My bad, I'm not particularly familiar with the organizational structure of the PLAAF. The content in parentheses (The 1st
J-35A fighter (PLAAF) + FC-31 thread
- Thread starter ACuriousPLAFan
- Start date
J35A is probably a little stealthier than J20A and even more stealthier than J20, but in actual combat, it probably doesn't make that much difference.
The bigger impact is likely having an interior that is designed with greater cooler requirement and power generation than something that had design frozen back in late 2000s (J20). After all, the progression in electric technology and high voltage platform in the past 10 years + modern 3rd generation RF semiconductors has been very dramatic. It would've been hard back 15 years ago for weapon designers to predict we would see this much greater requirement for cooling. You can see with 6th gen, they are making the nose section all humongous to account for the greater power/cooling requirements.
Even with J35A, its nose is huge for its size.
The bigger impact is likely having an interior that is designed with greater cooler requirement and power generation than something that had design frozen back in late 2000s (J20). After all, the progression in electric technology and high voltage platform in the past 10 years + modern 3rd generation RF semiconductors has been very dramatic. It would've been hard back 15 years ago for weapon designers to predict we would see this much greater requirement for cooling. You can see with 6th gen, they are making the nose section all humongous to account for the greater power/cooling requirements.
Even with J35A, its nose is huge for its size.
Is it though?
Largest noses were a thing in 1950-70s(with peak around 1960, 1970s aircraft with oversized aperture radars are overgrowth of ca.1960 fcs designs), after that relative nose size consistently goes down.
I think a while ago, I saw a picture of J35 and J15. J35 nose looks bigger than J-15 even though latter is a larger aircraft.
FriedRiceNSpice
Major
What is the point of mixed formations when the J-20 has a substantially longer range?
You are doing eyeballing again.
Studies on J-20 has shown that the ventral fines is more stealthier than baseline fuselage without them modeled on F-35 (therefor J-35 too) from the side. The reason is because J-20 does not thave horizontal and vertical stablizer acting as a perfect reflector. F-22 has that problem too, mind you. The same study also said that without treatment canard aircraft is 1.27dB worse in L band but 0.68dB better in C band than baseline. With proper treatment it is ignorable.
People should read actual scientific paper instead of eyeballing and following self designated expert. The "cannard bad, ventral fin bad" is becoming something like urban legend or UFO.
[addition]
For people holding such idea a similar question can be thought of. F-22 has the inlet gap that add one edge and one gap (on each side) similar to canard that suppose to worsen its RCS. Yet nobody held the belief that F-35 is stealthier than F-22 partitularly in the frontal area, but when it comes to J-20 vs. J-35 the non-issue becomes a concern.
Last edited:
Do we know the range of the J-35A?
AVIC showed a model of FC-31 in the 2015 Dubai Airshow. The company claimed a combat radius of 1200km:
"AVIC has only just released a basic specification for the FC-31 aircraft. Length is 55 feet, 1.5 inches, span is 37 feet, 8.75 inches and height is 15 feet, 8.5 inches. Maximum takeoff weight is listed at 55,000 pounds and weapons carrying capability at 17,600 pounds. AVIC claims that the FC-31 will be able to reach a service ceiling of 52,500 feet, and a top speed of Mach 1.8. Combat radius is 648 nm. The airframe is stressed to +9/-3 g, and has a projected service life of 6,000 to 8,000 hours, or 30 years."
Also as shown in Zhuhai 2016:
