Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Status
Not open for further replies.
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
schrage musik said:
I know. A land based version will still have the same airframe as the carrier plane it is derived from. If you go to the length of changing the airframe, you might as well design a new aircraft from scratch. In reality, what is likely to change on a PAF variant is the sensors, datalinks, avionics, munitions because export variants of these systems will be installed.
Click to expand...
Actually it's historically been easier to make a carrier bird Airforce then a Airforce bird carrier. The if the PLAN does start pushing a naval version of the FC31 then that bird would in essence start a new line splintering off from the FC31. If the PRC offers FC31 For export then it's likely to favor a conventional take off type. In essence two paths of evolution.
 
K

kurutoga

Junior Member
Registered Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Actually it's historically been easier to make a carrier bird Airforce then a Airforce bird carrier. The if the PLAN does start pushing a naval version of the FC31 then that bird would in essence start a new line splintering off from the FC31. If the PRC offers FC31 For export then it's likely to favor a conventional take off type. In essence two paths of evolution.
Click to expand...

I thought the catapult-capable jets will require a new structural design. While some subsystems can be reused, it is essentially a new jet because every bit in a fighter jet design must be optimized. If a nasalized FC31 did not exist yet, it may never exist. PLAN is better off ordering a new design.
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
kurutoga said:
I thought the catapult-capable jets will require a new structural design. While some subsystems can be reused, it is essentially a new jet because every bit in a fighter jet design must be optimized. If a nasalized FC31 did not exist yet, it may never exist. PLAN is better off ordering a new design.
Click to expand...
The modifications made to make a catapult capable make it difficult to change a conventional fighter into a naval bird true. But two points first, FC31 is still very early in it's program meaning that as it progresses they could navalize it. Much like how both the YF17 evolved into the FA18, the Su27 became the Su33, Mig 29 became Mig 29K and F35 becomes F35C.
Second just because the fighter is designed to operate off a carrier deck doesn't mean that it cannot be used as a conventional fighter. The Iranians have F14 but no carriers. The Canadian and Australians have FA18 but no carriers. These fighters launch conventionally.
The gear can be swapped and tailhook removed. Even more done if seemed necessary like having a set of wings that don't fold for conventional models.
 
asif iqbal

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
SinoSoldier said:
How can you be so sure in your claim?
Click to expand...

Do you think that SAC will do 6 years of testing and not redesign a naval varient to pitch to PLAN considering they already have a naval aircraft in operation ?

They will certainly pitch a naval version, after first land based prototype many thought the project was dead then we seen the 2nd much improved prototype

What is alternative, J20? Too big, not naval optimised and not practical

Carrier 002/003 will need a air wing, the timing for that is about now
 
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
asif iqbal said:
Do you think that SAC will do 6 years of testing and not redesign a naval varient to pitch to PLAN considering they already have a naval aircraft in operation ?

They will certainly pitch a naval version, after first land based prototype many thought the project was dead then we seen the 2nd much improved prototype

What is alternative, J20? Too big, not naval optimised and not practical

Carrier 002/003 will need a air wing, the timing for that is about now
Click to expand...

Exactly, and well stated my friend!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top