What's new

SAC FC-31 Stealth Fighter: News & Discussions

.
FC-31 V2

DYY9YSYU8AEcDia.jpg
 
.
Just ask opinion, If FC-31 single seat version make hard for PLAN select it? Carrier figther usually prefer with 2 seat version fighter right ? maybe SAC need built twin seat demo version ?
 
.
Just ask opinion, If FC-31 single seat version make hard for PLAN select it? Carrier figther usually prefer with 2 seat version fighter right ? maybe SAC need built twin seat demo version ?

There is more serious problem on the current design, in regards to drag, lift and engine power.

First of all it's not following supersonic area ratio very well. The main wings locate at a position that the fuselage has no shrinkage in size. Therefore the drag cannot be small when the aircraft's speed goes high.

The fuselage can not shrink in size at that main wings' position because it has to contain a big internal weapon bay. But to minimize the weight, the designer cannot further extend the fuselage to create shrinkage as that of F-22's aft fuselage. You may ask why they can't make the aircraft longer and hence heavier? Because the engines are mid thrust engines (RD-93 or WS-13) and will be significantly under-powered if the fuselage goes any larger.

F-22
aircraft-fighter-jets-f22-raptor-1920x1200-wallpaper.jpg

FC-31
DOk8o2jXcAATphv.jpg


As the engines are mid thrust engines, the fuselage has to be designed to have the main wings coupling with the very straight fuselage because of the internal weapon bay. Then high drag is unavoidable and energy bleeding can be quite visible when the aircraft maneuvers.

To maintain acceptable energy level, the aircraft's after burners were engaged quite often during some high profile demo flights, which received a lot of criticism as the fuel consumption looks very high. FC-31, as a stealth fighter, is not supposed to be used like a Mig-29, which is a typical front line fighter with a very short combat radius.

There is no sight of further development of FC-31 so far. No one has spotted the third FC-31 prototype plane yet. In comparison, for J-20 during its 6 year development cycle, CAC built at lease 2 prototype planes in a batch in every 2 years.
 
Last edited:
.
There is more serious problem on the current design, in regards to drag, lift and engine power.

First of all it's not following supersonic area ratio very well. The main wings locate at a position that the fuselage has no shrinkage. Therefore the drag cannot be small when the aircraft's speed goes high.

The fuselage can not shrink at that main wings' position because it has to contain a big internal weapon bay. But to minimize the weight, the designer cannot further extend the fuselage to create shrinkage as that of F-22's aft fuselage. You may ask why they can't make the aircraft longer and hence heavier? Because the engines are mid thrust engines (RD-93 or WS-13) and will be significantly under-powered if the fuselage goes any larger.

As the engines are mid thrust engines, the fuselage has to be designed to have the main wings coupling with the very straight fuselage because of the internal weapon bay. Then high drag is unavoidable and energy bleeding can be quite visible when the aircraft maneuvers.

To maintain acceptable energy level, the aircraft's after burners were engaged quite often during some high profile demo flights, which received a lot of criticism as the fuel consumption looks very high. FC-31, as a stealth fighter, is not supposed to be used like a Mig-29, which is a typical front line fighter with a very short combat radius.
are you referring to whit-comb Area rule fuselage buddyo_O
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_rule
 
. .
Sort of. I have to admit I have no profession on such topics. I was only aggregating the ideas from some Internet reviews on the FC-31 design.
definitely you're talking whit-comb area rule buddy but look at the picture of J-20 and FC-31 both jets have whit-comb area rule fuselage buddy
J-21_3view2.jpg
J-20_3view.jpg


Sort of. I have to admit I have no profession on such topics. I was only aggregating the ideas from some Internet reviews on the FC-31 design.
specially V-2 has a area rule fuselage to reduce drag that is you talking about buddy
 
.
definitely you're talking whit-comb area rule buddy but look at the picture of J-20 and FC-31 both jets have whit-comb area rule fuselage buddy
View attachment 460873 View attachment 460874


specially V-2 has a area rule fuselage to reduce drag that is you talking about buddy

I think you'd better compare them with photos of real planes

F-22
aircraft-fighter-jets-f22-raptor-1920x1200-wallpaper.jpg

J-20
j-20.jpg

F-35
f35-weapon-bay.jpg

FC-31
DOk8o2jXcAATphv.jpg

Obviously FC-31 doesn't follow the rule very well. If it can use a single engine like F-35, things would be much better. That doesn't mean F-35's aerodynamics is of any good. F-35 is also pretty sluggish when maneuvering because of some other factors. However FC-31's current design is even worse.

BTW J-20 might follow the rule the best with its canard delta wing configuration. With twin high thrust engines its supersonic performance must be pretty good.
 
Last edited:
. . . . .
Can someone translate the following rumor? Allegedly a V2.0 prototype had undergone static stress tests.

a014311dly1fqgthpalpdj20u00v2q9r.jpg


Much appreciated!
 
. . .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom