight is calculated using 60% internal fuel, which is 5000kg.

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=52510

If it carries the fuel for the same A/B duration as a traditional 4th gen fighter, its sustained G and energy recovery are far superior than Su-27/30. Remember Su-27 uses only 18920kg as combat weight, which is equivalent of 1800kg of fuel.

2) the STR of F-16 is already very good. Again, if you use the standard of "fuel for the same A/B duration":
viewtopic.php?f=55&t=52510&start=75

gta4 wrote:What I have proved:
Su-27 at 18920kg flying weight could sustain at 21 deg/sec, and that is about 1800kg total fuel weight.

To achieve similar afterburner duration, a F-16C-50 needs only 936kg fuel, resulting in 9675kg total flying weight. The corresponding sustained rate of turn is 22 deg/sec (converted from 21.5 deg/sec at 22000lb. See flight manual).

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 02:45
by inst
Cited F-16C/D clean STR is about 18 degrees, F-16A is about 20 degrees.

Also, if we're talking the 4.9G vs 9G figures, this implies that the degree/sec instantaneous turn rate of the F-35 is about 10 degree / sec.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 02:59
by gta4
inst wrote:Cited F-16C/D clean STR is about 18 degrees, F-16A is about 20 degrees.

Also, if we're talking the 4.9G vs 9G figures, this implies that the degree/sec instantaneous turn rate of the F-35 is about 10 degree / sec.


That is why we should not cite web encyclopedia.

If my memory serves, wiki also claimes F-16 has a rate of climb of only 254m/s.

The only reliable sources are: flight manual, test report, and tehnical papers that have gone through peer review process. You could use these things as proof for a court.

If you have gone to university, haven't your professor told you that web encyclopedia could not be cited as reference in your thesis?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 03:08
by gta4
inst wrote:Cited F-16C/D clean STR is about 18 degrees, F-16A is about 20 degrees.

Also, if we're talking the 4.9G vs 9G figures, this implies that the degree/sec instantaneous turn rate of the F-35 is about 10 degree / sec.


Your figure is terribly wrong.

First, It is >4.6g instead of 4.2g. Secondly, it is a threashold value instead of the true value (the former is always inferior than the latter). The most important thing is that, it is at 5000 kg fuel, 15000 ft (instead of at sea level)!

If you need the same A/B duration, a Su-27 must carry 6200kg fuel, resulting in even worth sustained G than F-35 at the same hight.

Anyway, since you are either blind or ignorant, it would be normal if you refuse to post any reliable rebuttal

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 03:10
by gta4
inst, please explain yourself:
viewtopic.php?f=55&t=52913
Poor pethetic coward

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 03:31
by fbw
inst wrote:Cited F-16C/D clean STR is about 18 degrees, F-16A is about 20 degrees.

Also, if we're talking the 4.9G vs 9G figures, this implies that the degree/sec instantaneous turn rate of the F-35 is about 10 degree / sec.

No, the sustained turn rate based on threshold is roughly 10-11 degree per second (.8 Mach, 4.6 g), the instantaneous turn rate based on the older heavier configuration (370 knots, 9g) would be roughly 25-26 degrees per second. At 15,000 feet

The F-16 does not have an 18-20 degree per second sustained turn rate at 15,000 feet either.

Edit- I calculated the F-35's instantaneous turn rate too high, probably more like 19-20 degrees.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 03:33
by gta4
fbw wrote:
inst wrote:Cited F-16C/D clean STR is about 18 degrees, F-16A is about 20 degrees.

Also, if we're talking the 4.9G vs 9G figures, this implies that the degree/sec instantaneous turn rate of the F-35 is about 10 degree / sec.

No, the sustained turn rate based on threshold is roughly 10 degree per second (.8 Mach, 4.6 g), the instantaneous turn rate based on the older heavier configuration (370 knots, 9g) would be roughly 25-26 degrees per second. At 15,000 feet


And I am sure he will use the ITR at 15000 ft to compare that at sea level.

He does not know that the ITR at sea level is 34% higher than that at 15000ft due to higher air density,

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 04:06
by gta4
viewtopic.php?f=55&t=52912&start=30
Ironically, inst just proved that F-35 is a top sustained turner. :mrgreen:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 05:33
by inst
fbw wrote:
inst wrote:Cited F-16C/D clean STR is about 18 degrees, F-16A is about 20 degrees.

Also, if we're talking the 4.9G vs 9G figures, this implies that the degree/sec instantaneous turn rate of the F-35 is about 10 degree / sec.

No, the sustained turn rate based on threshold is roughly 10-11 degree per second (.8 Mach, 4.6 g), the instantaneous turn rate based on the older heavier configuration (370 knots, 9g) would be roughly 25-26 degrees per second. At 15,000 feet

The F-16 does not have an 18-20 degree per second sustained turn rate at 15,000 feet either.

Edit- I calculated the F-35's instantaneous turn rate too high, probably more like 19-20 degrees.



Centripetal acceleration at 15000, mach .8 with 5 gs is

49m/s = v^2 / r

v^2 in m/s = ((1,160,000*.8)/3600)^2 = ~66450 m^2/s^2, divide both sides by 9 and multiply both sides by R, radius of turn is about 1356 m. Convert 1356m to circumference, you get 8520 meters, divided by velocity, you get ~33.05, divide 360 by 33.05 and you get about 10.89 degrees / second, lower than a clean F-16.

(Calculation error here, I accidentally used 45 m/s for 5 g instead of 49 m/s for 5 g.)

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 16:30
by gta4
inst wrote:(Calculation error here, I accidentally used 45 m/s for 5 g instead of 49 m/s for 5 g.)


Sorry to ruin your joy.
If we convert this performance for the same afterburner duration, F-35 could out-turn a Flanker or a Fulcrum:
viewtopic.php?f=55&t=52918

It is unfaire to comare A with B, which A has twice as long afterburner duration as that of B.

With the same afterburner duration, F-35 could reduce fuel weight by 3000 kg and easiy out-turn a Flanker or a Fulcrum. It is safe to assume that it could also out-turn a J-31

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2017, 15:00
by spazsinbad
Chinese Fighter Developments Revealed
27 Oct 2017 Reuben F. Johnson

"...The Shenyang FC-31 has gone through a major redesign to correct a number of shortcomings seen in the original prototypes. Among other changes, the structure has been reworked so that it is now three metric tons heavier and between 20 and 30 inches longer. The aircraft’s Russian-made RD-33 engine has been replaced with a Chinese engine that is supposedly “smokeless,” and the aircraft’s planform has been redesigned in order to reduce its radar cross section.

