According to your photo, the J-35A is 83.0% the length of a J-20. If we are to assume the J-20 is 21.2m long from the tip of the nose to the tip of the tail, that would make the J-35A approximately 17.6m long. That would be very close to the supposed 17.3m length of the FC-31 from many years ago.
If your photo is indeed accurate, the J-20 weapons bay is 7% longer than the J-35A weapons bay.
View attachment 139468
If we are to assume the weapons bays are
supposed to be of identical lengths, that would mean your photo is inaccurate. We would have to resize your J-35A photo by +7% to ensure its weapons bay is identical in length to the J-20 weapons bay. In this scenario, the entire J-35A would have increased to a length of 18.8m. That would be much longer than the rumored specs for the FC-31, which usually sat between 16.9m and 17.3m.
Could the J-35A really have grown that much bigger compared to the FC-31 prototype?
I haven't even spoken of the widths of the weapons bays. If the J-35A photo is resized by +7%, its weapons bay length will indeed match the J-20's weapons bay length. But even in this resized version, the J-20 weapons bay remains 5% wider than the J-35A weapon bay.
View attachment 139467
I realize that comparing between photos is very prone to errors, especially when we don't have the actual specs of the J-35A as a frame of reference. But right now, I'm questioning the longstanding assumption that the J-35A weapons bay would be identical to a J-20 weapons bay.