If they want to put this fighter onto future carriers, they need to hurry up otherwise it'll be as pointless as India inducting Tejas now. Too little too late. There are so many emerging technologies that will completely change the dynamics of warfare and arms races. If we continue to see nothing much come of this fighter in PLA branches, it's a good indicator this project is abandoned by PLA and/or going to be exported if permitted and geopolitics allow. We need to remember that PRC still wants to avoid treading too heavily of America's toes. It's not like they can just export a capable J-31 to anyone with the cash without some consequences. Whether those consequences are worth it or whether such exporting is in response to US action, will determine whether J-31 will become some sort of ubiquitous non-western 5th gen fighter. My bet is that this project just slowly disappears like it ought to. So far it's just a shell of a fighter that resembles the F-22 and F-35 with weak engines and small weapons bays. I'd be pretty disappointed if PLA prioritises this waste of resources over anything else. So far we've seen nothing impressive and it may well be the equivalent of a fake Rolex. All looks but no substance. I could be wrong but why does PLA seem so uninterested in it?
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
- Status
Guys .... !!??? 
Again I beg you to stay on topic - the same as with the J-15 thread - ... some are discussing as if their life would depend on their opinion the FC-31 is a failure or a super-duper-better than J-20-carrier type and even more as if they know better what the PLAN should get and why.
That's ridiculous. Come on ... it is a demonstrator with a certain potential if developed ... nothing more, nothing less.
And now stay here only related to the FC-31 ... but please do not take your own opinion as the one and only fact. So far we know nearly nothing... .
Deino
Again I beg you to stay on topic - the same as with the J-15 thread - ... some are discussing as if their life would depend on their opinion the FC-31 is a failure or a super-duper-better than J-20-carrier type and even more as if they know better what the PLAN should get and why.
That's ridiculous. Come on ... it is a demonstrator with a certain potential if developed ... nothing more, nothing less.
And now stay here only related to the FC-31 ... but please do not take your own opinion as the one and only fact. So far we know nearly nothing... .
Deino
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
I would not go this far at all.
1. J-31 is nowhere near like the Tejas. Tejas was inducted after 5th gens were available. J-31, any way you look at it, will not drag on into the mid 2030's when the first 6th gens might show up.
2. If anybody wants to buy J-31, there's not going to be consequences on China that the US can inflict. Depending on who it is, the US might pressure that country very hard, but it's not going to try to pressure China into not selling. Though... if the full development costs are not taken by the PLA, then whichever country orders it will have to pay the prohibitively high cost of completing development of the fighter.
3. Don't say that fake Rolex shit; it makes you sound like someone who thinks that if 2 jets look kinda similar, then the later one must have copied the earlier one. The engines aren't that weak; compared to 191kN on F-35, baseline RD-33 are only 163kN, though improved variants include RD-33MK for 177kN, new RD-93 for 196kN () or even WS-13IPE.
4. It's not a waste of resources because if anything, SAC learns from the experience. If China's armed forces decide to induct it, I will be confident that they made the right decision.
Agree with point 4. If PLA eventually inducts it, I have complete faith its inherent abilities are no worse than J-20 and it must also offer certain capabilities J-20 does not. What I meant by the Tejas comparison was more relating it to J-31 vs F-35 in a naval role. But yes, there was too much hyperbole there. Export issue depends on the factors you and I both mentioned. Consequences will exist e.g. if China sold ballistic missiles to arab nations unfriendly to Israel. There will be consequences. Same with J-31. Let's not discuss that though since it's so far removed from reality at the moment and like you said, whoever is interested needs to foot the bill. I doubt SAC will build a complete finished fighter with no customers. Fake Rolex is just how I feel about this fighter. J-31 does copy LockMart designs. There's nothing wrong with that. Copying a good design is great and cost effective. At the moment it is just a shell. Like Deino said, it's just a demonstrator at the moment, nothing more and nothing less. Carrier capable is so far away and MAY not be worth pursuing if time and costs are accounted for.
And yes I'm quite obviously biased against J-31. This is the sort of stuff China can do without. Whereas J-20 is a move in the right direction. It's like picking Su-27 over Mig-29. I'd much rather more Su-27 than have a whole lot of Mig-29s.
And yes I'm quite obviously biased against J-31. This is the sort of stuff China can do without. Whereas J-20 is a move in the right direction. It's like picking Su-27 over Mig-29. I'd much rather more Su-27 than have a whole lot of Mig-29s.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
I can understand the payload and range, but we really have no clue what the J-15's kinematic performance is against the FC-31 which will be equipped with the EJ200-class WS-19 engines. I also see that you conveniently ignored the main advantages that the 5th generation has over the 4th; mainly in first-shoot advantage, sensor fusion, VLO, stand-off attack capabilities, supercruise, C4I capabilities, and of course much superior avionics. Payload and range matters little if the airframe cannot survive against a technologically superior foe in the first place.
But that's exactly what your plan comprises of. No matter how much "stuff" you put on the J-15, it is still bound by the limits of a legacy airframe and will not stand a chance against VLO assets deployed by the USN, ROKN, and JMSDF. If you are advocating for the development of a new-sheet 5th generation design, then that is going to cost far more and take significantly longer than adapting an existing design (FC-31) for carrier use, which is what Huitong is claiming that SAC is in the process of doing.
Your insistence on the effectiveness of counter-VLO technologies is in black and white. Even if the US/Japan deploys "quantum radars" (more of a myth at this point than a working product), having a VLO airframe will still be more survivable than using a legacy one, even if the VLO aircraft may not be as effective as it used to be. This is the same kind of thinking that led "analysts" to believe that the age of tanks and aircraft carriers are over (due to the advent of ATGMs and AShBMs) despite their imaginations never materializing.
