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

[Miyayaya]

Is there any possibility that J-35A is stealthier than J-20?

It was reported that:

For the J-35, users have proposed higher stealth performance standards. To achieve these stealth indicators, we have adopted numerous new technological measures and systems. Significant progress and innovative achievements have been made in many areas. Leveraging the latest breakthroughs in existing technologies, we successfully developed the J-35A.

As well as having the "latecomer's advantage" （后发优势） compared to the J-20, and praised as "stealth performance ranks among first in the world" （隐身排世界第一） from official media.

Of course these aren't proof that it is stealthier. But if there is such a possibility, then it could be another reason for J-35A to be inducted alongside the J-20 as the slightly higher stealth performance allows slightly different mission capabilities.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Not exactly news per se, just some official verification from a CCTV news segment several days ago that the J-20/As and J-35As will form "heavy + medium" (重-中) and "specialized + multi-mission/role" (专-多) pairings in the PLAAF.

The J-20/A, being the heavy-weight stealth fighter of the PLAAF will major in air supremacy missions; whereas the J-35A, being the medium-weight multi-mission/role stealth fighter of the PLAAF will conduct both air supremacy (primary) and land-attack/anti-ship (secondary) missions.

The J-20/A+J-35A pairings will enhance the capability of offensive combat missions in high-threat and strong confrontation environments.

Posted by @单手搓核弹 on Weibo.

 

[ismellcopium]

Not exactly news per se, just some official verification from a CCTV news segment several days ago that the J-20/As and J-35As will form "heavy + medium" (重-中) and "specialized + multi-role" (专-多) pairings in the PLAAF.

The J-20/A, being the heavy-weight stealth fighter of the PLAAF will major in air supremacy missions; whereas the J-35A, being the medium-weight multirole stealth fighter of the PLAAF will conduct both air supremacy (primary) and land-attack/anti-ship (secondary) missions.

The J-20/A+J-35A pairings will enhance the capability of offensive combat missions in high-threat and strong confrontation environments.

Posted by @单手搓核弹 on Weibo.

View attachment 139680
View attachment 139681

Kind of interesting that they're touting it as a multirole vs air superiority only distinction if the IWB geometry is the same lol.

 

[minime]

Kind of interesting that they're touting it as a multirole vs air superiority only distinction if the IWB geometry is the same lol.

Range and super cruise could be mission critical to distinguish the two planes.
J-35, not design to be super cruise due to range compromise, thus multi-role and medium risk AA mission.
J-20, being bigger and more powerful, design for super cruise while maintain the range to counter enemy critical asset in high risk far way area in intercept/fast-response mission.
I'm not saying J-20 is an interceptor lack dog fight or ground attack ability but J-35 just can't do what J-20 does.

 

[gelgoog]

Are we that sure the J-35 cannot super cruise? I doubt that. Especially with the later engines.
It simply does not have the same amount of drag as the F-35 which has a boxy frontal area.

 

[sunnymaxi]

Are we that sure the J-35 cannot super cruise? I doubt that. Especially with the later engines.
It simply does not have the same amount of drag as the F-35 which has a boxy frontal area.

with WS-19, J-35 is capable to super cruise..

 

[minime]

Are we that sure the J-35 cannot super cruise? I doubt that. Especially with the later engines.
It simply does not have the same amount of drag as the F-35 which has a boxy frontal area.

with WS-19, J-35 is capable to super cruise..

Yes, capable but I think even with WS-19, J-35 it's not tactical practical to super cruise.
Super cruise=shorter range, same for J-20 and J-35
But internal volume dictate J-20 still have reasonable range doing super cruise.
For a multi-role/medium risk air superiority plane, range and patrol time might be more important.
It's even more true with naval version trying to keep the defense circle bigger and longer per sortie around the carrier.
So super cruise is not a priority for J-35.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[Blitzo]

Just one thing: I thought the original FC-31 used RD-93s instead of RD-33s?

Honestly, I've seen both referred. In hindsight I could've probably could've said "RD-93/33"

 

[by78]

A few more from Zhuhai.

 

[by78]