Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Lion said:

Probably PRC still behind US but definitely not behind Russia or Europe in aeronautical engine.

Click to expand...

this type of assertions have to be tested and at the end are meaningless.

China has achieve a very high level of aerospace industry, but Russia or Europe hold aereas where they have clear advantages.

A-380 for example is a European product which has no equivalent in China plus Europe is capable of designing stealth fuselages however they are designing UCAVs and not manned aircraft, but definitively stealth technology, AESA radars, thrust vectoring and supercruise are not technologies they can not build.

Plus Europe has a clear lead in Engines like the Trent series and EJ-200.
[video=youtube;zWzg8w-0TBI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWzg8w-0TBI[/video]
Russia has still has products that China is uncapable to build.
Il-476, Il-96, Tu-160, Tu-22M DF-30, Al-31M2 117, Al-41 engines plus Russia has a wide range of civil engines for aircraft that China lacks.


However China has a clear lead over Canada, India and Brazil, in that i would say yes China has a more developed industry.

But the lead is still relative since India, Canada and Brazil up to some degree might have areas of some lead over China, but yes in general terms China is slightly ahead of Canada, Brazil and India.

Potentially China has some areas where might be ahead now over Russia, for example Russia lacks a light fifth generation, it might be on par if we say C909 and MS-21 in terms of fuselage but not in engines because MS-21 has Russian engine and its PD-14 engine already has been tested

what i can say is definitively now is China has achieved a level of true independence in most areas in terms of design and manufacture, and definitively China these days is an aerospace power.


.

NikeX said:

Well consider this: While Chinese aerospace is working diligently to overtake manufacturers with a lead, those same manufacturers will be working just as hard and as diligently to maintain that lead.

Hard work is not just confined to China.

Click to expand...

What would be considered a valid source? News articles are of course out of the question. Russian sources are chronically flawed. Chinese sources are propaganda. American sources are only trying to push their budgets....

I think the forum should pool a ticket for NikeX to go to China to see it with his own eyes.....

No wait, then he'd be prone to visual illusions.

In the end, only F22 and F35 are the true, physical, proven stealth fighters in the world.

I am not saying this to instill flame in this forum. I acknowledged that the Chinese had come a long way and is no longer the third world country as seen in the 80s. Their aerospace industry had also been very very rosy. However, I would not go so far as to say that the Chinese had surpassed the Russian and European countries in term of engine developement and manufacturing sector.

Look, China started off pretty late (not that it is of any problem) and the Europeans and Russian are already up and going. Up till now, I am only seeing that the WS-10A engine which shows promises and had been equiping their fighters in masses and so far no report of any problem yet. The WS-15 are still in developement, no one know how good that engine is until it had reaches mass production and was fitted in the fighters and fly for a while...

The European on the other hand are coming up with great engines... look to Roys Royce and the already mentioned companies. Also brought up by Mig-29 - the civilian A380, which had no equivalent in China (although China did take part in building some of the components and subassembly like the wings section).

As to Russia... their economic had been in a sham for decades after the break up of Soviet Union, but their technology base was still very very strong. And the recent introduction of the T-50 which make use of almost totally Russian technology (including the engine department) and also the Su-35 (which also used their own engines) is proof enough that the Russian are still going strong.

The Chinese even with their latest J-21/J-31 or F-60 prototype might use Russian engines to fly first. So if the Chinese are that confident in their own design, I couldn't figure out why they needed to do that... the few explanations I can find is that the Chinese still didn't have an engine that they are confident in, or that the Chinese are aiming this aircraft for export and the target market are those customer that are flying Russian aircrafts and had assess to the Russian engines.

So in conclusion, I am a watcher, I would tend to wait and see the progress of the Chinese aerospace industry first for a while longer, before jumping in and declare that the Chinese are already up there... surpassing the European and Russian... At the most, I think they might be on par in certain areas as compared to the European and Russian... but to surpass them... the Chinese still have some distance to cover.

