What's new

J-31 is confirmed for export, export version model shown in Zhuanghai show

There, would be more options available, hopefully our economy will stabilize by then, and PAF's policy of only buying single engine fighters also expires that year. CAC however is believed to be developing a single engine 5th generation prototype, called J-2X, they presented the design to PAF recently. So, come 2018 our F-16s would be readying for replacement in next 5-7 years, F-35 will have its issues sorted out, we will find out if the US is willing to sell to Pakistan and IF or not we can pay for them, J-31 would have matured into an operational air craft, India would be amidst MMRCA and FGFA, integration so we would have the fresh threat analysis on how to balance our deterrent to the IAF's air power. Situation would be more clear and PAF would be in a position to take the right decision. BUT, if we don't change our political system and keep begging to run our economy that might just remain a pipe dream.

The last sentence is particularly important; the rest is all contingent upon that.
 
.
Does the RD-93 have supercruise? Is the RD-93 powerful enough (even with two of them) to power a powerful AESA radar, EW suite and other tech? Does the RD-93 have the required IR suppression? Does the RD-93 have thrust vectoring? The basic design is almost 40 years old guys-what do you expect? This engine was designed before 5th gen fighters were even on the drawing boards!

So is the AL-31.. isnt that the basic design on which the current PAK-FA flies(117S)..and a version of that which will power the it eventually(117). Whats your point? Its doomed because currently it flies with an engine that has its design based on an 80's powerplant?
Moreover, there are two RD-93's sitting in it.. Not one.
The whole hoopla about TV and the rest holds little ground as a definitive solution.
 
.
So is the AL-31.. isnt that the basic design on which the current PAK-FA flies(117S)..and a version of that which will power the it eventually(117). Whats your point? Its doomed because currently it flies with an engine that has its design based on an 80's powerplant?
Moreover, there are two RD-93's sitting in it.. Not one.
The whole hoopla about TV and the rest holds little ground as a definitive solution.
A fair point but whilst the deinfition of a 5th gen fighter is not 100% defined. But the basic characteristic they must all have at the very least are super-maneuverability and super-cruise. The J-31 does not have canards like its "big brother" the J-20 so you'd think it'd rely on TVC for super-maneuverability but the RD-33 lacks this. Similarly the RD-33 lacks supercruise functionality so it's fair to say the RD-33s are not engines suitable for a 5th gen fighter.
 
. .
A fair point but whilst the deinfition of a 5th gen fighter is not 100% defined. But the basic characteristic they must all have at the very least are super-maneuverability and super-cruise. The J-31 does not have canards like its "big brother" the J-20 so you'd think it'd rely on TVC for super-maneuverability but the RD-33 lacks this. Similarly the RD-33 lacks supercruise functionality so it's fair to say the RD-33s are not engines suitable for a 5th gen fighter.


You are right that the J-31 could not be called a 5th generation fighter if it relies on the basic RD-33 to power it.

However, we are looking at around the year 2018 before the J-31 is inducted into the Chinese military.

Since 2010 a 85KN WS-13 has been flying on a test JF-17. Another more powerful 100KN WS-13A is currently in the works and it is not too ambitious to think that this version, which will have the required thrust to be fitted into a 5th generation fighter, will be ready by 2018. For a fighter the size of the J-31, 200KN will be sufficient thrust to power it to super-cruise speed at dry thrust levels. And thrust vectoring is much easier to get right than producing the basic engine itself so that will be the least of China's worries.

What China is doing is not anything too new anyway, apart from that they may be using an engine from a foreign country. All countries have used previous generation engines when they began testing their new generation prototypes. The Eurofighter was using the Tornado's RB-199 engine when it first flew.

RD93 is just a temporarily transition, the target is WS13 in the test ready before 2015.

Yes - that should give a few years to test with the 100KN WS-13A version before th J-31 is ready to be inducted.

Before then the RD-33 can be used to test most flight parameters, avionicis and weapons systems. The highter thrust WS-13A will be required to test situations where supercruise combat is required.
 
.
27_173397_0b357f758fcc0d1.jpg
 
.
I thought it was an established doctrine that the PAF didn't go for twin-engined fighters?

And how much would this bird cost per unit?

The A-5 Fantan WAS a twin-engined fighter :coffee:

About cost: I suspect not more than $80 million a pop. I may be wrong though.

A fair point but whilst the deinfition of a 5th gen fighter is not 100% defined. But the basic characteristic they must all have at the very least are super-maneuverability and super-cruise. The J-31 does not have canards like its "big brother" the J-20 so you'd think it'd rely on TVC for super-maneuverability but the RD-33 lacks this. Similarly the RD-33 lacks supercruise functionality so it's fair to say the RD-33s are not engines suitable for a 5th gen fighter.