The new FC-31 variant is also supposed to receive the new WS-19 engine in 2019 and will give this aircraft supercruise capability as well. The radar is also reported to have been upgraded with new modes, including the ability to carry out dependent targeting or battlefield management tasks. The extra airframe structure will help in the eventual design of a carrier-capable version.

Other Chinese sources are also claiming that Indonesia is a serious potential export prospect for the FC-31. Jakarta had previously taken a minor role in the development of the Korean KF-X stealthy fighter. But that cooperation has reportedly ended...."

Source: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... s-revealed

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2017, 15:53
by smsgtmac
So, the J-31is now to be about 6600 lbs heavier with the magic engine yet to materialize? heh.
hans-solo-on-chinese-fighters.jpg

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2017, 17:36
by zerion
smsgtmac wrote:So, the J-31is now to be about 6600 lbs heavier with the magic engine yet to materialize? heh.
hans-solo-on-chinese-fighters.jpg

Well not according to this guy.

http://fmshooter.com/chinese-j-31-f-35-looked-like/

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2017, 18:06
by zhangmdev
If J-31 is going to enter service as a naval fighter, those tiny wings and flimsy landing gears really need to be enlarged and strengthened.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2017, 22:13
by disconnectedradical
The last I heard, Chengdu actually rained on the J-31's parade since their navalized J-20 proposal was judged to be better.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2017, 00:37
by smsgtmac
zerion wrote:
smsgtmac wrote:So, the J-31is now to be about 6600 lbs heavier with the magic engine yet to materialize? heh.
The attachment hans-solo-on-chinese-fighters.jpg is no longer available

Well not according to this guy.

http://fmshooter.com/chinese-j-31-f-35-looked-like/


:lol: He said 'Bulges'. :lol: A lot. Being a neo-isolationist libertarian with no aeronautics chops is bad enough. But the poor fellow seems to have terrible eyesight as well. I can't imagine anybody worth reading who would write an entire article holding up non-existant F-35 A and C 'bulges' as significant of anything substantial.

JSF-101-for-the-blind.jpg


There is more help for him just a click away: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/f35_arti ... tem_id=177

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2017, 01:10
by wrightwing
zerion wrote:
smsgtmac wrote:So, the J-31is now to be about 6600 lbs heavier with the magic engine yet to materialize? heh.
hans-solo-on-chinese-fighters.jpg

Well not according to this guy.

http://fmshooter.com/chinese-j-31-f-35-looked-like/

That guy is an idiot, and now I'll never get back the time I wasted, reading that article.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2017, 01:55
by sferrin
The "bulges" are for fuel as I recall.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2017, 08:22
by twistedneck
sferrin wrote:The "bulges" are for fuel as I recall.


I thought the gun was housed in the bulge in the A model.. the the B/C get gun pods? Or is he talking about the B lift fan bulge?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2017, 10:45
by tincansailor
disconnectedradical wrote:The last I heard, Chengdu actually rained on the J-31's parade since their navalized J-20 proposal was judged to be better.



Interesting. If the J-20 is navalized it's weight will be a very critical factor. The J-20's thrust to weight ratio is already a fraction worse then the F/A-18E. A navalized version will need stronger landing gear, structural strengthening, and a tail hook. That could add a couple thousand pounds of weight. Like it's predecessor the new Chinese 001A Class Carrier has no catapults. That will limit aircraft loads.

The next Class the 002 may have Catapults. The Chinese are testing both steam, and EMALS. Depending on how much EMALS technology they've stolen they might make a go of it. Considering how much trouble we've had, it's hard to imagine theirs will be available for installation on a carrier scheduled for commissioning in 2023. If it's EMALS it just about has to be a CVN, to generate enough power. The Chinese have never built a nuclear surface ship. Considering how marginal Russian Naval reactors are, what can the Chinese whip up at short notice?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2017, 14:38
by XanderCrews
smsgtmac wrote:
zerion wrote:
smsgtmac wrote:So, the J-31is now to be about 6600 lbs heavier with the magic engine yet to materialize? heh.
hans-solo-on-chinese-fighters.jpg

Well not according to this guy.

http://fmshooter.com/chinese-j-31-f-35-looked-like/


:lol: He said 'Bulges'. :lol: A lot. Being a neo-isolationist libertarian with no aeronautics chops is bad enough. But the poor fellow seems to have terrible eyesight as well. I can't imagine anybody worth reading who would write an entire article holding up non-existant F-35 A and C 'bulges' as significant of anything substantial.

JSF-101-for-the-blind.jpg


There is more help for him just a click away: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/f35_arti ... tem_id=177



I'll admit to thinking only the B had a lift fan bulge as well :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 01:39
by charlielima223
XanderCrews wrote:

I'll admit to thinking only the B had a lift fan bulge as well :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


Because the F-35 was/is advertised as a common airframe (or as common as they could design and engineer it...)

Image

(still more commonality between the 3 variants than an F-16, F/A-18 or Harrier...)

people will always assume that all 3 variants have all the same physical features and dimensions. My favorite one (that is still being thrown around) is when they blames the STOVL version for all giving the other variants a wide fuselage body :doh:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 03:11
by Corsair1963
I still think Russia will acquire the J-31 at some point. As it has no other viable option.... :shock:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 03:25
by Corsair1963
disconnectedradical wrote:The last I heard, Chengdu actually rained on the J-31's parade since their navalized J-20 proposal was judged to be better.



Honestly, I have my doubts about the J-20 being better than the J-31. Sounds like internal politics to me or even disinformation aimed at the West.....


The J-31 will be critical to the future of PLAAF. Just as the F-35 is to the USAF! :wink:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 04:00
by madrat
China is all about politics. If Xi needed some party support he'd quickly terminate even big fish like the J-20 if J-31 keeps him politically stronger. Success too quickly can lead to other persons in the party feeling uncomfortable. It's not easy keeping your spot in Chinese politics.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 04:16
by Corsair1963
My point is the J-31 is critical to the future of the PLAAF. Likely, even more so than the J-20.....

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 07:11
by disconnectedradical
Corsair1963 wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:The last I heard, Chengdu actually rained on the J-31's parade since their navalized J-20 proposal was judged to be better.



