Just stop. Further posts on this topic about "Russian procurement of FC-31/J-XY/J-35" will be deleted, both in this thread and the FC-31 thread.
J-35 carrier fighter (PLAN) thread
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Just stop. Further posts on this topic about "Russian procurement of FC-31/J-XY/J-35" will be deleted, both in this thread and the FC-31 thread.
Some braincells on Facebook got triggered by the latest photo of the J-35... which was released nearly 2 months ago...
I guess he would be really shell-shocked into comatose once he realizes how AMCA, TFX and KFX look like.
Also I bet that he has never heard of the term "forms-follow-function" in his entire life. Because how else would you even design a fr1ck1ng 5th-generation fighter?
In fact, there has been previous iterations of the J-35 with a rearward-opening canopy design:
But hey, we already knew that this guy would be too incompetent to figure that out.
Sucks to be him.
Although, serious question - Why would the J-35 designers and engineers in Shenyang settled on a forward-opening canopy design on the J-35 as final?
Are they planning VTOL versions for the J-35 in the future as well? Larger fuel tanks? Or something else fitted behind the cockpit which renders fitting the canopy hinges at the rear not viable?
Any probable explanations?
I guess he would be really shell-shocked into comatose once he realizes how AMCA, TFX and KFX look like.
Also I bet that he has never heard of the term "forms-follow-function" in his entire life. Because how else would you even design a fr1ck1ng 5th-generation fighter?
In fact, there has been previous iterations of the J-35 with a rearward-opening canopy design:
But hey, we already knew that this guy would be too incompetent to figure that out.
Sucks to be him.
Although, serious question - Why would the J-35 designers and engineers in Shenyang settled on a forward-opening canopy design on the J-35 as final?
Are they planning VTOL versions for the J-35 in the future as well? Larger fuel tanks? Or something else fitted behind the cockpit which renders fitting the canopy hinges at the rear not viable?
Any probable explanations?
Last edited:
danielchin
Junior Member
Wait until he saw MiG-21PF.
Is this a troll question?
VTOL with the current airframe is impossible. The front landing gear is right behind the cockpit where a F-35 type of lift fan would be.
Changing the canopy hinges are likely caused by the hump, but SAC paper only stated increased lift for having the hump, nothing else.
We literally covered this and the bulge more than 10 times on this very thread.
Here the full image ... however between will have (in a few years) and will have (now already one year after its maiden flight) is a difference and as far as I understand the situation, all rumours concerning an already signed export contract are a rumour or simply fake.
As such IMO, it is just one prototype - maybe the first one since it still has that huge pitot - and it remains to be seen, where and when this image was taken. Do we know this?
Just to confirm once again - What are the 4 variants?
CATOBAR variant, STOBAR variant, CTOL variant, export variant - Are these correct?