Maggern said:

What would be considered a valid source? News articles are of course out of the question. Russian sources are chronically flawed. Chinese sources are propaganda. American sources are only trying to push their budgets....

I think the forum should pool a ticket for NikeX to go to China to see it with his own eyes.....

No wait, then he'd be prone to visual illusions.

In the end, only F22 and F35 are the true, physical, proven stealth fighters in the world.

Click to expand...

The F-22 and the F-35 are indeed the only operational stealth fighters in the world, you can count China and Russia's flying prototypes on each hand, not to be obnoxious. To be precise there are now more "operational" coded F-35s than test aircraft. To assert otherwise as you seem to be makes you the delusional one? so much for the logical and reasonable, obviously no one in China who is a civilian has much access to information, thats not a big deal, and I find it frustrating myself, but thats the way the Chinese government does business, so what? In contrast much of what Chinese citizens know about their own military is what "Western Analysts" dig up, so what? Thats the way the US government does business, and in the process informs lots of us about forces world-wide, friend or foe, or like the election maybe "undecided"?

rhino123 said:

I am not saying this to instill flame in this forum. I acknowledged that the Chinese had come a long way and is no longer the third world country as seen in the 80s. Their aerospace industry had also been very very rosy. However, I would not go so far as to say that the Chinese had surpassed the Russian and European countries in term of engine developement and manufacturing sector.

Look, China started off pretty late (not that it is of any problem) and the Europeans and Russian are already up and going. Up till now, I am only seeing that the WS-10A engine which shows promises and had been equiping their fighters in masses and so far no report of any problem yet. The WS-15 are still in developement, no one know how good that engine is until it had reaches mass production and was fitted in the fighters and fly for a while...

The European on the other hand are coming up with great engines... look to Roys Royce and the already mentioned companies. Also brought up by Mig-29 - the civilian A380, which had no equivalent in China (although China did take part in building some of the components and subassembly like the wings section).

As to Russia... their economic had been in a sham for decades after the break up of Soviet Union, but their technology base was still very very strong. And the recent introduction of the T-50 which make use of almost totally Russian technology (including the engine department) and also the Su-35 (which also used their own engines) is proof enough that the Russian are still going strong.

The Chinese even with their latest J-21/J-31 or F-60 prototype might use Russian engines to fly first. So if the Chinese are that confident in their own design, I couldn't figure out why they needed to do that... the few explanations I can find is that the Chinese still didn't have an engine that they are confident in, or that the Chinese are aiming this aircraft for export and the target market are those customer that are flying Russian aircrafts and had assess to the Russian engines.

So in conclusion, I am a watcher, I would tend to wait and see the progress of the Chinese aerospace industry first for a while longer, before jumping in and declare that the Chinese are already up there... surpassing the European and Russian... At the most, I think they might be on par in certain areas as compared to the European and Russian... but to surpass them... the Chinese still have some distance to cover.

Click to expand...

Actually, China is surpassing Russia for the exact reason that you have stated, which is that of Russia's technology base. That technology base came entirely from the Soviet Union. While the Europeans are still going, the Russians are going nowhere. Today's Russia technology hardly moved away from Soviet's technology base, if at all.

Take T-50/PAKFA for example, it still shares a similar configuration with that of Su-27. The Su-35 is essentially just a modification of the Su-27, the latter being a Soviet product. The "new" Saturn engines that Russia is using on the Su-35 and PAKFA came from AL-31 and the AL-41 that were designed by the Soviet Union. In fact, let us go through MiG-29's aircraft list one-by-one.

The Il-476, the airframe came from Il-76 which is a Soviet Union product, while the PS-90A engines used were completed by the Soviet Union.

Il-96, a project completed by the Soviet Union.

The Tu-160 is designed by the Soviet Union.

Tu-22M, another project completed by the Soviet Union.