Honestly, I have my doubts about the J-20 being better than the J-31. Sounds like internal politics to me or even disinformation aimed at the West.....


The J-31 will be critical to the future of PLAAF. Just as the F-35 is to the USAF! :wink:


???

What are you basing this on? Based on reports from reputable PLAAF sources like Andreas Rupprecht (the guy who wrote THE western book on modern PLAAF), the J-31 has so far not impressed the PLAAF. The J-31 is pretty much entirely funded by Shenyang rather than the PLAAF, which is investing in the J-20.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 10:14
by hornetfinn
charlielima223 wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:

I'll admit to thinking only the B had a lift fan bulge as well :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


Because the F-35 was/is advertised as a common airframe (or as common as they could design and engineer it...)

Image

(still more commonality between the 3 variants than an F-16, F/A-18 or Harrier...)

people will always assume that all 3 variants have all the same physical features and dimensions. My favorite one (that is still being thrown around) is when they blames the STOVL version for all giving the other variants a wide fuselage body :doh:


I never understood why people are so fixated on airframe commonality when the real issue is commonality in avionics, engine and software. Of course there are some differences in engines, especially the B version, but they still have very much in common. Avionics and software are basically all the very same and that's where majority of the work has been done. Having differing airframe is not a problem in this day and age of robotics and automated production lines.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 15:49
by SpudmanWP
hornetfinn wrote:I never understood why people are so fixated on airframe commonality when the real issue is commonality in avionics, engine and software.
^^This

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 18:05
by sferrin
twistedneck wrote:
sferrin wrote:The "bulges" are for fuel as I recall.


I thought the gun was housed in the bulge in the A model.. the the B/C get gun pods? Or is he talking about the B lift fan bulge?


It's the "bulge" (more like a hump) for additional fuel. BF-1 does not have this. Was added after.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Oct 2017, 18:24
by SpudmanWP
The "bulge" on the F-35B is to accommodate the opening of the lift fan.

Image

Image

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 31 Oct 2017, 04:12
by rheonomic
hornetfinn wrote:I never understood why people are so fixated on airframe commonality when the real issue is commonality in avionics, engine and software.


Because people are stupid and ignorant.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 31 Oct 2017, 06:18
by Corsair1963
disconnectedradical wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:The last I heard, Chengdu actually rained on the J-31's parade since their navalized J-20 proposal was judged to be better.



Honestly, I have my doubts about the J-20 being better than the J-31. Sounds like internal politics to me or even disinformation aimed at the West.....


The J-31 will be critical to the future of PLAAF. Just as the F-35 is to the USAF! :wink:


???

What are you basing this on? Based on reports from reputable PLAAF sources like Andreas Rupprecht (the guy who wrote THE western book on modern PLAAF), the J-31 has so far not impressed the PLAAF. The J-31 is pretty much entirely funded by Shenyang rather than the PLAAF, which is investing in the J-20.


First, I have a bridge to sell you. If, you think Shenyang is solely funding the J-31 without assistance from Beijing. :doh: Second, the J-20 is a large Air Superiority Type Fighter similar to the F-22 and PAK-FA in general. It will not be produced in "vast" numbers. While, the J-31 is a Medium Sized Strike Fighter. In the same class as the US F-35. In short the J-31 would be the "workhorse" of both the PLAAF and PLAN!

In my opinion the J-31 is just as critical to China. As the F-35 is to the US and her Allies. :wink:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 31 Oct 2017, 06:51
by popcorn
Back to the topic, what country in their right mind that can afford a F-35 and pass US vetting would even consider buying a J-31?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 31 Oct 2017, 07:08
by Corsair1963
popcorn wrote:Back to the topic, what country in their right mind that can afford a F-35 and pass US vetting would even consider buying a J-31?



Is that an "oxymoron" :shock: Yet, to answer the obvious "NONE".

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 17 Dec 2017, 03:35
by arian
hornetfinn wrote: Having differing airframe is not a problem in this day and age of robotics and automated production lines.


There's very little "robotics and automated production lines" in aircraft manufacturing. The components are all assembled by hand, with the aid of various technologies in the F-35 to fit them to better tolerances etc.,. But it's still all put there by hand. The parts themselves are still produced the same way as they were in previous fighters: CNC machines or composite laying machines. Of course these are more sophisticated than what they were 30 or 40 years ago; more axis of movement for CNC machines and much more advanced composite construction.

The commonality saves in the design phase so that you don't have to design different structures for the planes. In as much as that is an issue. And to a certain degree in the jigs needed for assembly and for not duplicating assembly/manufacturing lines. All of these: design, manufacturing and assembly, do matter to some degree when you have commonality.

Even if it were more automated as is the case for the 787 where entire fuselage skin sections can be manufactured in one piece by giant robots, having commonality helps in not needed additional jigs and additional programs for doing all that work. But F-35 is nowhere near as automated as 787 because it is a lot more complex in shape than a simple tube.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 17 Dec 2017, 03:56
by madrat
I'm not sure J-31 won't be costlier lifetime costs versus Su-50. Could even be comparable operational costs for less capabilities.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2018, 09:21
by popcorn
separated at birth... :mrgreen:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2018, 10:11
by kimjongnumbaun
popcorn wrote:separated at birth... :mrgreen:


Upon closer inspection of each air frame, they aren't exactly alike in lot of subtle ways. But despite being subtle, they actually would affect the performance significantly. Take a look at the intakes. The J-21 is a lot more open and would reflect a lot more radar waves. The chines are significantly different as well, where the F-35's are longer and would produce more thrust.

I wonder if the plans that were "stolen" were actually a planted honey pot to screw up the Chinese stealth fighter program.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 18 Jan 2018, 10:31
by weasel1962
The J-31 is probably what anyone would get when they try to adopt the same external shaping and couple that with the "Russian" (opps, Chinese) jet engines that are fitted to it. This means vents all have to be designed to ensure optimal airflow and aerodynamics. The avionics are entirely different and hence so would its capabilities.

Chinese saying: 1 cent money, 1 cent goods.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2018, 03:09
by tphuang
Corsair1963 wrote:
First, I have a bridge to sell you. If, you think Shenyang is solely funding the J-31 without assistance from Beijing. :doh: Second, the J-20 is a large Air Superiority Type Fighter similar to the F-22 and PAK-FA in general. It will not be produced in "vast" numbers. While, the J-31 is a Medium Sized Strike Fighter. In the same class as the US F-35. In short the J-31 would be the "workhorse" of both the PLAAF and PLAN!

