Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Status
Not open for further replies.
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Player99 said:
Language barrier is a serious problem for alll Westners who have some interest in China or China-related things. If they read Chinese, we probably won't hear anything like "not transparent" or real stupid remarks such as "the Chinese people are slaves to their government and they dare not say anything in the open like in our democracy"... And this kind of remarks I actually picked up all from non-Western forums, which I think ya all know who I'm referring to. :D

On the other hand, I think it's good that most non-Chinese can't read Chinese. For we also have stupid XXXXX on military forums, reeking similar ignorance, idiocy, and stupidity...
Click to expand...

In these days there is no such barrier, today`s online translators while not completly acurate are more or less reliable, i my self can read Japanese and when i read some chinese kanjies i can recognize some meanings.

i know for example while the google translator from japanese into english will lose 5-10% of the real meaning, the translator is more or less acurate

In fact while chinese and japanese languages are differents and the Japanese use of chinese characters has changed some meanings, reading some chinese is not so difficult and with today`s computers you can read more or less Chinese well.

What happens in my opinion is many reporters are not versed on aviation, i have seen some Russian reports where they make terrible mistakes about aircraft, but not because the news are wrong, but because the reporter can not distinguish some facts or simply reports without enough knowledge to give an acurate report
 
Last edited:
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
MiG-29 said:
In these days there is no such barrier, today`s online translators while not completly acurate are more or less reliable, i my self can read Japanese and when i read some chinese kanjies i can recognize some meanings.

i know for example while the google translator from japanese into english will lose 5-10% of the real meaning, the translator is more or less acurate

In fact while chinese and japanese languages are differents and the Japanese use of chinese characters has changed some meanings, reading some chinese is not so difficult and with today`s computers you can read more or less Chinese well.

What happens in my opinion is many reporters are not versed on aviation, i have seen some Russian reports where they make terrible mistakes about aircraft, but not because the news are wrong, but because the reporter can not distinguish some facts or simply reports without enough knowledge to give an acurate report
Click to expand...
True with simple text. Completely untrue otherwise. When I first encountered the terms 沈飞 (shenfei) and 成飞 (chengfei) I was completely confused as to what they meant. When I consulted with my dad he said they sounded like names to something, and only then did I realize they were abbreviations for the AVIC companies. Asian languages are heavily dependent on colloquial context, and even being removed from the language for a few years can result in losing touch with newly adopted terms. This seems especially true of Chinese on the Mainland, especially in the last few years. That's something translators simply cannot compensate for. They're getting better, but they still fudge up terms that are thrown around in vernacular like abbreviated names and meme generated phrases.

Anyways, that was incredibly off topic...I really wonder how accurate that model is, or if it's even the J-35. I often feel like Chinese display makers often take an ample amount of artistic license in what they do.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
ladioussupp said:
According to Baidu pedia, it is known as a species of falco family. Specifically, "Falco rusticolus" or "Gyr-falcon" in common English.

This raptor lives around Eastern North area of China mainland, where Sheng-yang city and SAC located. So I guess this is why SAC uses Gyr-falcon as the name of project 310. :p
Click to expand...
The gyrfalcon is the largest species of falcon and the most prestidious for falconry. They live over a large part of the Northern hemisphere.
It is a very apt raptor name for a fighter aircraft.
 
W

weig2000

Captain
That's true only to a limited extent when it comes to Chinese defense-related matters.

In China, the companies and design institutes involved in defense industry are mostly state-owned. They do publish a lot of stuffs (news/PR releases/reports/pamphlets/academic papers); but these publications are often written in the official CCP/government language or cliche ("baguwen"). These kind of language have been increasingly out of step with those used in everyday life or even regular news reports and publications in China today. Of course, it doesn't help the language referring to more substantial information are often vague when it comes to military affairs and defense matters. Therefore, even for Chinese, it takes some experiences and observations to decode the true messages embedded inside the publications. I'm sometimes amazed that some long time Chinese military fans and enthusiasts could infer things and conclusions that are very insightful from some routine publications, which I would ordinarily dismiss as official BS.

At the risk of slightly OT, I noticed the divergence of the official language and unofficial language quite some time ago. For most non-Chinese China observers or even Chinese-speakers who rarely interact with Chinese society at large, the image of today's China projected by the official Chinese media or publications (both English and Chinese) is often quite disconnected with contemporary China. This is something pointed out by more than a few veteran western China observers, incidentally (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of The Atlantic comes to mind. He wrote a book on China's aviation industry, "China Airborne" based on his extensive China experiences; Fallows himself is an aviation enthusiast owning and operating his private aircraft).


MiG-29 said:
In these days there is no such barrier, today`s online translators while not completly acurate are more or less reliable, i my self can read Japanese and when i read some chinese kanjies i can recognize some meanings.

i know for example while the google translator from japanese into english will lose 5-10% of the real meaning, the translator is more or less acurate

In fact while chinese and japanese languages are differents and the Japanese use of chinese characters has changed some meanings, reading some chinese is not so difficult and with today`s computers you can read more or less Chinese well.

