Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

during the zhuhai airshow,ukraine told kanwa, they are in early stage developing 95 kn jet engine,design to power FC-1 and J-31 aircraft.
but kanwa receive news tfrom AVIC that J-31 was design for export only.clue.during her maiden flight,unlike J-20,there's no red carpet treatment,no big shot VIP,no top military brass attend her maiden flight.

J31 first customer is Pakistan and it is to counter PakFa/Rafale. The engine was already a clue.

If the RD-93 is the intended engine for the J-31, then I hope the Chinese brothers know what they're doing. That engine emits so much black smoke, it's like flying a motorised rickshaw in downtown Peshawar. Surely China isn't intending to put an engine that under-powers a Gen-4 combat aircraft (JF-17), on a Gen-5 stealth aircraft?

If China is to meet future challenges, it ought have powerful, high-performance, long-endurance engine that permit their Gen-5 stealth fighters to super cruise, but also be stealthy enough themselves in order to maintain the over all stealth integrity of the J-20s & J-31.

^^ Well there aren't that many alternatives, can Pakistan get EJ200?

hmmwv said:

^^ Well there aren't that many alternatives, can Pakistan get EJ200?

Click to expand...

It's a fairly simple thing to understand, buddy. We (Pakistan), don't want western equipment (to spend money on). We're looking military hardware which is from our closest ally, China. Over the last decade or so, China has proven to the world that it can produce high quality, advance military platforms and weapons. So when we go into a joint venture with our ally, we seek an all Chinese combat aircraft, which has nothing in it except Chinese radars, engines, missiles, ew-suites and avionics, which are of high standards and reliability.

A European engine or French was only sought, since there wasn't anything in its class that China had at the time (10 years ago). Plus we always ran the risk of sanctions when it came to getting American hardware, which is why we were looking at Europe as an alternative as we had bought Mirages (France), Grifo-Radar (Italy) and Avionics (Sagem-France), in the past. 10 years on, China has developed a robust and powerful military industry. And with the existence of program's such as WS-13 Taishan and WS-10 Taihang engines. It presents Pakistan with a true opportunity of becoming completely non-dependent on Western military hardware.

Why go for an extortionist pricy EJ200, which is riddled with conditions and sanction prone, when one ought to go for a Chinese engine on a Chine combat aircraft and that too when China is our main and strongest and closest ally?

Didn't think so.

Player99 said:

More likely for anyone (else but China Airforce or China Navy at this point of time anyway) who might be interested in funding it.

Click to expand...

Heh, Heh, heh, maybe a tribute to LockMart and Pratt & Whitney? [didn't those guys invent the steam powered cotton gin?], it really does look like the Pratt and Whitney Eagle don't it, OK I'm SORRY! I KNOW I shouldn'ta oughta said it? I'm stepping on my own toes right now, OUCH! any way I'm sticking to my PLAN theory, I still think the J-31 needs some better power plants, but if AVIC is claiming a mach 1.8 top end? I could be all wet? I really hope not? export only, how dissapointing would that be, but I will take the first one! I like this little bird, kinda reminds me of the poor little XP-530 prototype that Northrupp floated so long ago, but later became the YF-17---F-18, which is a winner by the way, and was scaled up to become the Super Bug, all to prove that sometimes good guys do come out ahead! Cheers AFB

There is no huge smoke deal left with the RD93. You ever saw old school Mig29, Phantom or Starfighter? Every engine has to alter or optimize the throttle changes and some just do not do anything so you get some smoke. I have explained the advantage of very fast spooling of the RD33 that causes this. They now dump the extra fuel from the pump into the outer airflow. But you have to remember that fine tuning is nice but has also some negative impacts on part quality (a lot higher) and fuel quality (a lot better needed). And do you really see that smoke on BVR? And if you think the smoke makes a lot of impact on WVR... You are already in every way scanned. So the mantra that smoke is terrible is just a remark that misses the real issue. In WVR you are already in disadvantage. It does hardly matter if you fly F22 or the good old smokey Mig29.

Munir said:

There is no huge smoke deal left with the RD93. You ever saw old school Mig29, Phantom or Starfighter? Every engine has to alter or optimize the throttle changes and some just do not do anything so you get some smoke. I have explained the advantage of very fast spooling of the RD33 that causes this. They now dump the extra fuel from the pump into the outer airflow. But you have to remember that fine tuning is nice but has also some negative impacts on part quality (a lot higher) and fuel quality (a lot better needed). And do you really see that smoke on BVR? And if you think the smoke makes a lot of impact on WVR... You are already in every way scanned. So the mantra that smoke is terrible is just a remark that misses the real issue. In WVR you are already in disadvantage. It does hardly matter if you fly F22 or the good old smokey Mig29.

Click to expand...

So in other words, you're saying that its the quality of jet-fuel that could reduce or eliminate the smoke? Are you also saying that a Stealth Fighter's engines can be smokey and yet have no effect on it's heat signature?

My response was purely on the fact that China ought to be producing/ developing its own engines which are of higher-performance, greater quality and longer endurance (time b/w overhauls). Russian engines have been known for lesser endurance (900 hrs on a AL-31) b/w overhauls. China should be developing its own engines which exceed the quality and performance of both Russian and European engines.

The JF-17 Thunder ought have a power-plant that reflects the aircraft's agility and performance ..... what it was built for. The WS-13 Taishan engine should have a thrust output, greater than the RD-93 or RD-33. It should also have a longer life span which allows Pakistan Air Force less time on overhauls and more time on Thunders fulfilling Combat Air Patrols!

I said what? I said the higher quality western high performance engine are more vulnerable for less quality fuel. Smoke is due to not fully burned fuel. Every engine has certain settings when that happens. And one should not over value some smoke cause it has no impact on BVR role and in WVR you have to either avoid it or you are visual or tracked anyway.

Munir said:

I said what? I said the higher quality western high performance engine are more vulnerable for less quality fuel. Smoke is due to not fully burned fuel. Every engine has certain settings when that happens. And one should not over value some smoke cause it has no impact on BVR role and in WVR you have to either avoid it or you are visual or tracked anyway.

Click to expand...

This is what you said, friend. Going by what have stated there, it means the RD-93 does NOT fully burn the fuel. That means a lot of things. To start of with, not fully burning fuel means using up more fuel and generating less power, which makes the RD-93 a gas guzzler and uneconomical for Pakistan Air Force. Infact, it iis no wonder that several analysis of MiG-29 Fulcrum have observed during exercises between American F-16s and Bulgarian and Polish MiG-29s (powered by RD-33), that the one big disadvantage the MiG had over the Viper, was its endurance. The MiG had a very limited window of time to fight before the pilot called "Bingo Fuel." Even so with the Polish MiG-29s, donated by the Luftwaffe, for joining the EU. The Polish MiGs were fitted with an external fuel tank on its centreline station. And eventhough it gave the Fulcrum, some more time in the air, it was still less than the Viper.

Even if we adhere to the practice of adding CFTs on the Thunder, plus a centreline tank. It still doesn't change two things about the RD-93s, which are using up more fuel for the amount of power generated and the fact that the RD-93 is under-powering the JF-17 Thunder.

Now I'm not saying that the WS-13 is the solution to the engine for the JF-17 Thunder. But as things stand, it is the only chance we have at giving the Thunder an engine which gives it more power for less fuel, has greater time (ideally over 1000-1500 hrs b/w overhauls), has features FADAC and DFBW and is more importantly MADE IN CHINA!!!!!