In my opinion the J-31 is just as critical to China. As the F-35 is to the US and her Allies. :wink:


I think there might be a little misunderstanding on this topic. I was actually one of the people that mentioned J-31 (or project 310 as I used to call it) was not an official PLAAF project. I'm not convinced it has officially received a J series numbers. Anyhow, it's definitely still receiving PLAAF funding. As of now, it hasn't been able to impress PLAAF enough to be officially established as a PLAAF program. But it's very important for PLA to keep the 2 factory workflow going between CAC and SAC. If CAC receives all the projects, it will be very bad for competition in China. I am under the impression PLAN has picked a design based on J-20 for the next generation naval fighter jet. At the time, it was a little surprising for me.

So my guess is that they will keep the program going and you will see more prototypes with incremental updates. They are not in a huge rush to get this into service like J-20. During the testing phase, it will probably use WS-13E at some point instead of RD-93. But the goal is to use WS-19, which is in development, for the production copy. Although I could see it entering service a little underpowered with WS-13E. Bottom line, there is not a lot of option out there for PLAAF, so I do see this as the LO fighter at some point, but PLAAF isn't going to just hand the money to SAC. They have to meet the requirements. You can see that they only produced one demonstrator + one flying prototype so far vs 2 demonstrators and many flying prototypes with J-20. SAC isn't getting the same level of funding CAC got for J-20.

I would imagine this is aimed at countries in middle east and ASEAN that would've otherwise went for Su-57. Outside of PAF, can't imagine any of China's traditional clients being able to afford this.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2018, 03:15
by steve2267
tphuang wrote:
I think there might be a little misunderstanding on this topic. I was actually one of the people that mentioned J-31 (or project 310 as I used to call it) was not an official PLAAF project. I'm not convinced it has officially received a J series numbers. Anyhow, it's definitely still receiving PLAAF funding. As of now, it hasn't been able to impress PLAAF enough to be officially established as a PLAAF program. But it's very important for PLA to keep the 2 factory workflow going between CAC and SAC. If CAC receives all the projects, it will be very bad for competition in China. I am under the impression PLAN has picked a design based on J-20 for the next generation naval fighter jet. At the time, it was a little surprising for me.

So my guess is that they will keep the program going and you will see more prototypes with incremental updates. They are not in a huge rush to get this into service like J-20. During the testing phase, it will probably use WS-13E at some point instead of RD-93. But the goal is to use WS-19, which is in development, for the production copy. Although I could see it entering service a little underpowered with WS-13E. Bottom line, there is not a lot of option out there for PLAAF, so I do see this as the LO fighter at some point, but PLAAF isn't going to just hand the money to SAC. They have to meet the requirements. You can see that they only produced one demonstrator + one flying prototype so far vs 2 demonstrators and many flying prototypes with J-20. SAC isn't getting the same level of funding CAC got for J-20.

I would imagine this is aimed at countries in middle east and ASEAN that would've otherwise went for Su-57. Outside of PAF, can't imagine any of China's traditional clients being able to afford this.


Meeting requirements is always a good idea when designing an aircraft.

BUT... if J-31 doesn't really have a "J-number" and is NOT an official PLAAF project, then what are these requirements it must meet?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2018, 05:12
by madrat
Kyrgyzstan is another possible China flip. Russia hasn't been real keen on partnerships with former Soviet states and is losing influence over former puppet regimes with each passing moment.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2018, 13:54
by sferrin
steve2267 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
I think there might be a little misunderstanding on this topic. I was actually one of the people that mentioned J-31 (or project 310 as I used to call it) was not an official PLAAF project. I'm not convinced it has officially received a J series numbers. Anyhow, it's definitely still receiving PLAAF funding. As of now, it hasn't been able to impress PLAAF enough to be officially established as a PLAAF program. But it's very important for PLA to keep the 2 factory workflow going between CAC and SAC. If CAC receives all the projects, it will be very bad for competition in China. I am under the impression PLAN has picked a design based on J-20 for the next generation naval fighter jet. At the time, it was a little surprising for me.

So my guess is that they will keep the program going and you will see more prototypes with incremental updates. They are not in a huge rush to get this into service like J-20. During the testing phase, it will probably use WS-13E at some point instead of RD-93. But the goal is to use WS-19, which is in development, for the production copy. Although I could see it entering service a little underpowered with WS-13E. Bottom line, there is not a lot of option out there for PLAAF, so I do see this as the LO fighter at some point, but PLAAF isn't going to just hand the money to SAC. They have to meet the requirements. You can see that they only produced one demonstrator + one flying prototype so far vs 2 demonstrators and many flying prototypes with J-20. SAC isn't getting the same level of funding CAC got for J-20.

I would imagine this is aimed at countries in middle east and ASEAN that would've otherwise went for Su-57. Outside of PAF, can't imagine any of China's traditional clients being able to afford this.


Meeting requirements is always a good idea when designing an aircraft.

BUT... if J-31 doesn't really have a "J-number" and is NOT an official PLAAF project, then what are these requirements it must meet?


Probably "this is what the PLA would likely be looking for" and go for the best they can do. Could be they just said, "we need to be in this business" and built a couple demonstrators. Not every airframe is the result of a requirement flowing from the mouth of the customer.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2018, 20:13
by tphuang
steve2267 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
I think there might be a little misunderstanding on this topic. I was actually one of the people that mentioned J-31 (or project 310 as I used to call it) was not an official PLAAF project. I'm not convinced it has officially received a J series numbers. Anyhow, it's definitely still receiving PLAAF funding. As of now, it hasn't been able to impress PLAAF enough to be officially established as a PLAAF program. But it's very important for PLA to keep the 2 factory workflow going between CAC and SAC. If CAC receives all the projects, it will be very bad for competition in China. I am under the impression PLAN has picked a design based on J-20 for the next generation naval fighter jet. At the time, it was a little surprising for me.