Additionally, you are using a lot of "ifs" in your theories ("if" the VLO airframes are countered, "if" the US develops anti-stealth radar, etc.); the PLAN would be in a very bad position if it stopped or delayed the introduction of 5th generation aircraft on the ASSUMPTION that anti-VLO technologies will mature in a few years, only to discover that VLO plans still reign supreme.
5th generation aircraft will bring you key advantages in a conflict regardless of whether the conflict is defensive or aggressive in nature; I can't believe we are even talking about this aspect of conflict when assessing the qualities of air platforms.
Except nobody is putting all their eggs into the FC-31 basket; the PLAAF still operates the J-20 and newly-developed Flanker variants. What your plan is advocating for is the abandonment of a 5th-generation platform and instead to have the PLAN place all their eggs in a much weaker and flimsier basket (read: J-15).
1. Range is 4000 km with 1250 km combat radius (superior to unclassified F-35 specs if true)
2. That's quite a bold statement regarding kinematics. I'd like to see some raw data (roll/climb/turn rates) between the F-35, FC-31, and whatever 4th generation airframes you choose.
3. The FC-31 will be powered by two WS-19 engines (95-100 kN each), which will provide it with an equivalent if not superior TWR compared to the F-35C
4. Weapons load is 8 tons, with internal provisions for six AMRAAM-class missiles or four 500 kg bombs; this is not "tiny" by any standard of measure.
What makes you think that a clean sheet design will provide much more capabilities than the FC-31? The aircraft will be limited by whatever sensors and subsystems it will bear, so unless the Chinese make significant headway into those technologies that can guarantee an advantage over the F-35's subsystems, you'll end up in the same place except with a lot less money and a lot more wasted time.
And the fact that the two bring different capabilities to the table. And the fact that one is less expensive than the other. And the fact that one of them has been rejected for naval use. And the fact that they are in two different weight classes, thus providing different operating and capability envelopes.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Fair enough and yes no one wants a fight and I'm sure China is not out looking for one either but sometimes the fight comes to you even if you aren't looking for it. With that being said one thing that is FACTUAL is the aggressive buildup of the military ESPECIALLY the Navy.
That is undeniable.
Perhaps like you said it is done for the sake of 'peace' and/or national defence but an aggressive buildup nonetheless and since we are afterall talking military procurement and about a naval 5th Gen fighter, be in J31 or something else it fits into the 'aggressive buildup' strategy and narrative that China is implementing.
The question remains; is/does the J31 have the potential to become PLAN's goto 5th gen in the next few years? If not then why not and what are the other alternatives?
I think most of us here have ruled out the J20 as a suitable candidate and just as well many here also agree that an existing navalized 5th gen already in the works is unlikely.
My personal contention is based on the aggressive buildup of PLAN and the likely commissioning of many carriers in the next 10-20 years including possibly 90-100K CVNs, I find it highly doubtful that PLAN will continue to depend ONLY on J15 and then skip an entire generation of aircraft and go straight to 6 Gen 20 yrs from now.
I don't think you really would use the J-15?, that's the beauty of the 5th Gen, with EOTAS and the helmet mounted sight,,, hitting what you're shooting at is as simple as lining up the dots, and no 4 Gen is quite there yet, plus with the F-35 you would "know" where the bad guys are, how many there are, and who is lined up to shoot your shots for you, so you can concentrate on your own mission.
and that friend is the potential that the J-31/FC-31 could bring to the PLANAF, situational awareness, and with lifting body aerodynamics, you've got to admit the F-35 and hopefully the J-31 using similar aerodynamic tweaks of the modern 5 gen aircraft will bring that same type of potential to the PLANAF or whoever eventually gets on board with the J-31/FC-31, no doubt that is Shenyang's objective...
If you pair the FC-31 and the J-15 you improve the mission capability of each one, at least that's what the USN is banking on with the F-35C and the F-18 Super Hornet...
so who knows at this stage, but I believe at least Kwai would agree with me that the J-31/FC-31 pack a lot of potential for the PLAN
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Yes. I am one to believe that PLAN has been meticulously studying and both adapting and adopting USN profiles and operational strategies. I mean the fact that they learned and emulated USN aircraft carrier handling operations and directives ON a Russian made carrier (as oppose to all Russia) shows how serious they are in this aspect.
I too believe PLAN will eventually have a J15/FC31 etc. .. ? type combo like the Superbug/Raven.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
I was actually assuming similar level avionics in J-15 and J-31 for this comparison, if not, then superior for the J-15 due to its larger size. In my comparison, I'm talking about a J-15 upgraded to the highest standards of avionics available to Shenyang vs a J-31 with similar treatment so the only advantage I'd be giving to J-31 is stealth.
J-31 could cooperate with J-15 when within J-31's range but outside of it, J-31 might have trouble going where J-15 can go.
I have been extremely impressed with how few real "snafu's" the Chinese have had in bringing CV-16 up to a meaningful operational tempo,,, many were commenting that the start was very slow, but honestly, I see their operational tempo as more deliberate.. That works a lot better when you are trying to bring any new system online, and now with CV-17 coming alongside?? lets just say its been a very enjoyable experience,, and I do love the J-15,, and the FC-31 looks like it would make an incredible fit, but here again, they have been very deliberate? Like you Kwai, I have to believe the Chinese know more about the future than they are willing to share with us, but they no doubt have a "PLAN"! (pun intended!)
- Status