SAC FC-31 Stealth Fighter: News & Discussions

[Wow]

View attachment 551346 View attachment 551347

that is looking really impressive

 

[yantong1980]

FC-31 V1 and V2 are all technology demonstrators. What SAC wants are to get the orders from PLAAF and PLAN, and to be free from Franker family fighters.

So, SAC created FC-31V1 and V2 for studying stealth fighter know-how, costly and directly but seems SAC also want show how they get serious catching-up with CAC with 'brainchild' J-20, not stuck with Flanker series project.

China to develop new engine for carrier-based stealth fighter jets
April 2019 News Navy Naval Maritime Defense Industry
POSTED ON FRIDAY, 19 APRIL 2019 10:44

Chinese designers and engineers teamed up to study, develop and test a new turbofan engine for the Chinese carrier-based stealth fighter jets, the Shenyang FC-31 fighters.
"The engine could be related to China's medium-sized twin-engine stealth aircraft FC-31, which could become China's next-generation aircraft carrier-based fighter jet," Wei Dongxu, a military expert told Global Times.

The team from Gas Turbine Research Institute working on the project, under the state-owned Aero Engine Corporation of China, will receive a provincial award during China's Youth Day on May 4, according to a statement released by the government of Chengdu, capital of Southwest China's Sichuan Province, on its WeChat account on April 15.

It took the development team one year to design the engine. The prototype of the engine underwent testing in six months. The engine is one of several major aero engine projects of the country, the statement said.

"Advanced turbofan engines are difficult to develop, especially the manufacturing of fan blades, which must be built to resist very high temperatures and pressure," Wei added. Although, still according to Wei, the new engine must still undergo a considerable amount of testing under different situations, before it is confirmed reliable and therefore can enter mass production.

https://www.navyrecognition.com/ind...blTYsCCDEZiPlbvIwcKxuB9D7ywVcs7P3yFTXhBSZbvRc

So PLAN officially adopt SAC FC-31 as next-gen carrier based fighter? But these:"The engine COULD BE related to China's medium-sized twin-engine stealth aircraft FC-31" Nothing sure?

 

[Ali_Baba]

that is looking really impressive

Procuring the FC-31 makes more sense than the J10C given its stealth qualities and commonality of engine with the JF17. Guess if/when PLAAF/PLAN buys it, then PAF can take a look at it. Not worth it right now as its future is un-certain.

Is the ground clearance on the FC-31 better(higher) or equal to the JF10C? It makes the addition of certain weapons easier and one minor issue in JF17s design(ergo Ra'ad integration on the centre point is an issue..).

 

[LKJ86]

Procuring the FC-31 makes more sense than the J10C given its stealth qualities and commonality of engine with the JF17. Guess if/when PLAAF/PLAN buys it, then PAF can take a look at it. Not worth it right now as its future is un-certain.

Is the ground clearance on the FC-31 better(higher) or equal to the JF10C? It makes the addition of certain weapons easier and one minor issue in JF17s design(ergo Ra'ad integration on the centre point is an issue..).

It is a seller's market in 5th-generation fighter now.

 

[Ali_Baba]

There is little Russia can offer that China can not beat. That too at a better price, better ToT/maintenance, and without the threat of the information on the system being given to India.

Russian helicopters are well priced and of decent quality and capability. Russian cold weather gear is probably better. Russian made guns are also a reliable purchase at a modest price. although sights and add-ons can be purchased from anywhere.

The only real system Pakistan should consider is a small batch of the latest Pantsir air defense system to counter PGMs near sensitive sites. especially after their experience in Syria, Russia may have a few tricks up their sleeves.

It is a seller's market in 5th-generation fighter now.

Not sure about it being a sellers market for 5th Gen. Most 5th Gen programmes are struggling with financing and the FC-31 was virtually dead until the PLAN picked up the programme...

As a buyer, you shouldnt buy anything that doesn't add enough value to your needs relative to the cost of the platform. That is why the J10C is a non-starter for PAF and AVIC has really really pitched the platform quite aggressively to the PAF/Pakistan. The gap between it, and the JF17 Block III isn't enough to warrant its purchase given the cost of "introducing a new platform and the cost of a new eco-system to support that system". That is what it comes down to, a cold hard calculation of cost versus capability. An issue that is more pronounced for a customer like PAF tht is always cash starved..

Its a ratio that may make sense for the FC-31, but not J10C. You have to see that? J10C only makes sense for customers who are looking for a 4+ gen platform and they dont have anything existing in their inventory.