So, of course Russia has an easy time when much of the work has already been done. However, Russia cannot design the aforementioned aircraft and engines from nothing. This is an area in which China is ahead, as China is developing new aircraft and engines from scratch. Developing something from scratch also means following the entire engineering process, and if the process makes China seems not confident then so be it.

China has also surpassed Russia in areas such as avionics and realization of aerodynamics, although China is still in the process of surpassing Russia. When current Chinese projects come to fruition, that would be the signal China has totally surpassed Russia.

Engineer said:

Actually, China is surpassing Russia for the exact reason that you have stated, which is that of Russia's technology base. That technology base came entirely from the Soviet Union. While the Europeans are still going, the Russians are going nowhere. Today's Russia technology hardly moved away from Soviet's technology base, if at all.

Take T-50/PAKFA for example, it still shares a similar configuration with that of Su-27. The Su-35 is essentially just a modification of the Su-27, the latter being a Soviet product. The "new" Saturn engines that Russia is using on the Su-35 and PAKFA came from AL-31 and the AL-41 that were designed by the Soviet Union. In fact, let us go through MiG-29's aircraft list one-by-one.

The Il-476, the airframe came from Il-76 which is a Soviet Union product, while the PS-90A engines used were completed by the Soviet Union.

Il-96, a project completed by the Soviet Union.

The Tu-160 is designed by the Soviet Union.

Tu-22M, another project completed by the Soviet Union.

So, of course Russia has an easy time when much of the work has already been done. However, Russia has lost much of the capability to design the aforementioned aircraft and engines from nothing. This is an area which China has surpassed Russia already, as China is currently developing the equivalents of these aircraft and engines from scratch. Developing something from scratch also means following the entire engineering process, and if the process makes China seems not confident then so be it.

Currently, China is still in the process of surpassing Russia. When the Chinese projects come to fruition, that would be the signal China has surpassed Russia.

Click to expand...

PD-14 is new engine for MS-21 is a new engine

T-50 is a new aircraft, designed in 2000s LEVCONs were not present on Su-27 niether Su-27 had fully moveable vertical tails so it is not a Su-27 but a new design, the wings are different in shape and airfoil to those of Su-27, requiering total new aerodynamics, even the intakes are different in shape and size more in common with F-18E than with Su-27

117 is a new engine too, not a soviet design

Irbis E a Russian design not Soviet

117S is Russian design not Soviet, in fact Al-41 was finished after the soviet union collapsed and 117S was built upon the Al-31 and Al-41 technologies but this engine did not exist in Soviet times


Plus Russia has the secret type 30 engine that no one has seen but Chepkin has commented

Superjet 100 is Russia too and its engine is Russia-French

MS-21 is Russian.

Of course Russia is not going to waste the good products of the Soviet union just for the sake of nationalism, they will exploit them as long as they make money and can be upgraded to save money


The PS-90A is also russian certified in 1992


Today russia is working also in PAKDA a new substitute of Tu-160

MiG-29 said:

PD-14 is new engine for MS-21 is a new engine

T-50 is a new aircraft, designed in 2000s LEVCONs were not present on Su-27 niether Su-27 had fully moveable vertical tails so it is not a Su-27 but a new design, the wings are different in shape and airfoil to those of Su-27, requiering total new aerodynamics, even the intakes are different in shape and size more in common with F-18E than with Su-27

Click to expand...

This doesn't change anything I have said. The T-50 being a new aircraft does not mean its configuration isn't similar to that of Su-27. Note the placement of the engine nacelles, the straight air intakes, and the use of variable-geometry inlets. The T-50 is essentially a 4-th generation fighter with some stealth and aerodynamic improvements. This reflects the designers' desire to start with something that they already know very well -- a design originated from the Soviet Union.

MiG-29 said:

117 is a new engine too, not a soviet design

Irbis E a Russian design not Soviet

117S is Russian design not Soviet, in fact Al-41 was finished after the soviet union collapsed and 117S was built upon the Al-31 and Al-41 technologies but this engine did not exist in Soviet times

Plus Russia has the secret type 30 engine that no one has seen but Chepkin has commented

Click to expand...