So my guess is that they will keep the program going and you will see more prototypes with incremental updates. They are not in a huge rush to get this into service like J-20. During the testing phase, it will probably use WS-13E at some point instead of RD-93. But the goal is to use WS-19, which is in development, for the production copy. Although I could see it entering service a little underpowered with WS-13E. Bottom line, there is not a lot of option out there for PLAAF, so I do see this as the LO fighter at some point, but PLAAF isn't going to just hand the money to SAC. They have to meet the requirements. You can see that they only produced one demonstrator + one flying prototype so far vs 2 demonstrators and many flying prototypes with J-20. SAC isn't getting the same level of funding CAC got for J-20.

I would imagine this is aimed at countries in middle east and ASEAN that would've otherwise went for Su-57. Outside of PAF, can't imagine any of China's traditional clients being able to afford this.


Meeting requirements is always a good idea when designing an aircraft.

BUT... if J-31 doesn't really have a "J-number" and is NOT an official PLAAF project, then what are these requirements it must meet?


It's a little puzzling for me too, since this seems like the best SAC can do. I've heard about some other plans too. Including one that is a "stealth flanker", which to me sounds like Chinese version of Su-57 and just a plain stupid idea.

My guess is that PLAAF is content letting this project develop slowly in the background and wait to see how well they integrate some of the subsystems they develop based on experience from J-20 project. It won't be surprising if they wait until they have a better idea of when WS-19 can join service. So my best guess is that unless they pick up an export customer, this project will probably not get picked up by PLAAF until after 2020.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2018, 04:13
by Corsair1963
tphuang wrote:
It's a little puzzling for me too, since this seems like the best SAC can do. I've heard about some other plans too. Including one that is a "stealth flanker", which to me sounds like Chinese version of Su-57 and just a plain stupid idea.

My guess is that PLAAF is content letting this project develop slowly in the background and wait to see how well they integrate some of the subsystems they develop based on experience from J-20 project. It won't be surprising if they wait until they have a better idea of when WS-19 can join service. So my best guess is that unless they pick up an export customer, this project will probably not get picked up by PLAAF until after 2020.



Honestly, at the rate that the US and her Allies are building F-35's. I don't see China taking a slow approach with either the J-20 and/or J-31. If, anything they likely will accelerate development....

"IMHO"

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2018, 12:43
by hornetfinn
F-35 is a massive effort by many companies like LM, NG, BAE Systems, P&W etc. Besides that, USAF, USN, USMC (along with a number of smaller air forces) have and are putting a lot of effort into developing the aircraft. F-22 was also a rather massive effort from all parties. Development also took a lot of money. I really doubt that any modern fighter aircraft can be developed by some company alone, but would require a lot of support from a major air force and a lot of government money. So I think that either J-31 will fail pretty badly as a contender to F-35 (or even 4++ gen fighters), or it will get serious support from PLAAF and PRC. It seems like J-31 is not getting much attention currently and all efforts go to J-20.

Basically making a good looking stealth fighter prototype is pretty easy, just like YF-22, YF-23, X-35 and X-32... Ok, forget X-32 in that context :P It still took a huge amount of work and money to make F-22 and F-35 after that. IMO, J-31 is very likely about similar to X-35 but with purely 4th gen engine.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Aug 2018, 17:45
by mixelflick
If it's true China is building the J-31 solely for export, that is a MAJOR mistake IMO.

First, it tells your prospective buyers the aircraft is second rate. Sort of like when the F-20 competed vs. the F-16, and we all know how that ended. 2nd, if China wants to go toe to toe with the US, they're going to need several thousand J-31's to counter the US's several thousand F-35's.

Also, the J-20 isn't likely to see production beyond 500 airframes IMO. In fact, I'd consider that a very generous estimate, with 200 - 300 airframes a lot more likely. So if I'm reading this correctly, no Hi - Low mix for the Chinese air force/navy. And I'll echo the comments the J-20 is going to gain some serious weight if navalised. As it stands, the aircraft is under-powered and that will only be magnified after carrier compatible modifications are completed.

It may also be that China is confident in its J-10's and J-11's/15's, SU-35's ability to beat the F-35. If that's the case, then they're playing a very dangerous game. And that may be, because they have no experience in what 5th gen airframes are capable of, and how they've changed the game insofar as air to air and air to ground aviation is concerned.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 28 Aug 2018, 20:40
by castlebravo
mixelflick wrote:If it's true China is building the J-31 solely for export, that is a MAJOR mistake IMO.

First, it tells your prospective buyers the aircraft is second rate. Sort of like when the F-20 competed vs. the F-16, and we all know how that ended. 2nd, if China wants to go toe to toe with the US, they're going to need several thousand J-31's to counter the US's several thousand F-35's.

Also, the J-20 isn't likely to see production beyond 500 airframes IMO. In fact, I'd consider that a very generous estimate, with 200 - 300 airframes a lot more likely. So if I'm reading this correctly, no Hi - Low mix for the Chinese air force/navy. And I'll echo the comments the J-20 is going to gain some serious weight if navalised. As it stands, the aircraft is under-powered and that will only be magnified after carrier compatible modifications are completed.

It may also be that China is confident in its J-10's and J-11's/15's, SU-35's ability to beat the F-35. If that's the case, then they're playing a very dangerous game. And that may be, because they have no experience in what 5th gen airframes are capable of, and how they've changed the game insofar as air to air and air to ground aviation is concerned.


The US 5th-gen fleet is going to be spread out across the globe, so the PRC may be able to achieve local numeric superiority with a much smaller fleet.

I don't think China cares about the J-20's ability to engage and destroy the F-35 so much as its ability to avoid them. Their J-20s will be going after our AEW&Cs, tankers, MPAs, UAVs, 4th gen fighters, ect. They will also try to use the J-20 to ID and track our warships so that they can be engaged by other platforms with various of stand off weapons.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 03:28
by element1loop
castlebravo wrote: ... I don't think China cares about the J-20's ability to engage and destroy the F-35 so much as its ability to avoid them.  Their J-20s will be going after our AEW&Cs, tankers, MPAs, UAVs, 4th gen fighters, ect.  They will also try to use the J-20 to ID and track our warships so that they can be engaged by other platforms with various of stand off weapons.


You got that right. They won't want to lose valuable J20s fruitlessly fighting F-35s or F-22s. They will not seek that fight they will stick to their own plans and roles.

And is anyone paying attention to how small and unsuitable Chinese carriers are for the J20? And how long and heavy a J20 is? It dwarfs the J15 Flanker derivative. J20 P:W near to MTOW must genuinely suck, could it even launch itself and fly away from a ramp? It may just make a terrific splooshing sound. Personally I think it's fanciful to believe J20s will be operating from carrier decks at any point. I do however recall seeing a photo of a 'J31' moving about upon a mockup of a Chinese carrier deck. But until the engines mature--fugetaboutit.

