Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

siegecrossbow said:

Rumor has it that the J-31 is waiting for Naval aviation endorsement. Air Force doesn't seem too interested as of now. This may change, given how the JH-7A entered service with the Navy before the Air Force thought that it would like some in its arsenal as well.

Click to expand...

Definitely it needs to fold it wings if it wanted the naval endorsement. Because they want this thing to fit in domestic CV. I remained skeptical but I think it has lots of export potential.

MiG-29 said:

this fighter looks more practical, it is smaller around the F-22 size or slightly smaller.

twin engined is logic, a the F-35 has really high thrust engines, and it weight 30 tonnes fully loaded

.

In my opinion this jet seems more like a better option than J-20, smaller is better

Click to expand...

Not for stealth fighters, as their useful load is more limited by internal space than weight

drunkmunky said:

OK. i almost hate the fact that I found this but here is an image of the F35.

View attachment 6854

Compare it to the front profile of the supposed J21 and we have some striking similarities. I think it might actually be photoshopped.

Click to expand...

You are wrong. One day has not passed, and more and more higher quality pictures are coming out to prove the existence of J31

Bltizo said:

Observations:
-the engines appear somewhat "loose" in their nacelles, not sure what that could be indicative of. Maybe the engines are mock ups, or maybe space is for TVC? who knows
...

Click to expand...

The engines are clearly Klimov RD-93. The plane is still in prototyping/testing phase, which indicates a stop-gap measure for the engines.

plawolf said:

As for not carrier fighters not having a single piece canopy, well that is down to the higher requirement the navy (USN at least) set for the structural strength of carrier fighter canopies compared to air force specs. This in turn is because seabirds tend to be larger than their land base brethren, so when they strike an aircraft, they strike with more force, and a single piece bubble canopy such as those seen on the F22 and J20 would just not be able to withstand that kind of an impact.

Click to expand...

If you look closely, F-35 does have a single piece canopy. The support is placed within the interior of the cockpit, and is not expose to the ouside in anyway.

siegecrossbow said:

So the nickname for this bird is confirmed!

Click to expand...

No, the Chinese characters on the logo clearly indicate the bird is not an owl.

Engineer said:

If you look closely, F-35 does have a single piece canopy. The support is placed within the interior of the cockpit, and is not expose to the ouside in anyway.

Click to expand...

True enough, but the support is nevertheless present because the single piece canopy on it's own would not be strong enough to withstand the kinds of impacts the USN demands. Since the support is in place, it matters little if it is built inside out outside of the canopy, as it's very presence negates the chief benefit of a single piece canopy, which is a completely unobscured field of view.

The F35's canopy might technically be single piece, but I would not consider it a true single piece canopy like those on the F22 and J20.

Franklin said:

Can someone identify this plane.

View attachment 6849

View attachment 6850

Click to expand...

Some thoughts after seeing the pictures. My first impression is that this plane is real, or at least the photo angle seem to protray its real. I mean if you have long looked at J20 photos when it first appeared, it have that same angle shot, plus it even include the side of a tree to compare distance. That tree is shot is what actually lessen my doubt since no one want to take a shot at the tree out of nothing. I probably think its the same person who took pictures of the J20 when it first came out. Secondly, i too think this aircraft is mainly for carrier operation since someone talked about the reinforced front wheel. While someone also mentioned the rear engine where it has a gap for TVC. While I thought of what engineer said that TVC helped with stalling, this could be very useful in carrier landing and the wiki article regarding TVC seem to support that idea. So i personally think this aircraft have a bright future with PLAN... While future carriers, J20 might also be carrier borne with bigger carrier coming along the way. Just some thoughts. Oh and before i forget, remember the rumor a while back that said an aircraft side wings got damaged due to mishandling and later clarified it wasn't? Now that i think about it, it may possibly a ruse to get people attention to this aircraft. Something along the line we mishandled aircraft decades ago but not now, anymore.

I had a feeling Secretary of Defence Leon Penetta will be calling his staff at the Pentagon and said, "See...I got a surprise too by the Chinese! Take that Robert Gate mine was better!"

plawolf said:

True enough, but the support is nevertheless present because the single piece canopy on it's own would not be strong enough to withstand the kinds of impacts the USN demands. Since the support is in place, it matters little if it is built inside out outside of the canopy, as it's very presence negates the chief benefit of a single piece canopy, which is a completely unobscured field of view.

The F35's canopy might technically be single piece, but I would not consider it a true single piece canopy like those on the F22 and J20.

Click to expand...

That's just moving the goal post, but whatever. Shenyang is really trying to cut cost by not employing a single piece canopy, and I think it will have some negative impacts on RCS.