Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

weig2000

Captain
taxiya said:
I guess you meant "J-20" instead of J-31 in your post.

I agree with you that I don't think J-31 would be cheap enough to be counted as cheap compared to J-20. That excludes J-31 to be the Lo in a Hi-Lo mix. I am inclined to believe that in the PLA's view, the Lo is the 3rd (4th in US/Russia) generation fighters. This is a view held by everyone in Chinese BBS except J-31 lovers from my observation.
Click to expand...

The idea of a Hi-Low fifth-generation aircraft composition for China is really appealing, and makes a lot of sense - in theory.

The reality is different. The key question to answer is at what cost/performance ratio would it start to make sense to have a J-20/J-31 mix than simply going for an all J-20 fleet. Would PLAAF be willing to settle for a "low" J-31 at 75% of the cost and under 50% of the capability, respectively, of those of J-20? To be more specific, I think the real challenge is China does not have a suitable high-performance medium thrust turbo engine in the foreseeable future.
 
b787

b787

Captain
taxiya said:
I guess you meant "J-20" instead of J-31 in your post.

I agree with you that I don't think J-31 would be cheap enough to be counted as cheap compared to J-20. That excludes J-31 to be the Lo in a Hi-Lo mix. I am inclined to believe that in the PLA's view, the Lo is the 3rd (4th in US/Russia) generation fighters. This is a view held by everyone in Chinese BBS except J-31 lovers from my observation.
Click to expand...
The J-31 is the only answer along side Su-35s for the Chinese.

J-10 can not compete versus S-400s, Eurofightes, Rafales or even Gripen already with AESA, better performance, and even the F-18E is a serious threat armed with AIM-9X and lots of AIM-120s, by the time the J-10s are depleted, the J-20s can be easily destroyed in their air bases due to their lack of STOL capability, destroy their runways and you destroy its ability to fly, F-35B for a reason has V/STOL.

Add already the USA has 180 F-35s, in no way China will make as many J-20s as F-35s, and regular F-18Es can down J-10s so for China J-31 makes sense to deploy J-31.

F-22 has better performance than J-20, higher TWR plus no canards and a lower IR signature So to say J-20 can surpass F-22 it is far far away, J-31 can b making a smaller cheaper fighter get in the needed numbers to at least have some parity.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
I also want to suggest people not to equate the Hi-Lo concept in USAF/USN to a "Hi-Lo" concept in PLA.

PLA never has Hi-Lo mix before J-20 appeared and probably IMO never will. The proposition of a J-20/J-31 Hi-Lo mix is IMO an argument by J-31 supporters to find a place in PLA for it, not necessarily PLA's idea.

In US case, primarily, Hi is charged for air-dominance, while Lo is charged for air-dominance + fighter-bomber role. There is some overlap, but the line is there.

In Chinese case, primarily, Hi is for air-dominance (same as US), but the Lo is primarily fighter-bomber, not intended for air-dominance even it can. IMO PLA does not see a place for a F-35 type of aircraft (J-31) in its mix, nor does Chinese government want to bankrupt itself to field thousands of stealthy fighters which regardless how one try will be much more expensive than a non-stealthy flanker.
 
P

Pmichael

Junior Member
I see like two reasons why the J-31 could become a thing.

There is somekind of export market for 5gen aircraft or the Navy wants a smaller aircraft for their carriers.
 
Zool

Zool

Junior Member
Pmichael said:
I see like two reasons why the J-31 could become a thing.

There is somekind of export market for 5gen aircraft or the Navy wants a smaller aircraft for their carriers.
Click to expand...

My opinion is the same, although I don't see much of a future for J-31 on the carriers. China already operates large long-leg Flankers and a naval J-20 would take up the same or slightly smaller amount of deck space (based on current LRIP sat photos) without sacrificing much in the way of combat radius versus a smaller naval J-31. Would PLAN want to give up so much of the combat radius and weapon payload potential it has become accustomed to having available? I expect they would rather build a bigger CV.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
The idea of a Hi-Low fifth-generation aircraft composition for China is really appealing, and makes a lot of sense - in theory.

The reality is different. The key question to answer is at what cost/performance ratio would it start to make sense to have a J-20/J-31 mix than simply going for an all J-20 fleet. Would PLAAF be willing to settle for a "low" J-31 at 75% of the cost and under 50% of the capability, respectively, of those of J-20? To be more specific, I think the real challenge is China does not have a suitable high-performance medium thrust turbo engine in the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...
I believe we are in the same lot of seeing the matter. Efficiency/Cost ratio is the key. And that ratio above is expensive (not worth it).
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
b787 said:
The J-31 is the only answer along side Su-35s for the Chinese.

