Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

ougoah said:

J-15 is far superior to J-31 in many respects.

Click to expand...

Please explain.

ougoah said:

If the aim is to match the technical ability of USN F-35 in pacific, I doubt a few dozens will do the trick. Nor will it provide much deterrence if political climates decay to the point of actually using these and going into war. Pouring immense sums into such a program is too great an opportunity cost.

Click to expand...

Oh, the FC-31 (or a naval J-XX) would be too great of a cost? Why doesn't the PLAAF simply stop producing the expensive J-20s and rely on J-7s instead? Why even induct new equipment when the PLAN and PLAAF can save 100% of their budget by relying on 3rd generation airframes? If a few FC-31 (or another naval 5th generation fighter) "won't make a difference", then perhaps Chinese officials should start shuddering when they think how poorly their J-15s would fare in a potential conflict.

ougoah said:

By the time J-31 is fully inducted in numbers and crews are trained up to match USN, PLAN still won't have numerical or technical advantage. Counter stealth tactics and detection will have improved to negate the advantages of VLO fighters.

Click to expand...

This is an issue with all aircraft, including any new J-15 variants and a Frankensteined naval J-20. The numerical and technical advantage held by the USN will only be greatly exacerbated if the PLAN continues to use its J-15s as the mainstay of its air wings. We all agree that both the US and China are working on anti-VLO countermeasures; this is neither a valid argument for the J-15 nor any indication that the J-15s would fare any better in battle.

ougoah said:

By then J-15's superior load, range, and kinematic performance will be a far more useful asset for the price it can be built in huge numbers as well. China should not be using J-31 to counter F-35. I've little faith the J-31 will be a better fighter than F-35. If it came to a war where F-35 will be used aggressively by US and Japan, i'd prefer PLA to have methods of eliminating USN carriers and bases before those assets can be put into use. It's better to have those methods ready and in numbers than have a few dozen new J-31s go up against the entire USN pacific fleet and Japanese as well.

Click to expand...

J-15's superior load, range, and "kinematics" will mean absolutely nothing if it cannot get within range of the enemy. A 5th generation platform provides a first-shoot advantage in virtually all scenarios and that usually turns the tables in favor of those who can achieve it. Your faith in the PLA's ability to destroy USN/Japanese assets before they can be put to sea is based on the false assumption that the latter has no effective countermeasures against PLA offensive munitions and that they have no plans to preemptively strike PLA assets in the first place; having "force multipliers" (a term that the FC-31 deserves far more than the J-15 does) would be a critical advantage in the likely event that the USN/JPN assets are not eliminated to an acceptable extent.

ougoah said:

Pouring a fortune into J-31 to match F-35 is preparing for a stupid battle China cannot win and is behind on.

Click to expand...

Matching capabilities of any single F-35 variant isn't hard, it's pointless.(ok, f-35B actually is hard on your own)
Honestly speaking, though, FC-31 seems to be wrong aircraft.
Before "hey, we have a second stealth, let's sell it to the navy", it first and foremost seems to be just a medium fighter and nothing more. Limited internal storage, limited endurance.
What for PLAN needs it?

SinoSoldier said:

Please explain.



Oh, the FC-31 (or a naval J-XX) would be too great of a cost? Why doesn't the PLAAF simply stop producing the expensive J-20s and rely on J-7s instead? Why even induct new equipment when the PLAN and PLAAF can save 100% of their budget by relying on 3rd generation airframes? If a few FC-31 (or another naval 5th generation fighter) "won't make a difference", then perhaps Chinese officials should start shuddering when they think how poorly their J-15s would fare in a potential conflict.



This is an issue with all aircraft, including any new J-15 variants and a Frankensteined naval J-20. The numerical and technical advantage held by the USN will only be greatly exacerbated if the PLAN continues to use its J-15s as the mainstay of its air wings. We all agree that both the US and China are working on anti-VLO countermeasures; this is neither a valid argument for the J-15 nor any indication that the J-15s would fare any better in battle.



J-15's superior load, range, and "kinematics" will mean absolutely nothing if it cannot get within range of the enemy. A 5th generation platform provides a first-shoot advantage in virtually all scenarios and that usually turns the tables in favor of those who can achieve it. Your faith in the PLA's ability to destroy USN/Japanese assets before they can be put to sea is based on the false assumption that the latter has no effective countermeasures against PLA offensive munitions and that they have no plans to preemptively strike PLA assets in the first place; having "force multipliers" (a term that the FC-31 deserves far more than the J-15 does) would be a critical advantage in the likely event that the USN/JPN assets are not eliminated to an acceptable extent.

Click to expand...

1. Superior in range, payload, kinematic performance. J-31 is likely very heavy with weak engines. Whatever weight saving methods employed on 5th gen could also be employed on J-15 if load parameters of respective frames are going to be the same. No really good reasons why this cannot be done without much issue.

