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

[jnd85]

not a chance. They are going to have 1000+ J-20s at the current production trend. And more importantly, we are going to see a whole bunch of CCAs replacing older jet.

we gotta Lower expectations a little bit here

The only issue I have with this projection is that it assumes current production rates will continue long term and are not part of a surge effort responding to specific policy objectives, after the achievement of which production may slow or halt altogether. That said, preducting the future is hard, especially since a lot of previously reliable patterns seem to no longer hold true vis a vis military production.

To elaborate, over the past several decades it was normal to see test craft and other equipment developed iteratively, and produced in certain volumes but not really with the intention of replacing the full fleet of whatever craft they may be an improvement over. The presumed reason being that although each individual iteration was definitely an improvement over what was already in service, there was sufficient confidence on the part of policymakers that an even better product was immediately over the horizon, and that investing fully in the current technology would not be prudent. In my mind, that pattern has proven wise and served China well up to now.

However, recent years has seen a shift toward ever greater investment in generational replacement. To a certain extent this is to be expected in light of aging equipment, but it also somehow feels to me like a shift in decision making. Leadership seems to on the one hand be confident that they are either approaching some acme of R&D or seeing diminishing R&D returns, and thereby feel confident that current state of the art are a good investment to roll out wholesale. On the other hand it may be that they are responding to pressure from one or a small number of individuals.

All that was a long explanation of why I feel it is hard to say if we will reach 1000, or if it may very quickly jumpt to 350 or some other number and then stop.

 

[tphuang]

The only issue I have with this projection is that it assumes current production rates will continue long term and are not part of a surge effort responding to specific policy objectives, after the achievement of which production may slow or halt altogether. That said, preducting the future is hard, especially since a lot of previously reliable patterns seem to no longer hold true vis a vis military production.

To elaborate, over the past several decades it was normal to see test craft and other equipment developed iteratively, and produced in certain volumes but not really with the intention of replacing the full fleet of whatever craft they may be an improvement over. The presumed reason being that although each individual iteration was definitely an improvement over what was already in service, there was sufficient confidence on the part of policymakers that an even better product was immediately over the horizon, and that investing fully in the current technology would not be prudent. In my mind, that pattern has proven wise and served China well up to now.

However, recent years has seen a shift toward ever greater investment in generational replacement. To a certain extent this is to be expected in light of aging equipment, but it also somehow feels to me like a shift in decision making. Leadership seems to on the one hand be confident that they are either approaching some acme of R&D or seeing diminishing R&D returns, and thereby feel confident that current state of the art are a good investment to roll out wholesale. On the other hand it may be that they are responding to pressure from one or a small number of individuals.

All that was a long explanation of why I feel it is hard to say if we will reach 1000, or if it may very quickly jumpt to 350 or some other number and then stop.

is there any reason to reduce production of j-20 just so that you can increase production of J-35A? After all, Air Force has clearly made a huge investment in J-20 infrastructure and WS-10 engine infrastructure.

Since CAC factory space has expanded significantly, it would appear more likely for J-20 production to go up further rather than dropping. In fact, since J-35 production has yet to start, there is no reason for J-20 production to drop.

Has there ever been a case in PLA history where it just suddenly stops buying a new aircraft type that it put significant investment in?

This may surprise people, but I've been around watching PLA for a good 20 years and their behavior is pretty consistent.

Why? Their roles differ and so are their respective range requirements.

Let's compare apples with apples and oranges with oranges.

Okay, so why don't we discuss this then. What do you see is the role of J-35A vs J-20 in the near term? And how does that affect PLA's procurement decisions.

Well, PLAAF went head on into j-35a, not me(you may in fact remember I was kinda surprised). With all respect to podcasts.
So i don't think it's me in a disagreement here. Not now at least.

The more CCA heavy the fleet is, the less capable the control node needs to be. But, the more nodes you need.

In a way, if you're ready to drop all independent capability altogether, one may say that the best controller node is something like Northrop model 437.

And, vise versa, the more onboard capabilities there is, the less vulnerable and passively capable it is, the more such platform can operate independently ...

The higher the ratio of unmanned vs manned, the more capable your central node needs to be in order to process the additional data and give command.

If there is 1 to 1 ratio of drones to manned fighter, why does the manned fighter need to be that capable?

Again, PLA themselves see two-seat aircraft as ideal for being the QB in MUMT. So I don't get the argument here of pushing J-35A into a role that it is not the most well suited for.

 

[Gloire_bb]

The higher the ratio of unmanned vs manned, the more capable your central node needs to be in order to process the additional data and give command.

True. And, vise versa, the lower the ratio manned v unmanned, the closer the mainland (with higher sensor capability than J-36 will ever hope to have), the less you need your control nodes to be especially advanced. The more manned fighters you have, the more sentient manned-unmanned teams you have. Very simple.

You just need a human with interface up there per optimal number and composition of CCAs, forming some sort of aerial "section". Or, instead, managing incoming CCAs on relevant tasks from the current priority list in the highest number of points, be it in the air, in transfer, or on ground standby..
Or indeed simply striking/fighting with J-35 units themselves, if it's the optimal course of action.

