Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

MarKoz81 said:

I also don't understand the fetishisation of J-20. It's the same ridiculous circlejerk as with F-22. It's the first VLO/5gen China made. It simply can't be better than the next one. You missed the whole learning from use process for reasons that I really don't want to get into. Why wouldn't PLAAF a cheaper plane that is better?

Click to expand...

J-31/5 is the same generation from J-20 as F-18（updated -17） was relative to F-16.
Both belong to more or less the same conceptual generation (ca. late 1990s), which they share. Between themselves and with, say, f-35/su-57.
They were born more or less simultaneously; J-31 just had a long-delayed development. On top of that - it's a different team.

With that in mind(@ougoah) - I'd strongly suggest against relying on personal preferences for estimating what other people(PLAAF) will decide. I am a J-31 sceptic(for PLAAF, not PAF) as well, but it isn't exactly me who makes those decisions.

I can see PLAAF will adopt the J-31. It’ll at least give the J-35 a favorable economy of scale and a convincing advertisement for the export version.

J10/J10A and J11/A/B will be retired and need to be replaced. IMO China will need another aircraft other than J20 as replacement, and J31/35 is here just at the right time.

Unless PLAAF wants a new 6th gen fighter jets to replace them but they may not be in mass production for service before 2035-2040, and many 4th gen fighter jets will have more than 30 years service lives by then.

TBF, wasn't it sometime last year when the PLAAF actually hinted of upgrading the so-called "The 3 Musketeers" of the PLAAF (namely J-10C, J-16 and J-20) to "The 4 Musketeers"?



There is also this screenshot from a PLAAF promo video some years ago which showed a J-31-like fighter aircraft (2nd from left) on the background wall:



It wouldn't be unreasonable to presume/suggest that the 4th "musketeer" of the PLAAF is actually the J-31.

Otherwise, the "4th musketeer" can only be the loyal wingman UCAV (given how the 6th-gen is still quite a long time away), which does seem somewhat less likely for the time being.

Hmm ... please allow me to share a few thoughts on the J-31 and all the speculation surrounding it..

Yes, I agree, another fighter - aka "musketeer" - slightly below the J-20 as a successor to the still numerous old J-8s and also early J-11s makes perfect sense. Sense, especially as an interim solution until the new 6th generation fighter is ready for use alongside the J-20 & J-20A - which both are real heavyweights - but also, above all, in order to deliver the quantities that are needed alongside the J-35, which IMO will remain rather limited.
In my opinion, however, the most important argument however is that it makes sense from an industrial policy perspective to also allow SAC to get a share of the fighter production cake. However, I doubt whether the argument that the PLAAF is ordering some to boost exports counts... this was also rumored with the JF-17 and didn't happen and the J-10 also took almost ages and whether that's the case now and sales will rise after Pakistan's purchase is also anyone's guess.

Therefore, I expect that we will (hopefully) see more of the J-35 in the coming months, more prototypes will be built, we will at some point receive confirmation of the first tests in Huangdicun and then the sea trials on the Fujian will be exciting.

The question then arises as to when series production will begin in order to equip the first units, but all of this is still years away, so I don't expect deployment in squadrons until 2028 at the earliest, which doesn't mean that the PLAN will use some for OPEVAL earlier.

And despite all the euphoria, I don't see a delivery to potential customers before 2030 ... but so much will have happened politically by then that it is pointless to speculate about it now.

Deino said:

Hmm ... please allow me to share a few thoughts on the J-31 and all the speculation surrounding it..

...
In my opinion, however, the most important argument however is that it makes sense from an industrial policy perspective to also allow SAC to get a share of the fighter production cake. However, I doubt whether the argument that the PLAAF is ordering some to boost exports counts... this was also rumored with the JF-17 and didn't happen and the J-10 also took almost ages and whether that's the case now and sales will rise after Pakistan's purchase is also anyone's guess.

...

Click to expand...

This is exactly the same argument that I made two years ago (something like that, can't remember exactly the time). It's strategically important for China to maintain two capable fighter aircraft makers for the competitiveness and innovativeness of the industry. The PLAAF should purchase at least 300 of J-31's to keep the assembly line busy and cost down, given that PLAN will be unlikely to acquire J-35 in large quantities (say, around 200). The expanded production capacity and further credibility for export that come with large orders from PLAAF are merely added bonus, which in turn reinforces the argument that it's important for PLAAF to be equipped with J-31's.