The P&W F119 prototype was developed back in the 80's. Does that imply that the F-22 Raptor is screwed? O.O
 
.
Taking Off: Implications of China’s Second Stealth Fighter Test Flight.


China Real Time Report

By Andrew Erickson and Gabe Collins


China’s fighter aircraft development efforts appeared to take another leap forward after local media reported that Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SAC) had successfully tested its J-31 stealth fighter prototype this week. Following the test flight of a Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) J-20 prototype less than two years ago, the test of the J-31 suggests China could eventually become only the second country behind the U.S. to develop two stealth fighter programs – an important development with serious potential implications for the tactical aircraft export market and well as the U.S. military.

Video and photos posted online Thursday show the J-31 prototype conducting an initial high speed taxi run and 10-minute flight test accompanied by a pair of SAC J-11BS fighters. The J-31’s maiden flight represents the second “unveiling” of a significant new fighter aircraft by SAC in less than a year, the other being the J-16, a two seat multi-role variant of the J-11B, similar to the US F-15E and the Russian Su-30MKK.

China’s defense industry can now sustain multiple overlapping advanced programs. SAC alone is currently working on four major fighter aircraft – the J-31 and the J-16 as well as the J-16’s single seat parent the J-11B and the carrier-based J-15, also based on the J-11B.

Like most modern fighter aircraft, the J-31 will likely be a multi-role combat aircraft capable of employing modern precision munitions in both air-to-air and air-to-surface roles. Despite apparent rapid advancement, however, it will take time for the fighter to reach full operational status. As Xu Guangyu of the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association explains, “there is still a huge gap between China and the US’ fighter jet technologies because we are still testing both the J-20 and the J-31. It might take another couple of years before we can put them on the production line.”

Mr. Xu’s observation raises an interesting question because it is not yet clear if the J-20 and J-31 are intended to complement each other or be competitors. Some Chinese analysts like former Aviation World deputy editor Bai Wei share the view of Western counterparts that they may be complementary as part of a “high-low” mix, with the larger J-20 akin to the F-22 and the smaller J-31 akin to the U.S. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

One factor that suggests the J-20 and J-31 could complement one another is that the J-31 could be modified for use on aircraft carriers in a way the larger J-20 is unlikely to be. Sr. Capt. Li Jie of the PLA Navy (PLAN)’s strategic think tank has been quoted in Western media as stating the J-31 prototype “might become a carrier-based fighter jet” because it is smaller and slimmer than the J-20.

Regional Impacts

The prospect of the J-20 and J-31 becoming China’s mainstay tactical strike fighters during the next decade stands to influence regional defense planning and tactical aircraft export markets. Unveiling the J-31 affirms that, save for jet engines, China’s aerospace sector is now in many ways nearly as advanced as Russia’s and suggests that Russian manufacturers will soon be unable to compete with China’s own fighter manufacturers. Beijing is already the world’s sixth-largest arms exporter, and Chinese aircraft export growth would come largely at Moscow’s expense.

This means Russia will need to shift its weapons exports from China to Chinese neighbors such as Vietnam and India. However, given the defense spending cutbacks in the U.S. and Western Europe, Russian firms will have to compete with the likes of Boeing, Lockheed Martin and BAE in a way they never had to when China (which Western defense firms are largely prohibited from selling to by an embargo) was essentially a captive market for Russian weapons exporters. Chinese e increasingly Therefore, the parallel development of the J-20 and J-31 will provide further impetus for China’s aviation industry to master mass-production of modern high-performance jet engines – its last major obstacle to being able to export tactical aircraft.

The J-31 also stands to meaningfully impact decisions on U.S. defense spending, especially if it ends up being produced in conjunction with the J-20 and they end up being complementary to one another. If the J-31 and J-20 both end up in mass production, China could ultimately achieve parity or perhaps even numerical superiority in the Asia-Pacific region in terms of late-generation fighters deployed. There is a rising probability that China’s rapid advancement in indigenous tactical aircraft design will spark a renewed debate in the U.S. over restarting production of the highly advanced but also highly expensive F-22 Raptor.

Bottom Line: China’s Military Aerospace Industry Nearing Critical Mass

It is extremely significant that China may soon join the U.S. as the only other nation to develop two “low-observable” aircraft simultaneously. China’s defense aerospace sector overall may be moving toward an architectural model in which several distinct poles of expertise develop in Shenyang, Xi’an, and Chengdu and then compete with each other on key big ticket projects. Multiple aviation industry bases with significant development and production capacity, including SAC, allow for domestic competition for key aircraft programs. This can minimize the chances of single-point failures jeopardizing development targets, increase efficiency, and maximize the chances of useful breakthroughs.

