J-35A fighter (PLAAF) + FC-31 thread

Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
taxiya said:
It seems that some think that if CAC is limited by its size of workforce and floor area to meet PLA's demand, then it must be SAC to produce large number of J-35A to fulfill that demand. However this is not the only possible conclusion to draw.
Click to expand...

It's not the only conclusion, but it should definitely be the most likely conclusion/explanation to explain what we are seeing.

taxiya said:
I tend to think CAC and SAC as a whole, they together fulfill whatever demand that PLA want. What ratio of J-35 and J-20 is up to PLA's design of their force structure, less a thing based on who is designer and producer. If hypothetically PLA only want heavy fighter or majority of their fighter being heavy, and CAC's current manpower is inadequte, AVIC can alot floors and workforce in SAC to produce J-20, or sent workforces to CAC if factory facility isn't the limit. AVIC's former self did that many times, XAC and CAC were created out of SAC and CAC got the job of making J-7 that was initiated by SAC as a result.
Click to expand...

This has already been discussed previously, either in this thread or others.

There are likely multiple reasons why the PLA has chosen to pursue J-35A alongside J-20/A rather than just increasing J-20/A production itself.
One of those reasons could be timing and ease of scaling up -- that is to say, it is actually easier and faster for them to get SAC to scale up J-35A production capacity than to have CAC scale up J-20/A production capacity or to have CAC teach other organizations to build J-20/A of their own, and any combination of "building more J-20/A production capacity" is unable to meet the PLA's timelines for 5th gen airframe demands while also allowing CAC to preserve its ability to carry out all of their other production, R&D, etc.

Other reasons that are important, of course include that J-35A is able to meet the PLA's requirements in terms of capability and likely having lower cost due to being a newer design with some newer production technologies than what even J-20A is able to integrate. Then there are military wide benefits of having J-35 and J-35A both exist and able to share common suppliers/upgrade pathways.



taxiya said:
So I won't put much trust in the talking by the Guancha Trios of "CAC up to their extrem limit". They know some bits and pieces from their contacts here and there, but not every dots can be connected correctly. Even they know a guy in the production line of J-20, that guy won't necessarily know what AVIC and PLA have in mind.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't think they should be treated as gospel.

However, I do think the idea of "CAC reaching their organizational limit" wrt J-20/A production is also a logical explanation that we should have been able to arrive to independently in terms of explaining why the PLA had adopted for J-35A + J-20/A rather than just pushing J-20/A alone.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
talonn said:
Why don't they export J-20 and keep J-35 at bay instead?
Click to expand...

RCS is not the only important metric of a fighter. There are factors like range, weapon load, built in redundancies, and kinematic. If only thing that mattered is stealth then AVIC would’ve made a stick. That said, the different in RCS is still in the same magnitude, so it isn’t as if J-35 could one-sided slaughter J-20 like J-36 could probably existing fifth gen.
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
Orca confirmed that it is gonna have superior RCS reduction than J-20, even J-20A.
Click to expand...

Expected, given the designers and engineers at Shenyang AC would have access to better and more advanced computing, design and simulation software when working on the J-35A prior to design finalization (which should be sometime prior to 2022) compared to the designers and engineers at Chengdu AC back in the late-2000s.

talonn said:
Why don't they export J-20 and keep J-35 at bay instead?
Click to expand...

Probably because of similar reasons as to the Americans' F-22 export ban decision - The J-20 is the best China has, comprehensive capability-wise. @siegecrossbow have explained very well just above.

Meanwhile, unlike the F-22 which entered the game too early - The J-20 is continuously upgraded and improved upon. So while the F-22 gets left behind by their smaller counterparts F-35A/B/C, the J-20 always retain its tip-top comprehensive capabilities in the PLAAF relative to the other fighter models (prior to the induction of the J-36 and J-XDS, that is).
 
Last edited:
4

4Tran

New Member
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
RCS is not the only important metric of a fighter. There are factors like range, weapon load, built in redundancies, and kinematic. If only thing that mattered is stealth then AVIC would’ve made a stick. That said, the different in RCS is still in the same magnitude, so it isn’t as if J-35 could one-sided slaughter J-20 like J-36 could probably existing fifth gen.
Click to expand...
The J-20 is supposed to be a lot more expensive so price could have something to do with it too.

ACuriousPLAFan said:
Expected, given the designers and engineers at Shenyang AC would have access to better and more advanced computing and simulation software when working on the J-35A prior to design finalization (which should be sometime prior to 2022) compared to the designers and engineers at Chengdu AC back in the late-2000s.



Probably because of similar reasons as to the Americans' F-22 export ban decision - The J-20 is the best China has, comprehensive capability-wise. @siegecrossbow have explained very well just above.

Meanwhile, unlike the F-22 which entered the game too early - The J-20 is continuously upgraded and improved upon. So while the F-22 gets left behind by their smaller counterparts F-35A/B/C, the J-20 always retain its tip-top comprehensive capabilities in the PLAAF relative to the other fighter models (prior to the induction of the J-36 and J-XDS, that is).
Click to expand...
Given how much newer the J-35 is and how it has access to much more advanced design tools, it would have been very surprising if it has a higher RCS than the J-20.

On a different note, it's weird to see all those people who say, without the slightest hestitation, that the F-22 is by far the best fighter plane in the world. The F-22 was designed in the '90s, and largely with '80s technology. Unless military technology has been at a standstill for decades, how can it possibly still be the best? It still has early generation RAM coatings, it didn't have all the advanced design tools we have now, and it doesn't have the advanced avionics or even the space for the advanced avionics modern planes have. It's a plane that isn't ideal for the modern battlefield, and it was good for the US that its production lines were shut down early.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top