Bangladesh is the best bet for the J10CE. Even Myanmar which has purchased the JF17, is buying the Su-30MKM from Russia as its high end, as the J10CE makes no sense for them. They operate both the K8, FC1 but skipped the J10C as it doesnt representative a capability gap to the FC1 that the Su-30MKM represents.

PAFs best play at the moment, is to expand the JF17 fleet aggressively, and try and pick up a few 2nd hand F16s if the opportunity arises and keep the Mirage force relevant until the JF17 can take over.

It has be to about Project Azm for the next phase for the PAF.

 

[FuturePAF]

Not sure about it being a sellers market for 5th Gen. Most 5th Gen programmes are struggling with financing and the FC-31 was virtually dead until the PLAN picked up the programme...

As a buyer, you shouldnt buy anything that doesn't add enough value to your needs relative to the cost of the platform. That is why the J10C is a non-starter for PAF and AVIC has really really pitched the platform quite aggressively to the PAF/Pakistan. The gap between it, and the JF17 Block III isn't enough to warrant its purchase given the cost of "introducing a new platform and the cost of a new eco-system to support that system". That is what it comes down to, a cold hard calculation of cost versus capability. An issue that is more pronounced for a customer like PAF tht is always cash starved..

Its a ratio that may make sense for the FC-31, but not J10C. You have to see that? J10C only makes sense for customers who are looking for a 4+ gen platform and they dont have anything existing in their inventory.

Bangladesh is the best bet for the J10CE. Even Myanmar which has purchased the JF17, is buying the Su-30MKM from Russia as its high end, as the J10CE makes no sense for them. They operate both the K8, FC1 but skipped the J10C as it doesnt representative a capability gap to the FC1 that the Su-30MKM represents.

PAFs best play at the moment, is to expand the JF17 fleet aggressively, and try and pick up a few 2nd hand F16s if the opportunity arises and keep the Mirage force relevant until the JF17 can take over.

It has be to about Project Azm for the next phase for the PAF.

Mostly true, a Single J-10CE can carry more than double the payload 8000 kg versus 3600kg over the JF-17, the range is longer, the capacity to carry 50% larger sensors could mean the J-10CE would be great at long range deep strike over land and at sea in ways the JF-17 is not able to do.

It all depends on doctrine and the missions the air force is tasked to be able to do. For a low level strike over the sea at an Indian carrier, a flight of 12 J-10CE; 6 as fighter escort and 6 as missile launch platforms would carry 12 CM-302 (YJ-12) anti-ship missiles amongst the group (each weighs 2500 kg) and have enough space left over for added drop tanks to extend their range. The 6 escort fighters could carry enough PL-15 and PL-10 and jamming pods (as well as drop tanks) to fly all the way with them and back, and protect them against the up to 26 Mig-29K on the INS Vikramaditya and other naval assets of the Indian Navy.

The long range of the J-10 would allow them to take off from Karachi or Ormara and target any Indian blockade being formed against Pakistan nearly anywhere in the Northern Arabian sea.

The JF-17 doesn't have the range, payload capacity, and its layout is not the best (in terms of stability; J-10 being a Delta design with fly-by-wire) for low level naval aviation.

12 High speed mach 4 anti-ship missiles coming in at low level, guided by their launch platforms (due to large AESA radars on the J-10s; that could also be jamming enemy radars and communications as well) until the final few kilometers would make the Indian navy stay far from Pakistan's coast. They maybe able to knock out a few missiles, but if the remaining get through, the Carrier would be sunk and it would destroy their strategy and morale

That's why giving the Pakistan navy two squadrons of J-10CE (36 jets) to cover their needs, and allow the PAF to handle the International border and Line of control defense operations.

 

[Deino]

Mostly true, a Single J-10CE can carry more than double the payload 8000 kg versus 3600kg over the JF-17, the range is longer, the capacity to carry 50% larger sensors could mean the J-10CE would be great at long range deep strike over land and at sea in ways the JF-17 is not able to do.

It all depends on doctrine and the missions the air force is tasked to be able to do. For a low level strike over the sea at an Indian carrier, a flight of 12 J-10CE; 6 as fighter escort and 6 as missile launch platforms would carry 12 CM-302 (YJ-12) anti-ship missiles amongst the group (each weighs 2500 kg) and have enough space left over for added drop tanks to extend their range. The 6 escort fighters could carry enough PL-15 and PL-10 and jamming pods (as well as drop tanks) to fly all the way with them and back, and protect them against the up to 26 Mig-29K on the INS Vikramaditya and other naval assets of the Indian Navy.