As for J20 being (allegedly) "navalised", this does not mean it's destined for a carrier deck. It much more likely means "marinised", i.e. made corrosion-resistant for routinely operating from places like coastal airbase and islands, thus continually operating over marine environments with high salt crystal laden air, which can eat a jet and the engine compressors fast. Three to four years and they're stuffed.

I think people have just read way too much into the J20 being marinised.

The Su34 was likewise 'navalised' but do the Russians operate it from a carrier ramp? No, despite the propaganda imagery, they never have. Maybe it's because it's too big and heavy, so its P:W sucks at near to MTOW? (Su34 MTOW=99,425lb)

Maybe such small Russian Battle-Cruisers also can't store the fuel, spares and weapons they would rapidly chew through? But the Su34 was certainly navalised for its coastal basing and role.

The J20 would be so much worse to operate from a carrier--the 'Great Dragon' fans are just dreaming.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 03:32
by Corsair1963
Honestly, this talk that the FC-31 (i.e. J-31) is solely for "export" is ABSURD. China needs to produce it in respectable numbers. In order to make it affordable and as a counter to the F-35.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 07:59
by mk82
element1loop wrote:
castlebravo wrote: ... I don't think China cares about the J-20's ability to engage and destroy the F-35 so much as its ability to avoid them.  Their J-20s will be going after our AEW&Cs, tankers, MPAs, UAVs, 4th gen fighters, ect.  They will also try to use the J-20 to ID and track our warships so that they can be engaged by other platforms with various of stand off weapons.


You got that right. They won't want to lose valuable J20s fruitlessly fighting F-35s or F-22s. They will not seek that fight they will stick to their own plans and roles.

And is anyone paying attention to how small and unsuitable Chinese carriers are for the J20? And how long and heavy a J20 is? It dwarfs the J15 Flanker derivative. J20 P:W near to MTOW must genuinely suck, could it even launch itself and fly away from a ramp? It may just make a terrific splooshing sound. Personally I think it's fanciful to believe J20s will be operating from carrier decks at any point. I do however recall seeing a photo of a 'J31' moving about upon a mockup of a Chinese carrier deck. But until the engines mature--fugetaboutit.

As for J20 being (allegedly) "navalised", this does not mean it's destined for a carrier deck. It much more likely means "marinised", i.e. made corrosion-resistant for routinely operating from places like coastal airbase and islands, thus continually operating over marine environments with high salt crystal laden air, which can eat a jet and the engine compressors fast. Three to four years and they're stuffed.

I think people have just read way too much into the J20 being marinised.

The Su34 was likewise 'navalised' but do the Russians operate it from a carrier ramp? No, despite the propaganda imagery, they never have. Maybe it's because it's too big and heavy, so its P:W sucks at near to MTOW? (Su34 MTOW=99,425lb)

Maybe such small Russian Battle-Cruisers also can't store the fuel, spares and weapons they would rapidly chew through? But the Su34 was certainly navalised for its coastal basing and role.

The J20 would be so much worse to operate from a carrier--the 'Great Dragon' fans are just dreaming.


Spot on!!

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 10:18
by Corsair1963
Honestly, this idea that the J-20 is going to be the primary Stealth Fighter for China. While, also being produced as a Naval Fighter. (i.e. Carrier Based) Is in my opinion extremely far-fetched at best. As the design will never be cheap to produce in volume. Nor, would it be well suited for Aircraft Carrier Operations. (to big among others)


My guess is the J-20 will be produced in modest numbers. Either being employed as a Air Superiority Fighter or an Interdictor. While, the J-31 will be the primary Strike Fighter of both the PLAAF and PLAN. Including in a Naval Role on Chinese Aircraft Carriers. This is very similar to the F-22 and F-35 is US Service. So, it would hardly be a surprise....

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 12:55
by sferrin
element1loop wrote:And is anyone paying attention to how small and unsuitable Chinese carriers are for the J20?



Think of the Liaoning as a training carrier and the Type 001A as an interim. They're already working on the carrier after that which is suppose to be a CATOBAR, which should have no problem at all with an aircraft the size of the J-20. Even the Forrestals could handle the 80,000lb A3D and RA-5C.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 17:22
by tphuang
By this point, there is enough photo analysis done to show J-20 is not as large as originally assumed and that it's probably a little smaller than flankers, although it's denser. And they are not going to attempt a naval version based on J-20 until the engine situation gets sorted out.

I don't think anyone in PLAAF leadership thinks that J-10s and flankers are going to defeat F-35s, so it will be interesting in what they decide on as part of the lo-mix. None of the other ideas I've heard thus far sound that promising, so I do assume FC-31 will get picked up once they have a firmer grip on the engine situation. I can't see them abandoning a project that have already received this much funding and development effort. It costs a lot of money to develop 5th gen project, so most of the funding is going to get J-20 into a combat ready stage right now.

They might not be able to get it developed fast enough to sell to Russia. But I think it will be ready when countries like Malaysia or even Saudi Arabia are looking for a next generation fighter jet. Here is a question though, are concepts like silent Eagle going to be made available for export in the future? I could see that attracting export orders for countries that aren't getting F-35. At this point, the entire Su-57 project seems to be going nowhere.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 29 Aug 2018, 19:27
by marsavian
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, this idea that the J-20 is going to be the primary Stealth Fighter for China. While, also being produced as a Naval Fighter. (i.e. Carrier Based) Is in my opinion extremely far-fetched at best. As the design will never be cheap to produce in volume. Nor, would it be well suited for Aircraft Carrier Operations. (to big among others)


My guess is the J-20 will be produced in modest numbers. Either being employed as a Air Superiority Fighter or an Interdictor. While, the J-31 will be the primary Strike Fighter of both the PLAAF and PLAN. Including in a Naval Role on Chinese Aircraft Carriers. This is very similar to the F-22 and F-35 is US Service. So, it would hardly be a surprise....


The J-31 has to be turned into a fully working production design first and at the moment it just seems to be a private design that is sponsored by their government to see where it goes. The J-20 is their only official stealth design and it currently suits their purpose as a long range interceptor. Remember SAMs is not going to be their primary enemy but carrier/airfield based western allied aircraft. Just because the J-31 looks like the F-35 does not mean it is going to be produced like the F-35 or even needed to be.

