J-15 carrier fighter thread

[Deino]

PS .... by the way, here's a funny J-15EW = J-15D aka J-17 patch !

 

[FORBIN]

Yes in 2018 soon we see J15B batch 3

Also J15D the EW varient

So 6 in total maybe 5 if we call J15T the J15B but I would they are separate units so 6

What are these predictions based on?

Wishes ... probably.

Asif point right i have calculate an average according production number especialy from huitong actually 6 J-15 built by year so the new Shandong need to wait to have a full CAW

 

[SinoSoldier]

Again, we have no evidence to believe in secret support for J-31. On the contrary, the snail's pace of progress at 2 prototypes in 6 years highly suggests that project is stalled due to lack of funds/support.

But you are treating a lack of public acknowledgement as evidence that the FC-31 design has been rejected. You have neither the right nor insight to make wild guesses, such as the statement that the FC-31 has been "stalled" due to lack of funding, simply because you don't have information from either the outside or the inside.

 

[manqiangrexue]

But you are treating a lack of public acknowledgement as evidence that the FC-31 design has been rejected. You have neither the right nor insight to make wild guesses, such as the statement that the FC-31 has been "stalled" due to lack of funding, simply because you don't have information from either the outside or the inside.

I have no right?? LOL Call the cops then.

I have every right to make educated guesses based on the evidence seen. Evidence is that projects funded by the PLA move very quickly (such as J-20, J-16, J-15, 055, 052D) and projects without funding do not. Lack of public acknowledgement is evidence that something's not going right with this design (whether that be the design itself or lack of need for an aircraft of such configuration) when every other project that the PLA has endorsed comes with public acknowledgement. That's pattern recognition leading to an educated guess based on evidence (which qualifies as information from the outside), which is what this forum is about.

Wild guessing is saying that maybe, unlike every other aircraft in PLAAF history, J-31 is being supported and funded secretly and still making very slow progress.

I never said it was outright rejected, but that it's stalled out is a fact because of how little activity there is on; it's basically the dictionary definition of stalled out. Now you can argue that they making a lot of invisible progress. Well, in the history of aviation, has any successful design made good progress without making a decent number of prototypes?

 

[SinoSoldier]

I have no right?? LOL Call the cops then.

I have every right to make educated guesses based on the evidence seen. Evidence is that projects funded by the PLA move very quickly (such as J-20, J-16, J-15, 055, 052D) and projects without funding do not (like the J-9, Q-6, FC-31). Lack of public acknowledgement is evidence that something's not going right with this design (whether that be the design itself or lack of need for an aircraft of such configuration) when every other project that the PLA has endorsed comes with public acknowledgement. That's pattern recognition leading to an educated guess based on evidence (which qualifies as information from the outside), which is what this forum is about.

Wild guessing is saying that maybe, unlike every other aircraft in PLAAF history, J-31 is being supported and funded secretly and still making very slow progress.

I never said it was outright rejected, but that it's stalled out is a fact because of how little activity there is on; it's basically the dictionary definition of stalled out. Now you can argue that they making a lot of invisible progress. Well, in the history of aviation, has any successful design made good progress without making a decent number of prototypes?

LOL you are entitled to your own opinion, but to try to pass it off as a fact is exactly what needs to be avoided. As I state once more, lack of publicly observed progress does not mean that progress isn't being made behind closed doors. If the FC-31 has been given a green light to advance to a naval prototype, you would not be seeing "public" activity while developmental and design work is being undertaken. There is no need to fly the V2.0 prototype is design work is being done for a third variant. And if we assume that they are building newer prototypes, it would take time for it to be completed, during which it is perfectly normal to have a "stall" in flight testing or public appearances.

Here's another analogy: just because nobody has seen the prototype of the J-20 prior to 2010 does not mean that developmental work and funding wasn't underway until then.

 

[vesicles]

LOL you are entitled to your own opinion, but to try to pass it off as a fact is exactly what needs to be avoided. As I state once more, lack of publicly observed progress does not mean that progress isn't being made behind closed doors. If the FC-31 has been given a green light to advance to a naval prototype, you would not be seeing "public" activity while developmental and design work is being undertaken. There is no need to fly the V2.0 prototype is design work is being done for a third variant. And if we assume that they are building newer prototypes, it would take time for it to be completed, during which it is perfectly normal to have a "stall" in flight testing or public appearances.

Here's another analogy: just because nobody has seen the prototype of the J-20 prior to 2010 does not mean that developmental work and funding wasn't underway until then.

However, the current stage of development for the J-31 has been way passed where the J-20 was before 2011.