What happens in my opinion is many reporters are not versed on aviation, i have seen some Russian reports where they make terrible mistakes about aircraft, but not because the news are wrong, but because the reporter can not distinguish some facts or simply reports without enough knowledge to give an acurate report
Click to expand...
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
MiG-29 said:
71963.png
16018442ed02ca168860396cf8c1caa1.png


in my opinion J-31 has a wing closer to F-35A than F-22 and smaller than F-35C
Click to expand...

One of the reasons I had opined on the F-35 thread that I wish the AirForce had the C wing, especially with the weight being right at design limits, a little more wing would likely benefit the A as well. The J-31 has no such problem at this time, and with twin engines, lifting fuselage, and the wing area she has she will likely turn quite well. I will point out that the A will sustain a 9g limit, and that is nothing to sneeze at, and it has reportedly been to 9.9, ducumented at Edwards, so I think it will be a far more agile aircraft than we had imagined.
 
M

mack8

Junior Member
Pulling 9.9G is not an indicative of it's agility imo. Either by accident or pulling the stick very hard alot of (combat) aircraft can exceed their designed G limit , but that's not an indicative of their true agility. It's said somewhere a MiG-25 pulled 11G during some last ditch maneuver , but we can't call MiG-25 agile right ?
 
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
mack8 said:
Pulling 9.9G is not an indicative of it's agility imo. Either by accident or pulling the stick very hard alot of (combat) aircraft can exceed their designed G limit , but that's not an indicative of their true agility. It's said somewhere a MiG-25 pulled 11G during some last ditch maneuver , but we can't call MiG-25 agile right ?
Click to expand...

G limits are indeed an indicative of agility because the ability of banking is related as a product of G force pulled.

However if you mean what is the difference between two fighters that pull 9Gs in example F-16 and MiG-29, well that is lift, but the MiG-25 is limited to 4Gs because of structure limits that at 5-6Gs will break the airframe if it is constantly put to that G force.

MiG-31 can pull 5Gs a little bit more than MiG-25 thanks to re-inforced structure.
Heavier aircraft usually have lower limits due to first lift reduction that can be overcome by TVC nozzles as in the case of F-22 but still the airframe might not take the constant expose to high G forces, so a Su-27 has a better airframe than MiG-25 for taking G loads
 
Last edited:
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Air Force Brat said:
One of the reasons I had opined on the F-35 thread that I wish the AirForce had the C wing, especially with the weight being right at design limits, a little more wing would likely benefit the A as well. The J-31 has no such problem at this time, and with twin engines, lifting fuselage, and the wing area she has she will likely turn quite well. I will point out that the A will sustain a 9g limit, and that is nothing to sneeze at, and it has reportedly been to 9.9, ducumented at Edwards, so I think it will be a far more agile aircraft than we had imagined.
Click to expand...
In my personal opinion the J-31 seems to follow the F-35 even in wing area, the F-22 has a bigger wing proportionally.

How well the J-31 turns or rolls well that is a big mystery, but i do not think it is particularly agile due to a large fuselage and a small wing in fact all the critics of F-35 can say basicly the same of J-31 in terms of wing area.

Of course F-35 without external weapons reduces drag a lot so it is said it turns like an F-16, so probably a J-31 might be the same, since very likely its thrust and wing loading are similar.
 
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
weig2000 said:
That's true only to a limited extent when it comes to Chinese defense-related matters.

In China, the companies and design institutes involved in defense industry are mostly state-owned. They do publish a lot of stuffs (news/PR releases/reports/pamphlets/academic papers); but these publications are often written in the official CCP/government language or cliche ("baguwen"). These kind of language have been increasingly out of step with those used in everyday life or even regular news reports and publications in China today. Of course, it doesn't help the language referring to more substantial information are often vague when it comes to military affairs and defense matters. Therefore, even for Chinese, it takes some experiences and observations to decode the true messages embedded inside the publications. I'm sometimes amazed that some long time Chinese military fans and enthusiasts could infer things and conclusions that are very insightful from some routine publications, which I would ordinarily dismiss as official BS.

At the risk of slightly OT, I noticed the divergence of the official language and unofficial language quite some time ago. For most non-Chinese China observers or even Chinese-speakers who rarely interact with Chinese society at large, the image of today's China projected by the official Chinese media or publications (both English and Chinese) is often quite disconnected with contemporary China. This is something pointed out by more than a few veteran western China observers, incidentally (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of The Atlantic comes to mind. He wrote a book on China's aviation industry, "China Airborne" based on his extensive China experiences; Fallows himself is an aviation enthusiast owning and operating his private aircraft).
Click to expand...

Man, math can be used to break codes, there is nothing special about Chinese, Japanese codes were broken in WWII thanks to math and other technologies in 2012 the computing ability makes that easier, plus chinese is a widely spoken language, so there are enough people in the west who speak Chinese to break codes.

And for experience i read japanese, so i know ideograms "Kanjies" are usualy forgoten unless you have a dictionary at hand, but computers do not forget, so a computer these days can be used to break codes and memorize all the written kangies.

All languages can be spoken in code.

[video=youtube;9hAzmh6XSr8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hAzmh6XSr8[/video]

[video=youtube;JF48sl15OCg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF48sl15OCg[/video]
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top