It is thus not too early to consider the possibility that China’s aviation industry, despite enduring limitations, may already enjoy some key advantages over Western counterparts. As a latecomer, China can draw on knowledge gleaned from industrial espionage, reverse engineering, and study of foreign systems, standards, and specifications, allowing it to save costs by leapfrogging rather than developing every component itself. Meanwhile, it may benefit from lack of legal obstacles to subsidization and technical diffusion through civil-military integration—a lack that Western contractors arguably benefitted from during their Cold War heyday before stricter regulations emerged in the 1980s and 1990s. China’s military aerospace industry is rapidly approaching critical mass. Continuing to add investment to this growing foundation will allow China’s aviation industry to fully harness the flashes of technical prowess shown when new aircraft like the J-31 take flight.

Andrew Erickson is a professor at the U.S. Naval War College and a research associate at Harvard’s Fairbank Center. Co-founder of China SignPost (洞察中国), he blogs at Andrew S. Erickson | China analysis from original sources.

Gabe Collins is co-founder of China SignPost, founder of ChinaOilTrader.com and is a J.D. candidate at the University of Michigan Law School.
 
.
A fair point but whilst the deinfition of a 5th gen fighter is not 100% defined. But the basic characteristic they must all have at the very least are super-maneuverability and super-cruise. The J-31 does not have canards like its "big brother" the J-20 so you'd think it'd rely on TVC for super-maneuverability but the RD-33 lacks this. Similarly the RD-33 lacks supercruise functionality so it's fair to say the RD-33s are not engines suitable for a 5th gen fighter.

People should understand that all this talk about "5th gen" is nothing but marketing ploy invented by Lockheed Martin. Funnily enough F-35 lacks at least two of those "5th gen" requirements.
 
.
You are right that the J-31 could not be called a 5th generation fighter if it relies on the basic RD-33 to power it.

However, we are looking at around the year 2018 before the J-31 is inducted into the Chinese military.

Since 2010 a 85KN WS-13 has been flying on a test JF-17. Another more powerful 100KN WS-13A is currently in the works and it is not too ambitious to think that this version, which will have the required thrust to be fitted into a 5th generation fighter, will be ready by 2018. For a fighter the size of the J-31, 200KN will be sufficient thrust to power it to super-cruise speed at dry thrust levels. And thrust vectoring is much easier to get right than producing the basic engine itself so that will be the least of China's worries.

What China is doing is not anything too new anyway, apart from that they may be using an engine from a foreign country. All countries have used previous generation engines when they began testing their new generation prototypes. The Eurofighter was using the Tornado's RB-199 engine when it first flew.



Yes - that should give a few years to test with the 100KN WS-13A version before th J-31 is ready to be inducted.

Before then the RD-33 can be used to test most flight parameters, avionicis and weapons systems. The highter thrust WS-13A will be required to test situations where supercruise combat is required.

We are hearing of WS engine since JF-17 started flying with russian engine and still no credible repost it is actually successfully made.

Its story is same like Kaveri.
 
. .
Very accurate analysis! :tup:

You are right that the J-31 could not be called a 5th generation fighter if it relies on the basic RD-33 to power it.

However, we are looking at around the year 2018 before the J-31 is inducted into the Chinese military.

Since 2010 a 85KN WS-13 has been flying on a test JF-17. Another more powerful 100KN WS-13A is currently in the works and it is not too ambitious to think that this version, which will have the required thrust to be fitted into a 5th generation fighter, will be ready by 2018. For a fighter the size of the J-31, 200KN will be sufficient thrust to power it to super-cruise speed at dry thrust levels. And thrust vectoring is much easier to get right than producing the basic engine itself so that will be the least of China's worries.

What China is doing is not anything too new anyway, apart from that they may be using an engine from a foreign country. All countries have used previous generation engines when they began testing their new generation prototypes. The Eurofighter was using the Tornado's RB-199 engine when it first flew.



Yes - that should give a few years to test with the 100KN WS-13A version before th J-31 is ready to be inducted.

Before then the RD-33 can be used to test most flight parameters, avionicis and weapons systems. The highter thrust WS-13A will be required to test situations where supercruise combat is required.
 
.
IR-sig suppression is a (platform-specific) external design element which will be factored into the upcoming thrust-vectoring-super-cruise-capable-at-dry-thrust WS13. All other sensor fusion is being tested in various platforms on modular basis. It all maybe a bit into the future, but not too distant future!


Does the RD-93 have supercruise? Is the RD-93 powerful enough (even with two of them) to power a powerful AESA radar, EW suite and other tech? Does the RD-93 have the required IR suppression? Does the RD-93 have thrust vectoring? The basic design is almost 40 years old guys-what do you expect? This engine was designed before 5th gen fighters were even on the drawing boards!
 
. .
IR-sig suppression is a (platform-specific) external design element which will be factored into the upcoming thrust-vectoring-super-cruise-capable-at-dry-thrust WS13. All other sensor fusion is being tested in various platforms on modular basis. It all maybe a bit into the future, but not too distant future!

I don't understand this dialect of Pashto ! :blink:
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom