Will do!
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
- Status
Only my personal opinions of course, feel free to disregard -- though I do think the relative ease of sharing graphics/charts means trying to get it as accurate as possible is important.
Good choice of chart program, whichever it is.
I hope you don't mind a few notes and comments from my side (in fact my own opinion) additionally to @Blitzo's comments:
- IMO the claim it was privately founded is more a cover story than a fact. I'm pretty sure it was always aimed for the PLA and as such more a low-priority project until development of the J-20 was done. If I'm not mistaken, we must remember we saw it first as scale-down model (then called ) by the 601 Institute in September 2011 on an event aimed for UAV-models landing on a simulated carrier deck!
- As explained "FC-31V2 prototype 03" IS "FC-31V2" ... and IMO this is the reason for so much confusion also for such stupid claims, there are three FC-31 and later 31003 as a J-31.
- Therefore we know prototype 31003 as FC-31V2 but in fact it is the "third prototype" of the FC-31 demonstrators since FC-31 (better known as V1) was number 31001, followed by another FC-31 (V1) maybe serialled 31002 (but IMO it never got a number) and rarely witnessed most likely as a static testbed), and then FC-31 (V2) number 31003.
As such i tried a bit and s here's my revised one based on your map:
I think "internally developed" might be a better way of describing it rather than "privately developed/founded".
Ultimately IMO the difference between "internally developed" and "developed for PLA" is best differentiated by whether a project was intended for PLA service from the outset at a project's initiation, and to the best of our knowledge the "FC-31 family" only was intended for PLA service once it was selected as the basis for J-XY/35 as the PLAN's carrier based 5th gen.
Why is this surprising exactly? Even in the Soviet Union airplane designers and makers often made prototypes without directives from the central government.
Try reading about the development of the La-5 during WW2 for example.
The Chinese economy if anything is a lot more decentralized than the Soviet one ever was. The Chinese local governments fund companies by themselves without direct input from the central government. And airplane makers have their own limited discretionary budgets which they can use for projects like this. Shenyang likely decided after losing the competition to make the J-20 that they needed to keep their skills up to date. Otherwise they would be risking their own long term viability as an independent aircraft company with its own design bureau. You only need to look at what happened to MiG in Russia to see what could likely happen to them. Get put under the same umbrella as Chengdu.
AECC seems to be shopping for a 1:48 scale model of the J-31. So a semi-official confirmation of the existence of a J-31 variant?
I think this alone was a semi-official one, but the point is, what is this J-31? Is it just a landbased-only export type? But why then the J-designation? Or is it a possible PLAAF variant?
It is possible that, in fact, fighter aircraft of the same type often need to strengthen their airframe structures to accommodate arresting wires and slightly increase wing area when used at sea to reduce landing speed. For example, the SU-27's 16.8 tons to the SU-33's 19.6 tons, the F-35A's 13.2 tons to the F-35c's 15.6 tons.
The J-35 and J-31 may also have the same empty weight gap. If I were the Chinese Air Force, then I would also want a J-31 that reduces unnecessary weight.
- Status