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

tamsen_ikard

Senior Member
Registered Member
I think that was the idea maybe ten years ago before the program really kicked off.
If J-35A is not a cheap multi-role plane to fill up the numbers then there is no reason for it to exist and get acquired by the air force. Cause J-20 is better in every way.

J-20 is a much bigger plane with more range, bigger radar and likely better supersonic performance. Considering China's likely battle scenario in the pacific, absolutely no reason to buy a smaller lower range plane other than cost.
 

BillRamengod

Junior Member
Registered Member
If J-35A is not a cheap multi-role plane to fill up the numbers then there is no reason for it to exist and get acquired by the air force. Cause J-20 is better in every way.

J-20 is a much bigger plane with more range, bigger radar and likely better supersonic performance. Considering China's likely battle scenario in the pacific, absolutely no reason to buy a smaller lower range plane other than cost.
Can we pass the J-20 or/and J-35 thing? It's been discussed a million times. This is just angry bait by now.
 

lcloo

Major
If J-35A is not a cheap multi-role plane to fill up the numbers then there is no reason for it to exist and get acquired by the air force. Cause J-20 is better in every way.

J-20 is a much bigger plane with more range, bigger radar and likely better supersonic performance. Considering China's likely battle scenario in the pacific, absolutely no reason to buy a smaller lower range plane other than cost.
F-16A/B was developed as a cheap multi-role fighter jet replacing F-5E/F used by US allies. As it turn out, F-16 become the most numerous among the 4th gen F-14 to A/F-18. And its technological sophistication (F-16C/D) is among the top of its time before the 5th Gen. And it is not as cheap was it was originally intended in 1970/1980s.

I think we are seeing some degree of similarities.
 
Last edited:
Top