The other thing they are concentrating on is long range missiles of both air to air and surface to surface types so they can offset the technological superiority of western designs with longer weapons. Sometimes if life gives you lemons you just have to make lemonade.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2018, 01:38
by Corsair1963
marsavian wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, this idea that the J-20 is going to be the primary Stealth Fighter for China. While, also being produced as a Naval Fighter. (i.e. Carrier Based) Is in my opinion extremely far-fetched at best. As the design will never be cheap to produce in volume. Nor, would it be well suited for Aircraft Carrier Operations. (to big among others)


My guess is the J-20 will be produced in modest numbers. Either being employed as a Air Superiority Fighter or an Interdictor. While, the J-31 will be the primary Strike Fighter of both the PLAAF and PLAN. Including in a Naval Role on Chinese Aircraft Carriers. This is very similar to the F-22 and F-35 is US Service. So, it would hardly be a surprise....


The J-31 has to be turned into a fully working production design first and at the moment it just seems to be a private design that is sponsored by their government to see where it goes. The J-20 is their only official stealth design and it currently suits their purpose as a long range interceptor. Remember SAMs is not going to be their primary enemy but carrier/airfield based western allied aircraft. Just because the J-31 looks like the F-35 does not mean it is going to be produced like the F-35 or even needed to be.

The other thing they are concentrating on is long range missiles of both air to air and surface to surface types so they can offset the technological superiority of western designs with longer weapons. Sometimes if life gives you lemons you just have to make lemonade.



Sorry, the J-31 (FC-31) is a full-fledged fighter program. Which, is supported by the Chinese Government.

J31A.jpg


J31D.jpg


J31B.jpg


J31C.jpg

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 30 Aug 2018, 01:40
by Corsair1963
Odds are the J-31 will become the backbone of the PLAAF and PLAN.....

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 05:52
by popcorn
China reportedly making modest progress in jet engine field.

https://m-scmp-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v ... 20%251%24s

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 06:30
by hornetfinn
popcorn wrote:China reportedly making modest progress in jet engine field.

https://m-scmp-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v ... 20%251%24s


That doesn't exactly insipre confidence in their engine technology. So they are at the same level Soviets were almost 40 years ago and USA was almost 50 years ago? It will take some time before WS-15 will become operational. J-31 still uses RD-93s and WS-13 is not much better. Decent engines, but nowhere near F-135 or F-119 class. Even EJ200, M88 and F414 are clearly more advanced engines.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 10:03
by popcorn
hornetfinn wrote:
popcorn wrote:China reportedly making modest progress in jet engine field.

https://m-scmp-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v ... 20%251%24s


That doesn't exactly insipre confidence in their engine technology. So they are at the same level Soviets were almost 40 years ago and USA was almost 50 years ago? It will take some time before WS-15 will become operational. J-31 still uses RD-93s and WS-13 is not much better. Decent engines, but nowhere near F-135 or F-119 class. Even EJ200, M88 and F414 are clearly more advanced engines.


Agreed... that's why I called it 'modest'. :wink:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 11:00
by aasm
F-135 or F-119 class. Even EJ200, M88 and F414 are clearly more advanced engines.


thrust to weight values of F135? Sure it is higher than EJ200? (yeah i know it is only one aspect amongst many...)

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 12:39
by hornetfinn
aasm wrote:
F-135 or F-119 class. Even EJ200, M88 and F414 are clearly more advanced engines.


thrust to weight values of F135? Sure it is higher than EJ200? (yeah i know it is only one aspect amongst many...)


We don't know the F135 or even F119 weight really. Sure there have been some numbers in the web, but I've never seen any real source for them. If you have any real numbers, I'd like to know for sure.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 14:13
by ricnunes
hornetfinn wrote:
aasm wrote:thrust to weight values of F135? Sure it is higher than EJ200? (yeah i know it is only one aspect amongst many...)


We don't know the F135 or even F119 weight really. Sure there have been some numbers in the web, but I've never seen any real source for them. If you have any real numbers, I'd like to know for sure.


I also have yet to see official numbers about the F135 weight.

For what's worth wikipedia (or not, afterall it's wikipedia) claims that the F135, namely the conventional variant the F135-PW-100 has the following thrust-to-weight ratios:
- 7.47:1 (dry regime)
- 11.467:1 (afterburning regime)

While the EJ200 has the following thrust-to-weight ratios:
- 6.11:1 (dry regime)
- 9.17:1 (afterburning regime)

If these values are to be correct than the F-135 clearly has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio compared to the EJ200 which personally doesn't surprise me a bit.

Here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_F135
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurojet_EJ200

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 15:12
by tphuang
popcorn wrote:China reportedly making modest progress in jet engine field.

https://m-scmp-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v ... 20%251%24s


here is a word of wisdom. Don't take anything out of SCMP seriously. It's pure trash.

In terms of WS-10 series, it's still full of problem. It's probably comparable to recent models of AL-31F in thrust performance, but with lower reliability due to the shorter time in service. They are working on improving WS-10 series reliability and WS-15 at the same time. Typical Chinese way of doing things. Remember just a few years ago, they were still producing the final batch of J-7s while also developing J-20 at the same time.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 07 Sep 2018, 15:17
by tphuang
hornetfinn wrote:
popcorn wrote:China reportedly making modest progress in jet engine field.

https://m-scmp-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v ... 20%251%24s


That doesn't exactly insipre confidence in their engine technology. So they are at the same level Soviets were almost 40 years ago and USA was almost 50 years ago? It will take some time before WS-15 will become operational. J-31 still uses RD-93s and WS-13 is not much better. Decent engines, but nowhere near F-135 or F-119 class. Even EJ200, M88 and F414 are clearly more advanced engines.

If China can have a reliable production of engine with comparable performance to F-414 right now, it would be jumping in joy.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 08 Jan 2019, 02:53
by spazsinbad
Coming Soon to China's Aircraft Carriers: The JC-31 Stealth Fighter?
07 Jan 2019 David Axe

"The People's Liberation Army Navy could buy "fourth-generation" FC-31 fighters from the Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute to replace older J-15s, state-run Global Times reported. The Chinese navy reportedly is considering acquiring a new stealth fighter to replace existing carrier-launched warplanes that have proved unreliable and unsafe.

