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

[by78]

A few more high-resolution images.

 

[siegecrossbow]

This third one also flew without using its luneberg lens too..? Pretty bold and quite risky, make me also doubt that these aircrafts are already in LRIP or ready for PLAAF service

I wonder if this one is CG since both variants flew with retractable luneburg lens as per other photos.

 

[Deino]

Was this one already posted? The J-35A from this morning with reheat seen from behind. (Image via @朱大象 from Weibo)

 

[siegecrossbow]

Was this one already posted? The J-35A from this morning with reheat seen from behind. (Image via @朱大象 from Weibo)

View attachment 138887
View attachment 138886

And it is obvious from this image that luneburg lens is there.

 

[Deino]

Just a side-by-side comparison between the two aircraft...
View attachment 138880

What do you think about this? I took the liberty of revising your work a little... so based on your work and the differences observed between the possibly/obviously now three J-35A prototypes, as well as a theory/information from a friend who wishes to remain anonymous: I have provisionally numbered the machines as no. 01 to 03!

 

[KampfAlwin]

I'm guessing the F-35 style horizontal stabilisers are better for stealth than the previous one?

 

[Deino]

I'm guessing the F-35 style horizontal stabilisers are better for stealth than the previous one?

Maybe, but is this bend or non-straight transition actually better for stealth?

 

[gullible]

As this aircraft enters service, will they completely replace the J-11 platform? Or partially? Asking because I am curious as to how long the service life of the J-11 airframes will be ...

j-15T carries more weapon loads than j-35A...so no

 

[KampfAlwin]

Maybe, but is this bend or non-straight transition actually better for stealth?

View attachment 138894

That's why I'm asking. The F-35 went with this style of stabilisers, and not the F-22-style ones. It could be better for stealth since F-35 is newer, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[lgnxz]

What do you think about this? I took the liberty of revising your work a little... so based on your work and the differences observed between the possibly/obviously now three J-35A prototypes, as well as a theory/information from a friend who wishes to remain anonymous: I have provisionally numbered the machines as no. 01 to 03!

View attachment 138891

What would be the basis for the numbering sequence? Would be surprising to me if the sequence is really based on the actual production order of the prototypes, because imo the 01 is made later than 02, given the unmodified stabilizer and the worn-off paint on the 02.

And it's not based on appearance order on the pre-show either because that would be the exact opposite; 03 appeared first, followed by 02 and then 01.

The question on why the side EODAS only appeared in 1 of 3 aircrafts is also still unanswered. What do you think is the reason for that?