Pardon for the unending questions across multiple threads but
1. For what purpose is FC-31 being iterated upon by Shenyang? Three prototypes that never would amount to much seems like too much investment for a non military undertaking. Much of the changes (on the exterior) seem to concentrate on planar stealth and modification thereof.
2. Shouldn't they be testing the FC-31 prototypes in the Huangdicun Naval Air Base in the EMALS test field. Fixing a strengthened Landing gear for EMALS handling would give some valuable inputs on the capability of the aircraft to take off with EMALS push.
(unless it's structural design - of FC-31-
is inherently incompatible with EMALS and can't take the punishment)
3. Isn't it important that J-35 have an aerodynamic device like LERX to induce vortex lift for takeoff? Since it is very sure that it's not going to be a STOL design (is it?).
The YF-23 says hi and wants to have a brief conversation with you.
1. They're technology demonstrators. Even if they don't represent carrier capable prototypes, the idea of technology demonstrators is to demonstrate new technologies (that may include but not be limited to stealth, FCS, production, materials), which can then expedite future intended prototypes. The reason for iterating the airframes is obvious as well; to iterate the technologies you're demonstrating.
2. If an airframe is designed and built without the existing structure for catapult takeoff (or arresting landing for that matter), as is the case with both FC-31 airframes, you cannot "modify" them for those abilities. You need to design and build a new airframe capable of it instead.
3. We cannot eyeball aerodynamics and kinematic performance. LERX is just one feature that may contribute to that capability. In the case of the carrier derived FC-31 variant/J-XY/J-35, it will of course have catapults to launch it from a carrier. LERX are not present on F-22 or F-35 either.