Both AL-31 and AL-41 are Soviet Union products. Russia putting technologies from the two together is therefore using the work already done by the Soviet Union, thus proving what I said.

MiG-29 said:

Superjet 100 is Russia too and its engine is Russia-French

MS-21 is Russian.

Of course Russia is not going to waste the good products of the Soviet union just for the sake of nationalism, they will exploit them as long as they make money and can be upgraded to save money

Click to expand...

This proves my points exactly. What Russia have been doing is basically integrating Soviet systems, and Soviet systems weren't designed by Russia.

MiG-29 said:

The PS-90A is also russian certified in 1992

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

This is the exact reason why the PS-90A is a project completed by Soviet Union. The Soviet Union dissolved on December 26, 1991, and Russia has no ability to fund any project immediately afterward. The PS-90A being certified on 1992 shows it has already been built and was undergoing tests before the collapse of Soviet Union.

MiG-29 said:

Today russia is working also in PAKDA a new substitute of Tu-160

Click to expand...

We shall see how much Soviet technology it will use.

Engineer said:

This doesn't change anything I have said. The T-50 being a new aircraft does not mean its configuration isn't similar to that of Su-27. Note the placement of the engine nacelles, the straight air intakes, and the use of variable-geometry inlets. The T-50 is essentially a 4-th generation fighter with some stealth and aerodynamic improvements. This reflects the designers' desire to start with something that they already know very well -- a design originated from the Soviet Union.


.

Click to expand...

You point is not right for the following


Since Russia, Belarus and Ukraine were most of the populous countries of the Soviet Union they were the true industrial powers.



Let us do a review.

An-125 and An-225 were Soviet, true but tell me a Chinese equivalent?

Tu-22M tell me a Chinese equivalent?



Now PAKFA is a new design, it never flew in the times of the Soviet Union, its engines were not design in the times of the Soviet Union

Now Russia is the main power in the CIS and EuroAsian Union.

Sukhoi is Russian property, MiG is Russian property.

Since Ilyushin and Tupolev are property of Russia they are Russian.


Since Russia was the most industrialized republic of the Soviet Union, the UAC and UEC are Russian.

Today there is no more Sukhoi or MiG but the United Aviation Corporation.

MS-21 is not a Sukhoi, Yak or Tupolev product but a UAC.


Since Al-31 was designed in 1970s it was designed mostly by Russians, so what ever development of Al-31 is Russian.


117 is a Russian modern engine and it is based upon the upgrade of Al-31 however it is not an Al-31 but a new design



117 and T-50 of course reflect the lessons and ideas of the Russian past in the Soviet Union, but they are new products .

117S is not an Al-31, in fact 117S is a different engine of Al-31M2 despite both have the same traction of 14500kgs.

T-50 is not 4th generation but fifth generation simply because it used stealth technology, can supercruise and has STOL and supermaneouvrability


LEVCONs are not present in Su-35 niether the intakes are the same of T-50 and Su-35, the AESA radar of T-50 is new it is not IRBIS niether BARS and 117 is a 15000kg+ of thrust engine but lighter than AL-31 and smaller than AL-41F


The T-50 and Su-35 only share the common integral configuration of lifting blended wing fuselage.

Besides that the LEVCONs and wing, vertical fins, intakes and forebody are totally different

LEVCONs were first applied in the history of aviation in Russia and after the Soviet Union since no Soviet aircraft had them

blame that of mao's idiocratic cultural revolution,and people warfare.

MiG-29 said:

You point is not right for the folowing


Since Russia, Belarus and Ukraine were most of the populous countries of the Soviet Union they were the true industrial powers.

Click to expand...

In other words, what have been designed by Soviet Union is a product of all the Republics. Thus, Russia does not have the capabilities to develop Soviet's aircraft and engines outside of the Soviet Union, which proves my point.