With the J20, once the first prototype showed up, they moved quickly to all the following samples. And we have photographic and video documentation of every prototype, along with the date when it first appeared. Even with the current tight security, we still get photos and video clips of the latest J-20’s undergoing all sorts of tests. Just today, we learned that the J-20 has been used in combat training.

And the J-31? Every once in a while, we get a photo of the V1, and sometimes the V2, flying around a bit.

When we look at the progress of the J31 alone, I agree with you that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. And we cannot conclude anything.

However, when we compare how other weapons systems, especially other planes like the J-20 and the Y-20 etc, move along, we can actually make some educated guesses. Under the same level of security and even the same management (SAC), the J-31 distinctively shows a slow pace. Actually, there has been no change with the J-31 since the V2 showed up quite a while ago.

I don’t think it’s about some kind of top secret design thing. They’ve hauled the J-31 around various air shows for years. That’s why people have assumed the J-31 has been intended to be an export model.

 

[latenlazy]

However, when we compare how other weapons systems, especially other planes like the J-20 and the Y-20 etc, move along, we can actually make some educated guesses. Under the same level of security and even the same management (SAC), the J-31 distinctively shows a slow pace. Actually, there has been no change with the J-31 since the V2 showed up quite a while ago.

I don’t think it’s about some kind of top secret design thing. They’ve hauled the J-31 around various air shows for years. That’s why people have assumed the J-31 has been intended to be an export model.

We generally get fewer leaks out of CAC vs SAC, owing in part to how much more remote the latter’s airfields and facilities are from population clusters compared to the former.

 

[SinoSoldier]

However, the current stage of development for the J-31 has been way passed where the J-20 was before 2011.

With the J20, once the first prototype showed up, they moved quickly to all the following samples. And we have photographic and video documentation of every prototype, along with the date when it first appeared. Even with the current tight security, we still get photos and video clips of the latest J-20’s undergoing all sorts of tests. Just today, we learned that the J-20 has been used in combat training.

And the J-31? Every once in a while, we get a photo of the V1, and sometimes the V2, flying around a bit.

When we look at the progress of the J31 alone, I agree with you that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. And we cannot conclude anything.

However, when we compare how other weapons systems, especially other planes like the J-20 and the Y-20 etc, move along, we can actually make some educated guesses. Under the same level of security and even the same management (SAC), the J-31 distinctively shows a slow pace. Actually, there has been no change with the J-31 since the V2 showed up quite a while ago.

I don’t think it’s about some kind of top secret design thing. They’ve hauled the J-31 around various air shows for years. That’s why people have assumed the J-31 has been intended to be an export model.

If the current FC-31 configuration (i.e. the V2 configuration as it stands now) had been selected for funding and induction, then you would be correct in saying that we would've seen a marked increase in the frequency of flight tests and appearances of that prototype (and additional ones too). However, if the PLAN has decided to fund a future follow-on variant such as a carrier-borne version (Huitong is claiming that this is a possibility), we would not see any major "public activity" until at least when the third prototype flies; you are comparing apples and oranges in this case.

 

[SinoSoldier]

We generally get fewer leaks out of CAC vs SAC, owing in part to how much more remote the latter’s airfields and facilities are from population clusters compared to the former.

This is an important point as well; it took us a full year to see images of the Sharp Sword prototype. J-11D images are also hard to come by these days.

 

[vesicles]

If the current FC-31 configuration (i.e. the V2 configuration as it stands now) had been selected for funding and induction, then you would be correct in saying that we would've seen a marked increase in the frequency of flight tests and appearances of that prototype (and additional ones too). However, if the PLAN has decided to fund a future follow-on variant such as a carrier-borne version (Huitong is claiming that this is a possibility), we would not see any major "public activity" until at least when the third prototype flies; you are comparing apples and oranges in this case.

You realize that your apple is an imaginary one? You are using a hypothetical scenario (at best a “possibility”) to refute my conclusion derived from fact-based observation? You know that you need evidence to support your assertion? You might as well tell me that the Chinese are collaborating with aliens to come up with a 12th gen fighter.

No one can predict the future. Anything is possible in the future. Attempting to do so without any actual evidence is called daydreaming. We can only make educated guesses based on the past. Based on what we have observed and comparing among various advanced programs, my conclusion is that the J-31 is at a clear disadvantage, as opposed to other new fighter designs like the J-20.

Now, is it possible that the Chinese are designing a carrier born fighter based on the J-31? It is a possibility, as Huitong has suggested. However, it is just a possibility, same as it is possible that the Chinese are working with aliens on a Death Star.

Is my conclusion accurate? I have no idea. The accuracy of my prediction depends heavily on how properly I have collected my data. Because of the small sample size and other subjective biases, my conclusion may be far from the truth. However, at least my conclusion is based on facts, however limited they might be, not some hypothetical possibility...