I must also point out that, being able to export 5th-gen stealth aircraft will become increasingly important for China, beyond getting some export revenue for the Chinese defense industry. It will be part of the larger geopolitical game going forward and beyond the 2030's that China will have to be part of. The US locks in many countries in their so-called security partnership (I'm not talking about NATO or US allies) by offering cutting-edge weapons, the modern fighter aircraft being first and foremost among them. China will need to provide the alternatives to these countries if it wants more influence and better relationships.

I don't see how J-31 can be half the price of J-20. The production cost of J-20 is likely quite low given the high production run (close to 100 per year).

More importantly, there are significant cost savings and operational flexibility you get from having just 3 fleet types with PLAAF:
J-20, J-16 and J-10s

Longer term, more than 50% of PLAAF front line bases are likely to be J-20 units. That simply makes it easier to deploy forces or operate aircraft from other bases, since the full support and sustainment structure is in place.

I just don't see the justification for J-31.

It makes more sense for me if PLANAF decided to keep a few more land bases and replace all those bases with J-35s and get rid of the flankers, JH-7A and other aircraft

weig2000 said:

This is exactly the same argument that I made two years ago (something like that, can't remember exactly the time). It's strategically important for China to maintain two capable fighter aircraft makers for the competitiveness and innovativeness of the industry. The PLAAF should purchase at least 300 of J-31's to keep the assembly line busy and cost down, given that PLAN will be unlikely to acquire J-35 in large quantities (say, around 200). The expanded production capacity and further credibility for export that come with large orders from PLAAF are merely added bonus, which in turn reinforces the argument that it's important for PLAAF to be equipped with J-31's.

I must also point out that, being able to export 5th-gen stealth aircraft will become increasingly important for China, beyond getting some export revenue for the Chinese defense industry. It will be part of the larger geopolitical game going forward and beyond the 2030's that China will have to be part of. The US locks in many countries in their so-called security partnership (I'm not talking about NATO or US allies) by offering cutting-edge weapons, the modern fighter aircraft being first and foremost among them. China will need to provide the alternatives to these countries if it wants more influence and better relationships.

Click to expand...

why would they not acquire J-35s in large quantities?

You need probably 30 J-15s per carrier. Let's say you get 8 of them (which is below my expectation), you'd need 250 just for the on board air wing itself.

But in reality, you need more than that for training, tactical development, replacement and other reasons. That alone imo brings requirement to 400.

If you ever intend to fly these off Type 076 (since they have catapult), the number could push to 500. That's a very respectful production run

I don't see the justification for needing J-31 at all. If you need a cheaper aircraft next to J-20, just build more UCAVs

tphuang said:

why would they not acquire J-35s in large quantities?

You need probably 30 J-15s per carrier. Let's say you get 8 of them (which is below my expectation), you'd need 250 just for the on board air wing itself.

But in reality, you need more than that for training, tactical development, replacement and other reasons. That alone imo brings requirement to 400.

If you ever intend to fly these off Type 076 (since they have catapult), the number could push to 500. That's a very respectful production run

I don't see the justification for needing J-31 at all. If you need a cheaper aircraft next to J-20, just build more UCAVs

Click to expand...

8 CVs? I don't see it's happening, at least not any time soon. Moreover, to keep a production rate of 30 J-35s per year, you'll need to launch a CV every year, do you really think that's really feasible? And even at this rate, it'll be just about 1/4 of that of the J-20. I don't see it would be significantly cheaper than the J-20 in that case. With the J-31 adopted by PLAAF, the story would be quite different.

tphuang said:

why would they not acquire J-35s in large quantities?

You need probably 30 J-15s per carrier. Let's say you get 8 of them (which is below my expectation), you'd need 250 just for the on board air wing itself.

But in reality, you need more than that for training, tactical development, replacement and other reasons. That alone imo brings requirement to 400.

If you ever intend to fly these off Type 076 (since they have catapult), the number could push to 500. That's a very respectful production run

I don't see the justification for needing J-31 at all. If you need a cheaper aircraft next to J-20, just build more UCAVs

Click to expand...

Even at 300, we are already talking about SAC having steady production for the next ten years. All this enthusiasm will fade away once we get close to the 6th gen first flight like cars and stereos. Save all the training/logistics headaches and money (J-35 is twin engined). 30 to 40 a year is more than plenty to solidify/preserve/expand later the industrial base and ORBAT.
J-35 is a very beautiful plane (even Bill Sweetman said it is what the F-35 should have been) but unmanned drones even better especially after the sky is filled with LEO satellites.