If there is 1 to 1 ratio of drones to manned fighter, why does the manned fighter need to be that capable?

it doesn't. Same with 2-4, or even more with simple CCAs and tasks. That's the entire point.

J-36 is an aircraft that can shine where there is no ecosystem around. Otherwise, ground radars, ships, SAM batteries, KJ-3000s/700s/200Bs and WZ-9s form a net far superior.

 

[taxiya]

SAC basher make their argument and even come up the "SAC blackmailing PLAAF" based on nothing but personal emotion. That is toxic.

On the other hand, proponent of "PLAAF buying large number of J-35A" are basing their argument on personal thinking which is a wish, not something backed by information from PLAAF. Aren't people doing the same thing that they criticize? I see it equally toxic.

The only known thing is that J-20 is being produced in large numbers that we have seen with our own eyes, that is a verifiable fact. We have not seen anything close in J-35A. I don't give a damn what rumors say, only aircraft painted with serial numbers count.

My bottom line is that if we don't know, just accept that we don't know.

 

[mack8]

While China has made amazing progress in all fields, including military aviation which is the subject here, not all is/was 100% perfect, the J-35 being unfortunately an example (hopefully rare) of that. Imo it was a mistake not to pursue the J-31/35 program with the same aggressiveness and determination as the J-20, which would have meant TWO stealth fighter lines boosting PLAAF/PLANAF, thus significantly improving their capabilities relative to the americans and their F-22/35 combo.

The J-31/35 should have been in series production by 2020 at the latest, and even a relatively sedate (by chinese standards) yearly building rate would have meant 250-300 airframes by now, complementing the 300 or so J-20s estimated to be built so far. This would have also meant faster retiring of the remaining J-7 and J-8 airframes which despite their upgrades can't be expected to contribute much in a potential conflict. And not forgetting the potential export orders that might have been possible if J-31/35 was in service already.

 

[minime]

While China has made amazing progress in all fields, including military aviation which is the subject here, not all is/was 100% perfect, the J-35 being unfortunately an example (hopefully rare) of that. Imo it was a mistake not to pursue the J-31/35 program with the same aggressiveness and determination as the J-20, which would have meant TWO stealth fighter lines boosting PLAAF/PLANAF, thus significantly improving their capabilities relative to the americans and their F-22/35 combo.

The J-31/35 should have been in series production by 2020 at the latest, and even a relatively sedate (by chinese standards) yearly building rate would have meant 250-300 airframes by now, complementing the 300 or so J-20s estimated to be built so far. This would have also meant faster retiring of the remaining J-7 and J-8 airframes which despite their upgrades can't be expected to contribute much in a potential conflict. And not forgetting the potential export orders that might have been possible if J-31/35 was in service already.

It take time to understand &develop stealth era tactics and doctrine.
The application and context change as time goes by too.
Not to mention Chinese aviation industry, R&D still young on 5th gen back then, they need to earn the trust of the military.
I glad PLAAF took the cautious approach.

 

[SanWenYu]

While China has made amazing progress in all fields, including military aviation which is the subject here, not all is/was 100% perfect, the J-35 being unfortunately an example (hopefully rare) of that. Imo it was a mistake not to pursue the J-31/35 program with the same aggressiveness and determination as the J-20, which would have meant TWO stealth fighter lines boosting PLAAF/PLANAF, thus significantly improving their capabilities relative to the americans and their F-22/35 combo.

The J-31/35 should have been in series production by 2020 at the latest, and even a relatively sedate (by chinese standards) yearly building rate would have meant 250-300 airframes by now, complementing the 300 or so J-20s estimated to be built so far. This would have also meant faster retiring of the remaining J-7 and J-8 airframes which despite their upgrades can't be expected to contribute much in a potential conflict. And not forgetting the potential export orders that might have been possible if J-31/35 was in service already.

CAC only reached the 100 J-20 per year milestone after it had stopped making J-10 altogether. SAC meanwhile still has had to make all the Sino-Flankers. Until there is another aircraft manufacturer to take over making J-16 and J-15 from SAC, it will not be able to mass produce J-35 in large numbers.

 

[ismellcopium]

CAC only reached the 100 J-20 per year milestone after it had stopped making J-10 altogether. SAC meanwhile still has had to make all the Sino-Flankers. Until there is another aircraft manufacturer to take over making J-16 and J-15 from SAC, it will not be able to mass produce J-35 in large numbers.

The new mega plant north of Shenyang should be solely dedicated to J-35 production, with likely some capacity within existing facilities too.

 

[SanWenYu]

The new mega plant north of Shenyang should be solely dedicated to J-35 production, with likely some capacity within existing facilities too.

SAC will still have to increase the workforce if they are to keep the same capacity for J-15 and J-16. They will need skilled workers with certain security clearance. Such workers will not be the usual 10k per month hires that one can poach from any civilian sector.

Automation can help to some degree. Even more so if J-35 is designed to be put together by, say, replacing forging and machining with casting, replacing riveting with glueing, sharing parts and components with existing models, etc. That would be very bold of the designer.

 

[simonov]

Why Shenyang cannot relocate the production of J-16 to Hongdu?