The long range of the J-10 would allow them to take off from Karachi or Ormara and target any Indian blockade being formed against Pakistan nearly anywhere in the Northern Arabian sea.

The JF-17 doesn't have the range, payload capacity, and its layout is not the best (in terms of stability; J-10 being a Delta design with fly-by-wire) for low level naval aviation.

12 High speed mach 4 anti-ship missiles coming in at low level, guided by their launch platforms (due to large AESA radars on the J-10s; that could also be jamming enemy radars and communications as well) until the final few kilometers would make the Indian navy stay far from Pakistan's coast. They maybe able to knock out a few missiles, but if the remaining get through, the Carrier would be sunk and it would destroy their strategy and morale

That's why giving the Pakistan navy two squadrons of J-10CE (36 jets) to cover their needs, and allow the PAF to handle the International border and Line of control defense operations.

Can we please leave out these PAF wishfull-thinking ideas in this thread? There is already one related to the FC-31 in possibly PAF service, so no need to derail this one too:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/sac-...rcraft-for-paf-updates-debate.343466/page-158

Deino


PS: even more, please do your homework, the J-10C can never ever carry a YJ-12

 

[FuturePAF]

Can we please leave out these PAF wishfull-thinking ideas in this thread? There is already one related to the FC-31 in possibly PAF service, so no need to derail this one too:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/sac-...rcraft-for-paf-updates-debate.343466/page-158

Deino


PS: even more, please do your homework, the J-10C can never ever carry a YJ-12

Ok, got it, will stick to evidence based discussions.
I will stick to the MastanKhan option: JH-7A equipped YJ12

Would be happy if the PAF goes for the J-31 once the engine issues are worked out. (we have seen the loss of a Japanese F-35, possibly due to it single engine failing)
Merely wanted to state the case that there is a place for longer range fighters; especially in the naval domain

Will stick to the J-31 in this thread

 

[Ultima Thule]

Ok, got it, will stick to evidence based discussions.
I will stick to the MastanKhan option: JH-7A equipped YJ12
View attachment 556375
Would be happy if the PAF goes for the J-31 once the engine issues are worked out. (we have seen the loss of a Japanese F-35, possibly due to it single engine failing)
Merely wanted to state the case that there is a place for longer range fighters; especially in the naval domain

Will stick to the J-31 in this thread

JH-7A and also J-11 series of jets can carried YJ-12

 

[Deino]

Ok, got it, will stick to evidence based discussions.
I will stick to the MastanKhan option: JH-7A equipped YJ12
View attachment 556375
Would be happy if the PAF goes for the J-31 once the engine issues are worked out. (we have seen the loss of a Japanese F-35, possibly due to it single engine failing)
Merely wanted to state the case that there is a place for longer range fighters; especially in the naval domain

Will stick to the J-31 in this thread

Pardon again to disagree, this image is a plain stupid photoshop fake and well known since years, even more the missile is much too small shown in this image and also at least IMO I won't rate MastanKhan too reliable. Anyone who thinks by easy plug and play scale downing Pakistan could transform the twin-engine FC-31 into a single engine type and that alone with one WS-19 tells me too much. But maybe that's just my opinion.

JH-7A and also J-11 series of jets can carried YJ-12

Nope, they cannot ... at least there has been no proof posted and by my calculation, the YJ-12 is simply much too large and heavy.

But back to topic.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Nope, they cannot ... at least there has been no proof posted and by my calculation, the YJ-12 is simply much too large and heavy.

But back to topic.

ok sir, but one last question, if J-11 and JH-7A can't carry YJ-12 H-6 @Deino

 

[ziaulislam]

Procuring the FC-31 makes more sense than the J10C given its stealth qualities and commonality of engine with the JF17. Guess if/when PLAAF/PLAN buys it, then PAF can take a look at it. Not worth it right now as its future is un-certain.

Is the ground clearance on the FC-31 better(higher) or equal to the JF10C? It makes the addition of certain weapons easier and one minor issue in JF17s design(ergo Ra'ad integration on the centre point is an issue..).

Raad is a strategic weapon /nuclear that will be retired with mirages and replaced by a new weapon for the new plateform that takes over this rule in 2030.. Be it jf17 or j10 or fc31..

 

[Deino]

ok sir, but one last question, if J-11 and JH-7A can't carry YJ-12 H-6 @Deino

Yes, ... so far only confirmed for the H-6 series.

 

[LKJ86]

 

[Deino]

Oh please no! ... just show us the real deal, at best the no. 3 airframe!