J-XY/J-35 carrier-borne fighter thread

[AssassinsMace]

I'm sure there are some in China had that very intent. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Using "35" to them puts it on the par as the already established F-35. Other cultures think the bigger the number the better or more advanced. The Chinese who know they're not on the same level as the US seek to be equated with them first not being better. Throwing out a larger number means nothing. It's like how China thought it should be a member of the ISS simply because it could do the basics of human space travel. Politics aside, to the US they see China contributes nothing they can't do themselves. To the Chinese it's establishing it's an equal. I argue with Chinese who think copying is best. They don't want China to try to do anything new. Doing something new to them doesn't say you're doing something better because there's not a measure out there that says it's better hence why it's new. That's where Chinese get caught in the inferiority complex "copying" trap.

 

[steel21]

No way will it be called J-35. No one in charge can be that stupid and dense. Also that designation makes no sense. The 'X' in J-XY denotes generation so it should be J-2<something>.

Since the it's a follow up to the J-15, maybe J-25T?

 

[kentchang]

I'm sure there are some in China had that very intent. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Using "35" to them puts it on the par as the already established F-35. Other cultures think the bigger the number the better or more advanced. The Chinese who know they're not on the same level as the US seek to be equated with them first not being better. Throwing out a larger number means nothing. It's like how China thought it should be a member of the ISS simply because it could do the basics of human space travel. Politics aside, to the US they see China contributes nothing they can't do themselves. To the Chinese it's establishing it's an equal. I argue with Chinese who think copying is best. They don't want China to try to do anything new. Doing something new to them doesn't say you're doing something better because there's not a measure out there that says it's better hence why it's new. That's where Chinese get caught in the inferiority complex "copying" trap.

yeah i am afraid you are very correct. in china, young kids learn calligraphy that way and it is an easy way to encourage conformity...

 

[LawLeadsToPeace]

I'm sure there are some in China had that very intent. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Using "35" to them puts it on the par as the already established F-35. Other cultures think the bigger the number the better or more advanced. The Chinese who know they're not on the same level as the US seek to be equated with them first not being better. Throwing out a larger number means nothing. It's like how China thought it should be a member of the ISS simply because it could do the basics of human space travel. Politics aside, to the US they see China contributes nothing they can't do themselves. To the Chinese it's establishing it's an equal. I argue with Chinese who think copying is best. They don't want China to try to do anything new. Doing something new to them doesn't say you're doing something better because there's not a measure out there that says it's better hence why it's new. That's where Chinese get caught in the inferiority complex "copying" trap.

You cant be serious? The stereotype of Chinese copying other people's stuff is extremely harmful to literally every overseas Chinese communities and mainlanders' reputation. Are you sure they are actually Chinese people? Also to the mods, sry for the extremely off topic discussion. I wont continue it whether or not the user decides to respond.

 

[Richard Santos]

Just because it is very harmful does not mean there is not a significant of element of truth to it. To say it is wrong because it is harmful does not help to fix the problem implied by the element of truth. It will enable the element of truth to be more persistent, and thereby enable the stereotype to also be more persistent and persistently harmful.

 

[TK3600]

I agree that the new name should be more likely J-2x.

 

[crash8pilot]

The PLA's fighters has historically followed a structured nomenclature system where 3rd generation fighters have always been single digit (J-7, J-8, Q-5), 4th generation starts with the teens (J-10, J-11, J-15, J-16), and the PLA's first 5th generation fighter broke the teens into the twenties. As such I fully expect whatever end product that comes from the 5th generation FC-31 to be J-2X (21 if I had to guess). I can't see the PLA breaking the nomenclature unless FC-31 features some generationally ground breaking technology that we don't know about... until then J-3X series of designation should be reserved for 6th generation. Just my two cents.

It did get be thinking though - when the PLANAF adopted the J-10 and J-11, the "H" nomenclature was added (J-10AH/SH and J-11BH) where "H" stands for the Chinese character 海 (pronounced "hai", meaning sea). I wonder if the PLAAF subsequently follows the PLANAF's lead and adds the J-XY to it's inventory.... what happens then? Is there I reverse "H" nomenclature/designation?!

 

[Richard Santos]

If China breaks the fighter naming pattern with its second stealth fighter it would not be unique. The US DoD also followed a very structured convention from about 1962 with the introduction of the joint tri-service naming system, to about the year 2000, going from F-4, almost perfectly sequentially up to F-22. Then F-35 completely breaks the naming paradigm.

 

[daifo]

Did the FC-31 name come from the the manufacturer or fanboys/pla watchers?

 

[siegecrossbow]

Did the FC-31 name come from the the manufacturer or fanboys/pla watchers?

31 stands for designation, 001 stands for first prototype.