J-10 can not compete versus S-400s, Eurofightes, Rafales or even Gripen already with AESA, better performance, and even the F-18E is a serious threat armed with AIM-9X and lots of AIM-120s, by the time the J-10s are depleted, the J-20s can be easily destroyed in their air bases due to their lack of STOL capability, destroy their runways and you destroy its ability to fly, F-35B for a reason has V/STOL.

Add already the USA has 180 F-35s, in no way China will make as many J-20s as F-35s, and regular F-18Es can down J-10s so for China J-31 makes sense to deploy J-31.

F-22 has better performance than J-20, higher TWR plus no canards and a lower IR signature So to say J-20 can surpass F-22 it is far far away, J-31 can b making a smaller cheaper fighter get in the needed numbers to at least have some parity.
Click to expand...
It all boils down to this question, is J-31 (and Su-35 as you bring it up) cheap enough in terms of Efficiency/Cost ratio to make up the number? If it doesn't, China will have to figure something else regardless how (slightly) cheap they are, they are expensive if their Efficiency/Cost ratio is low, still a waste.
 
P

Pmichael

Junior Member
Zool said:
My opinion is the same, although I don't see much of a future for J-31 on the carriers. China already operates large long-leg Flankers and a naval J-20 would take up the same or slightly smaller amount of deck space (based on current LRIP sat photos) without sacrificing much in the way of combat radius versus a smaller naval J-31. Would PLAN want to give up so much of the combat radius and weapon payload potential it has become accustomed to having available? I expect they would rather build a bigger CV.
Click to expand...

Yes, I don't think the J-31 has a bright future in that regard.

I think it's a combination of export market and providing Shenyang with some experience in designing and testing a 5gen fighter.
 
b787

b787

Captain
taxiya said:
It all boils down to this question, is J-31 (and Su-35 as you bring it up) cheap enough in terms of Efficiency/Cost ratio to make up the number? If it doesn't, China will have to figure something else regardless how (slightly) cheap they are, they are expensive if their Efficiency/Cost ratio is low, still a waste.
Click to expand...
J-10 has external stores and a single dorsal fin, ventral fins so it is no stealth fighter, being single engined it means it carries few weapons so it carries few AAM at the expense of range, add more AAM and fuel tanks it becomes fat and heavy easy to detect, it has no supercruise, so F-18Es which is twin engine carrying more AAMs has better BVR chances, versus Rafale, the combination of higher TWR, better aerodynamics makes the J-10 no more than a F-16 threat aircraft, the USA has thousands of F-16s, China a few J-10s dependent on Al-31s from Russia.
Su-27 clones are expensive and very visible to radar, so F-35s and F-18Es will deplete the J-10s easily.

Su-35 has Speed, Speeds means the Hornet and F-35 can not chase it on equal terms.

J-31 can be used with lower RCS even better than J-20 with those ugly canards and Horrible ventral fins, J-31 only real weakness is the engines, which is the same weakness J-20 has, but being smaller can be built in larger numbers, so China can deploy a fighter which is a poors man F-35, but better than the J-10
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
b787 said:
taxiya said:
It all boils down to this question, is J-31 (and Su-35 as you bring it up) cheap enough in terms of Efficiency/Cost ratio to make up the number? If it doesn't, China will have to figure something else regardless how (slightly) cheap they are, they are expensive if their Efficiency/Cost ratio is low, still a waste.
Click to expand...
J-10 has external stores and a single dorsal fin, ventral fins so it is no stealth fighter, being single engined it means it carries few weapons so it carries few AAM at the expense of range, add more AAM and fuel tanks it becomes fat and heavy easy to detect, it has no supercruise, so F-18Es which is twin engine carrying more AAMs has better BVR chances, versus Rafale, the combination of higher TWR, better aerodynamics makes the J-10 no more than a F-16 threat aircraft, the USA has thousands of F-16s, China a few J-10s dependent on Al-31s from Russia.
Su-27 clones are expensive and very visible to radar, so F-35s and F-18Es will deplete the J-10s easily.

Su-35 has Speed, Speeds means the Hornet and F-35 can not chase it on equal terms.

J-31 can be used with lower RCS even better than J-20 with those ugly canards and Horrible ventral fins, J-31 only real weakness is the engines, which is the same weakness J-20 has, but being smaller can be built in larger numbers, so China can deploy a fighter which is a poors man F-35, but better than the J-10
Click to expand...
Can you stop for just a second and read my post before you rumble about how good F-16, F-18, Su-35 are and how bad J-10 is? I said "all boil to the efficiency/cost ratio", nothing else.

I asked apple and you gave me potato? I have to say that you sound like a relentless but clueless salesman trying to staff things down to customer's throat. It is frustrating the customer therefor will never work.:eek:

BTW, I know, I know, I know how "bad" Chinese aircrafts are compared with the rest of the world in your opinion. I don't mind, I don't care, no need for you to repeat it. Repeating it does NOT change the fact whether they are good or bad which is a personal opinion.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top