2. That's taking things a bit too far. I'm not condoning abandoning 5th gen and your logic is flawed. J-15 is not J-7 and J-15 can offer abilities J-31 cannot IFF stealth is countered effectively enough. J-31 on carriers will take a decade? if not more to be fully introduced and crews to be properly trained and familiarised. By then I bet there will be effective counter stealth methods available. It'll be more effective and cheaper than investing in VLO. It'll also negate many advantages of stealth fighters on both sides which means stealthy strike will not be as easy as it is today. Remember that F-35, F-22, J-20, J-31 stealth teach is at least 2 decades old. It won't be hard to overcome them in a decade or two. If this does happen, J-15 and electronically competent and up to date 4.5 gen fighters will have range, payload, and kinematic superiority over super expensive stealth fighters which will mostly be hugely effective against every other nation except the major military powers. So these developments (which you admit everyone must be working hard on and probably have been for at least a decade if not many many more e.g. since F117 and B2) will only make VLO less useful against competent opponents and make 4.5 gen fighters more capable relative to 5th gen.

3 and rest. I'm not advocating for navalised J-20. Just from observation of the wider context, I don't see China being militarily aggressive in coming decades. Only defensive to some extent. Any war between powers will either be proxy, extremely contained, or end of world. In no situation will spending billions on inducting 5th gen carrier fighters really help either three possibilities. Political gain is everything and NK is the biggest flash point. If we put all our eggs into this J-31 basket, it's a crappy half arsed copy of two american designs (meaning they probably understand exactly how well it performs and Chinese electronics and radar tech cannot be a generation or even half a gen better than the latest of US). Probably short legged like Mig-29 (they use similar engines after all), tiny weapons load (next to useless so may as well use drones), poor kinematic performance (F-35 is worse than 4th gen as well and J-31 is underpowered by 4th gen standards if it doesn't have miracle weight reduction). There's no need to copy everything from the US. Especially if China is a step behind. Why not seek another path? J-20 is enough for the coming decades? Why diversify? There's zero advantage in having a crappier version of J-20 albeit possibly a little stealthier and cheaper. Cheapness is negated by having to support a separate platform and develop engines for it. Unless J-31 is much more capable than J-20 is several fields, it just doesn't need to be a thing unless it's exported which I sincerely hope it becomes. China already has a full fledged VLO fighter which has room to be modified for future. It's got that base covered. Move on, this is just a stop gap for better UCAVs and AI controlled networked warfare.

Just personal opinion and biases from me. But that's how I see the situation. We have to remember that the main reason the US forces got two 5th gen platforms was also partly because they got other nations to almost completely finance the F-35.

If we're addressing the specific problem of 5th gen onboard future carriers, there's certainly a more positive image to be gained with having 5th gens onboard newer catapult carriers. Imagine how much the foreigners would be laughing at China if they see J-15s ("junk made in China copies of su-33") onboard our next gen carriers. So there's something to consider there if no better options are ready by then. I personally think the slow pace is either no faith in J-31 platform to perform for coming decades, or they've something better in the works. It can't be due to technical reasons since we've seen more than one prototype, no serious setbacks, 5th gen avionics, electronics, and sensors completed on J-20 and SAC's experience for navalised fighters. Honestly is slower than snail's pace for this bird. Could be explained by many other things but I just don't believe it actually is.

J-31 frame only has the look of a 5th gen fighter. It doesn't have the tight tolerances yet or the engines. It can't take the WS-15 or even WS-10. Yes SAC have only built prototypes and any finished product will be more polished than the uneven surfaces we've seen so far but SAC is no CAC and I doubt their ability in producing something that can decidedly do up against F-35s.

It's not that I don't think that J-31 could be developed into a good rival/counter for the F-35; I think it very well could. It's that I don't think that's what the PLAN is looking for. They are used to operating large, kinematically powerful aircraft like J-15. They want long range, big payload, high speed/altitude and stealth on top. If they trade those for a smaller jet with low range, low missile load, but stealth, they essentially have an aircraft made for area defense and to swat incoming enemy carrier jets out of the sky, but not much else after that. The way I see it, the PLAN has to choose again whether they want MiG-29K or Su-33 for their carrier except in 5th gen equivalents and I think they will once again go for the bigger jet with long range, one that can carry anti-shipping missiles to go on the offensive against enemy ships. That's how I'd want it.

ougoah said:

1.

3 and rest. I'm not advocating for navalised J-20. Just from observation of the wider context, I don't see China being militarily aggressive in coming decades. .

Click to expand...

