Guess they are mounting the IR missiles on the wingtips then?
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
- Status
Guess they are mounting the IR missiles on the wingtips then?
APU intakes are usually located near the tail roots, no?
As for SAC/AVIC fc31 future... Chances aren't looking good, that's for sure. But SAC will need work. If US govt wont let their NG, LM or Boeing to drop out of MiC, i can't fathom china letting SAC drop from its position of large military producer either. While it might perhaps let chengdu produce even more and perhaps give SAC more commercial airliner work (c919 and later c929) to keep it busy, i'd say it will still keep it up as a strong military aerospace player. For as long as there is no third player to take its place. and only one who could take its place in coming decades is Xian AC. But it seems to lack fighter making experience altogether.
SAC, in the short run, seems destined to be a second line fighter maker, after chengdu. fc31 MAY still somehow find its way (though political interests and pressure) into PLA and that would certainly help SAC's position.
But i'd say even better chances for SAC would be had if SAC let fc31 be a demonstrator programme. Keep the knowledge gained from it. build upon it. and fast track a stealthy, single engined solution (powered by future ws15). while chengdu is sure to be planning a plane in such a class as well, SAC would be offering something that PLA actually wants (single engined plane, instead of mid weight class twin engined one), something that could be more competitive abroad and would have larger foreign market AND would, in case of a technological and cost benefit tie with Chengdu's proposal, even likely be favored simply because of political pressure to keep both manufacturers viable for the future generations.
of course, "fast tracking" here is a relative term. We're still talking about several years of concept development, several years of engineering and first prototype flight not before 2025. But that might be perfectly in line with what PLA needs. because of, come 7-8 years of testing, 2032 might be just about right for PLA need to retire and replace original J10a.
For SAC to concentrate just on flanker derivatives and fc-31 class plane seems like a more risky proposal, one that might well lead them to irrelevance in the China's militaryindustrial sector by 2030.
As for SAC/AVIC fc31 future... Chances aren't looking good, that's for sure. But SAC will need work. If US govt wont let their NG, LM or Boeing to drop out of MiC, i can't fathom china letting SAC drop from its position of large military producer either. While it might perhaps let chengdu produce even more and perhaps give SAC more commercial airliner work (c919 and later c929) to keep it busy, i'd say it will still keep it up as a strong military aerospace player. For as long as there is no third player to take its place. and only one who could take its place in coming decades is Xian AC. But it seems to lack fighter making experience altogether.
SAC, in the short run, seems destined to be a second line fighter maker, after chengdu. fc31 MAY still somehow find its way (though political interests and pressure) into PLA and that would certainly help SAC's position.
But i'd say even better chances for SAC would be had if SAC let fc31 be a demonstrator programme. Keep the knowledge gained from it. build upon it. and fast track a stealthy, single engined solution (powered by future ws15). while chengdu is sure to be planning a plane in such a class as well, SAC would be offering something that PLA actually wants (single engined plane, instead of mid weight class twin engined one), something that could be more competitive abroad and would have larger foreign market AND would, in case of a technological and cost benefit tie with Chengdu's proposal, even likely be favored simply because of political pressure to keep both manufacturers viable for the future generations.
of course, "fast tracking" here is a relative term. We're still talking about several years of concept development, several years of engineering and first prototype flight not before 2025. But that might be perfectly in line with what PLA needs. because of, come 7-8 years of testing, 2032 might be just about right for PLA need to retire and replace original J10a.
For SAC to concentrate just on flanker derivatives and fc-31 class plane seems like a more risky proposal, one that might well lead them to irrelevance in the China's militaryindustrial sector by 2030.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Are you confident the images aren't PS-ed?
PAK-FA has it.
A better question is why do you think the images might be PSed?
Most of us are very familiar with doctored photos, not only in terms of how they look, but also in terms of when they are presented, where they are presented.
This photos (obviously taken by a camera of a promo video at the airshow) do not fit that bill any of the characteristics at all.
I'm not sure if you're actually that unaware of the characteristics of PSed photos or if you're deliberately asking a loaded question.
The cases of Q-5 and FBC-1/JH7 as well are very different from FC-31.
Both Q-5 and JH7 started as state projects, in case of JH7, PLAF lost interest because the capability did not meet their expectations (could be due to PLAF raised the bar, their fault, not XAC). So, PLA has no power to say anything against Nanchang or Xian aircraft factory (later XAC). Q-5 and JH7 continued to be financed by the state. Remember the aero industry and PLA were equally subordinates of the State.
FC-31 is totally different IF it is a pure SAC initiation. I assume the primary goal of SAC is a copy of JF-17 project for export. I do not believe for a second that SAC even dare to "force" or nagging PLA to accept FC-31 if the state has no plan for it. The state may change its strategy in the future, leading PLA to introduce FC-31 in the future, but that possible change is only (limited to) on the table of central military commission's table, and the boss of SAC or AVIC surely do not have a place at that table. If anyone tried that more than 3 times, I highly doubt it, he would not receive a good looking, not by President Xi for sure.
China will surely keep the competence of SAC. But what SAC can and should do largely depend on the decision by the state consul and CMC. SAC can surely take its own initiatives, but only with the approval of state.
I have said many times that one can not draw analoge between US and China. NG, LM and Boeing are private company. AVIC are more than 90% if not 100% owned by the state, huge difference.
To all,
Contrary to FC-31 bashing and its supposed dismissal by PLA, I believe, just like JF-17, the project of FC-31 is endorsed by the state and PLA, BUT not intended for PLA. All these are clear between PLA and AVIC. Nobody in the institution bashes FC-31. That however does not mean FC-31 will succeed, nor does it mean the state or PLA will sacrifice PLA budget to prop FC-31 up (like some says SAC trying to convince PLA to adopt to help attracting foreigner buyers), that kind of thing never happened to JF-17, and I am sure it won't happen to FC-31.
Last edited:
but J-20 doesn't, F-22 doesn't.
I don't think you are expecting an answer or really asking a question. Why don't you say it straight "it is PSed"? Many, I at least will not bother to reply.
- Status