MiG-29 said:

Let us do a review.

An-125 and An-225 were Soviet, true but tell me a Chinese equivalent?

Tu-22M tell me a Chinese equivalent?

Click to expand...

It does not matter. Today, Russia does not have the ability to design an equivalent of An-125 or An-225. In other words, possessing something and capable of designing that same thing are two completely different concepts. I rest my case.

MiG-29 said:

Now PAKFA is a new design, it never flew in the times of the Soviet Union, its engines were not design in the times of the Soviet Union

Click to expand...

Whether or not the PAKFA is a new design does not alter the fact that the configuration is based on the configuration of Su-27, the latter being the work of the Soviet Union. We can see this because of the common features found on both Su-27 and PAKFA.

MiG-29 said:

Now Russia is the main power in the CIS and EuroAsian Union.

Sukhoi is Russian property, MiG is Russian property.

Since Ilyushin and Tupolev are property of Russia they are Russian.


Since Russia was the most industrialized republic of the Soviet Union, the UAC and UEC are Russian.

Today there is no more Sukhoi or MiG but the United Aviation Corporation.

MS-21 is not a Sukhoi, Yak or Tupolev product but a UAC.

Click to expand...

This is entirely irrelevant, as it doesn't reflect Russian's ability to design the same Soviet products. Possession of intellectual properties does not equate to capability of creating similar intellectual properties.

MiG-29 said:

Since Al-31 was designed in 1970s it was designed mostly by Russians, so what ever development of Al-31 is Russian.

117 is a Russian modern engine and it is based upon the upgrade of Al-31 however it is not anm Al-31 but a new design

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

117 and T-50 of course reflect the lessons and ideas of the Russian past in the Soviet Union, but they are new products .

117 is not an Al-31, in fact 117 is a different engine of Al-31M2 despite both have the same traction of 14500kgs.

Click to expand...

The 117 uses technologies from AL-31 and AL-41, both of the latter engines are product of the Soviet Union. In other words, Soviet Union did much of the work, whereas Russia integrated the two together. This is a completely different concept from creating an entirely new fighter aircraft engine as the American has done with the F119 or as the Chinese are doing with the WS-15.

MiG-29 said:

T-50 is not 4th generation but fifth generation simply because it used stealth technology, can supercruise and has STOL and supermaneouvrability

LEVCONs are not present in Su-35 niether the intakes are the same of T-50 and Su-35, the AESA radar of T-50 is new it is not IRBIS niether BARS and 117 is a 15000kg+ of thrust engine but lighter than AL-31 and smaller than AL-41F

The T-50 and Su-35 only share the common integral configuration of lifting blended wing fuselage.

Besides that the LEVCON and wing are totally different

LEVCONs were first applied in the history of aviation in Russia and after the Soviet Union since no Soviet aircraft had them

Click to expand...

The PAKFA uses external engine nacelles, straight air intakes, and variable-geometry inlets. These are the same features found on the Su-27. On top of that, the PAKFA also have stabilators extending pass the engine nozzles like the Su-27 does, while the sting extends further than the stabilators. These suggest the designers started with what they know -- the Su-27, a 4-th generation fighter which is a Soviet design, rather than starting from a brand new configuration liked the F-22.

Furthermore, while the PAKFA incoporates some stealth design, it is not a true 5-th generation fighter. The reason is the engine fan is completely exposed, resulting in strong radar reflection. Thus, the aircraft is not stealthy. The panel joints are not serrated, unlike F-22, F-35 or J-20.

As for the 117, the engine is based on technologies from AL-31 and AL-41 that are Soviet technologies. While it is true that Russia did a lot of work in integrating the best of the two engines, it is also true that much of the work was already done by the Soviet Union and that Russia did not design the 117 from a blank sheet of paper. Thus, what the Russia did with the 117 cannot be compared to what the Americans did with the F-119, nor be compared to what the Chinese are doing with the WS-15.