Say WUT!?!?! that is the most inaccurate statement I've ever read in my life... a country that is NOT militarily aggressive will not go from a 3rd rate rag tag military to one that produces 5th Gen fighter and having the 2nd most powerful navy in the world.. in a matter of 25 years and continues to expand at a very high rate of growth.
You don't make war machines for the fun of it or to feed poor people with it. You make war machines for one purpose and one only. to kickass!

manqiangrexue said:

It's not that I don't think that J-31 could be developed into a good rival/counter for the F-35; I think it very well could. It's that I don't think that's what the PLAN is looking for. They are used to operating large, kinematically powerful aircraft like J-15. They want long range, big payload, high speed/altitude and stealth on top. If they trade those for a smaller jet with low range, low missile load, but stealth, they essentially have an aircraft made for area defense and to swat enemy carrier jets out of the sky, but not much else after that. Essentially, the PLAN has to choose again whether they want MiG-29K or Su-33 for their carrier except in 5th gen equivalents and I think they will once again go for the bigger jet with long range, one that can carry anti-shipping missiles to go on the offensive against enemy ships. That's how I'd want it.

Click to expand...

Here I'm going to agree with your logic, but I would remind you that even with its physically smaller size, the F-35 will carry a "truck-load" of heavy munitions, (see "beast mode"), once first day VLO need subsides. I think the limiting factor now for the J-31/FC-31 is more than likely engines, and indeed suitable engines seem to have kept J-20 production rates and capabilities from advancing to the next level.

So no doubt engines are a priority, and it is possible that the PLANAF would prefer a larger airframe,, but then that would limit numbers of aircraft on the carrier?? so there remains a great deal to be revealed in the future, and there are many decisions to be made in the near term, in order that future capabilities do not suffer?

I will say this, for the USN the F-35C must be embraced and put into full production, and for the PLAN I would encourage a full on 5th Gen, if they intend to fully implement their aircraft carriers. I really believe that the FC-31 is a very fine aircraft, though it does indeed need serious engines to be successful.

No you build up your military for defence of national interests. Having a strong military doesn't necessarily force its use. Maybe you're thinking too much like the Americans. Humanity is continuing to evolve. There will hopefully be higher peaks of civilisation we can build. In any case, when I said I don't think China will be militarily aggressive, I mean it will not be looking for a fight. That simple. And if a fight does come its way courtesy of the USA, a few squadrons of J-31 will not be able to stand against even a fraction of the F-35 force the USN already has and have been training on. There's around 300 inducted already (I think in total for all branches). Yes I know being behind is granted at this point for China but trying to play the exact same game probably isn't the smartest strategy. J-20 is covering the basics for 5th gen. What new abilities will J-31 offer at all? Total waste of resources.

Air Force Brat said:

Here I'm going to agree with your logic, but I would remind you that even with its physically smaller size, the F-35 will carry a "truck-load" of heavy munitions, (see "beast mode"), once first day VLO need subsides. I think the limiting factor now for the J-31/FC-31 is more than likely engines, and indeed suitable engines seem to have kept J-20 production rates and capabilities from advancing to the next level.

So no doubt engines are a priority, and it is possible that the PLANAF would prefer a larger airframe,, but then that would limit numbers of aircraft on the carrier?? so there remains a great deal to be revealed in the future, and there are many decisions to be made in the near term, in order that future capabilities do not suffer?

I will say this, for the USN the F-35C must be embraced and put into full production, and for the PLAN I would encourage a full on 5th Gen, if they intend to fully implement their aircraft carriers. I really believe that the FC-31 is a very fine aircraft, though it does indeed need serious engines to be successful.

Click to expand...

Well, it might carry a "truckload" of bombs but if I had to use F-35 in "beast mode," I'd rather just use J-15. What the F-35 does not do is carry anti-shipping missiles in stealth mode. As a matter of fact, I don't even think J-20 could be made to do that. So... ideally, the PLAN could get a new large, long range 5th gen with bays configured to carry anti-shipping missiles. With a stealth squadron catapult-launched for full range, AAMs in the side-bays, anti-shipping missiles in the belly, I would consider that an ideal solution. And if one such machine was in the works (say within 2-3 years of first flight) I'd advocate waiting for it rather than settling for J-31.

I also like your idea of making an F-15SE variant of J-15. Maybe J-15SS (Silent Shark)? LOL

manqiangrexue said:

Well, it might carry whatever a "truckload" means in your definition but if I had to use F-35 in "beast mode," I'd rather just use J-15. What the F-35 does not do is carry anti-shipping missiles in stealth mode. As a matter of fact, I don't even think J-20 could be made to do that. So... ideally, the PLAN could get a new large, long range 5th gen with bays configured to carry anti-shipping missiles. With a stealth squadron catapult-launched for full range, AAMs in the side-bays, anti-shipping missiles in the belly, I would consider that an ideal solution.

Click to expand...

If they determine that a carrier borne 5th gen fighter is needed for future catapult carriers, they should use J-20 if possible. It's not that much wider than J-31 assuming folding wings. Length and numbers trade off is 100% worth it if J-20 can internally carry AShM, have greater range, sensor ability, and payload. What idiot would ever pick J-31 if the equation is that simple. Obviously it's not but as far as we can see, J-20 makes more sense. Plus it doubles up with airforce and doesn't create problems with logistics.