The People's Liberation Army Navy could buy "fourth-generation" FC-31 fighters from the Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute to replace older J-15s, state-run Global Times reported. In Chinese military parlance, a "fourth-generation" plane is a stealthy plane with modern sensors and weapons. The rest of the world refers to such aircraft as "fifth-generation." :twisted: [So suck on that youse capitalist LMworshipping 5genRunningDOGS!] :twisted:

"Multiple changes and upgrades are being made to the FC-31 allowing it to be used on an aircraft carrier," Global Times reported an unnamed military source as saying....

...Global Times and other news outlets have cited , as evidence of Beijing's interest in buying FC-31s, various requests-for-proposals and tenders that the Shenyang Aircraft Design Institute has published apparently in order to upgrade the FC-31 for carrier operations....

...There was speculation early on that the Shenyang intended for the FC-31 to have a naval role. The type features the heavy-duty landing gear and twin nosewheel that are standard on carrier aircraft that must endure high-impact landings....

Source: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... hter-40842

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 08 Jan 2019, 05:37
by Corsair1963
What have I been saying.......... :?

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 08 Jan 2019, 05:47
by Corsair1963
QUOTE:


Shenyang independently developed the FC-31 in the hope of selling it to the Chinese military or foreign air arms. That has changed. "The FC-31 is no longer export-oriented, and is destined for domestic military service," Global Times claimed.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 08 Jan 2019, 08:04
by element1loop
Problems though:

viewtopic.php?p=402408#p402408

... Full-fuel of 12,000 lb plus the full-weapon payload gives a weight of 67,000 lb, or 12,000 lb over [claimed] MTOW. In other words, you can have full-fuel, or you can have full-weapons--but you can not have both. So J-31, as it currently stands, would be unable to have full-fuel and to carry any external weapons, unless you first removed all of the internal weapons. So external pylons on a J-31 will not be seeing a whole lot of action. ...


No margin to add external fuel or weapons without much more capable engines, so sans significant engine advances, it reads more like a headline response to Japan.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 08 Jan 2019, 08:21
by spazsinbad
Problem hinted at in the AXE story so now 'looking forward' to catapult heavyweights with third Chinese carrier - maybe. I'm not allowed to excerpt an entire story - sometimes other bits are left out - always best to read same at the URL.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 08 Jan 2019, 08:49
by Corsair1963
Have doubts about all the numbers floating around for the Naval Variant. Yet, China will have to work it out. As the J-15 is not going to be adequate post 2030 if not before.... :shock:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 08 Jan 2019, 10:34
by element1loop
Agree.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 09 Jan 2019, 15:13
by mixelflick
tphuang wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:
popcorn wrote:China reportedly making modest progress in jet engine field.

https://m-scmp-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v ... 20%251%24s


That doesn't exactly insipre confidence in their engine technology. So they are at the same level Soviets were almost 40 years ago and USA was almost 50 years ago? It will take some time before WS-15 will become operational. J-31 still uses RD-93s and WS-13 is not much better. Decent engines, but nowhere near F-135 or F-119 class. Even EJ200, M88 and F414 are clearly more advanced engines.

If China can have a reliable production of engine with comparable performance to F-414 right now, it would be jumping in joy.


Forgive me on this but isn't the F-414 an uprated F-404? With 18,000lbs of thrust? Or is the 414 what powers the SH, and has 22,000lbs of thrust? Always marveled at how small a motor that was, and how much power they got out of it!

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 09 Jan 2019, 15:59
by sprstdlyscottsmn
mixelflick wrote:
Forgive me on this but isn't the F-414 an uprated F-404? With 18,000lbs of thrust? Or is the 414 what powers the SH, and has 22,000lbs of thrust? Always marveled at how small a motor that was, and how much power they got out of it!

The F404-GE-400 powered the old Hornets with ~16,000lb rated thrust. The F404-GE-402 was the uprated Hornet motor with ~18,000lb rated thrust. The F414-GE-400 is the Super Hornet motor "rated" at 22,000lb thrust, but the manual indicates 20,500lb un installed at sea level.

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 09 Jan 2019, 16:06
by sferrin
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
Forgive me on this but isn't the F-414 an uprated F-404? With 18,000lbs of thrust? Or is the 414 what powers the SH, and has 22,000lbs of thrust? Always marveled at how small a motor that was, and how much power they got out of it!

The F404-GE-400 powered the old Hornets with ~16,000lb rated thrust. The F404-GE-402 was the uprated Hornet motor with ~18,000lb rated thrust. The F414-GE-400 is the Super Hornet motor "rated" at 22,000lb thrust, but the manual indicates 20,500lb un installed at sea level.


Also the same engine GE has proposed bumping to 26,500lbs since the early 00s. It boggles the mind the thought of a Super Hornet being pushed around with as much power as TWO F-105s. :shock:

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 09 Jan 2019, 16:38
by sprstdlyscottsmn
That would be a massive boost to the excess thrust available in much of the envelope. You would see a drastic increase in acceleration rates and loaded envelope expansion (which is currently rather dismal).

Re: J-31 aims at F-35 market

Unread postPosted: 09 Jan 2019, 17:50
by blindpilot
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:That would be a massive boost to the excess thrust available in much of the envelope. You would see a drastic increase in acceleration rates and loaded envelope expansion (which is currently rather dismal).


Design engineers and customers are always trying to balance capability and performance trade-offs. In the case of US applications, this is a luxury since the engine performance is beginning to exceed most requirements. Chinese are still struggling to reach capabilities.

For aircraft like the SH, eye watering acceleration is achievable, but the aerodynamic design limits will not increase top speed etc. capabilities now available. There is a trade-off in bumping acceleration in this environment, specifically fuel consumption (ie. range etc.)

The old Plymouth Baracuda with the hemi engine and hi ratio rear end could turn the quarter mile in an instant, and then topped out at about 90ish mph. The sister designed Dodge Challenger with lower ratio rear end could reach higher top ends with a smaller 340 block engine, but wouldn't do much on the drag track. The difference is the Baracuda sucked gas like high power vacuum. If you didn't need the acceleration. It was a high price to pay for "power."

Jet fighters are like this as well. What are the requirements? Acceleration? Range? Operating costs? In US designs like the SH (and F-35) we have the luxury of asking such questions. The Chinese ... not so much.

MHO,
BP