SAC FC-31 Stealth Fighter: News & Discussions

[Aspen]

Actually my rational is that lengthening has more to do with reducing trans/supersonic drag, improving area-ruling. FC-31 at it's current form is far from being able to super-cruise, therefore I think they'll do everything possible to achieve it, with new engine.

It's possible that they are lengthening it for supercruise ability, but I would have thought that the original design would have accounted for this. I think powerplant efficiency matters more for supercruise than supersonic drag but others would know better than me on that. I am leaning toward theory that lengthening is because of weapons bay constraints. Not being able to carry large enough missiles is really a huge problem that is non-negotiable in my opinion. If small weapons bay turns out to be a problem, evidence of new larger weapons bay would be pretty clear proof that this issue had at least a partial role in changing size of plane. But I think this actually introduces a new problem which is that with stealth planes, a concealed weapons bay means you will have size constraints on any missiles designed after the plane goes into service. So alternative solution to enlarging the plane is to make the missiles smaller as this technology will have to be developed at some point in the long term anyway.

 

[Ultima Thule]

If PLAN next carrier 003 managed to come up with working launch system comparable to US super carriers, expect it to be as big as US Nimitz class carrier large enough to house many large fighters. F-14B tomcat at 62ft long, wingspan 64 ft unswept 32ft swept, F/A-18E length 60ft and wingspan 44ft no space issue with US carriers. The J15 is far larger at 71ft long and 48ft wide.

As for FC-31 some said its internal bay could barely fit PL-12 and can't fit PL-15 which is serious matter if it's true as these will be the standard air to air missiles. Lengthening FC31 is simpler than Boeing attempt to lengthen its X-31. If PLAN decided to have FC-31 on board type 003, its requirements will need the PL-15.

stop derailing the thread and don't compare USN carriers philosophies to other countries carrier philosophies (Chinese) which might be different

 

[enroger]

It's possible that they are lengthening it for supercruise ability, but I would have thought that the original design would have accounted for this. I think powerplant efficiency matters more for supercruise than supersonic drag but others would know better than me on that. I am leaning toward theory that lengthening is because of weapons bay constraints. Not being able to carry large enough missiles is really a huge problem that is non-negotiable in my opinion. If small weapons bay turns out to be a problem, evidence of new larger weapons bay would be pretty clear proof that this issue had at least a partial role in changing size of plane. But I think this actually introduces a new problem which is that with stealth planes, a concealed weapons bay means you will have size constraints on any missiles designed after the plane goes into service. So alternative solution to enlarging the plane is to make the missiles smaller as this technology will have to be developed at some point in the long term anyway.

IMO large weapon bay is not a must for J-35, as a naval bird it does have anti-surface needs, but requiring it to internally hold ashm will make it a radically different thing, ie a F-35 like striker. It is enough for it to internally hold A2A load, ashm will just have to go external or let J-15 carries them. J-35 primary purpose should be air-superiority, with ability to hold SDB internally.

Supercruise depends on two things, drag and engine dry thrust at that speed and altitude, if you don't have op engine then you better have low drag. I just suspect FC-31 needs to further reduce drag, I have good reasons though of course I can be wrong.

 

[waja2000]

IMO large weapon bay is not a must for J-35, as a naval bird it does have anti-surface needs, but requiring it to internally hold ashm will make it a radically different thing, ie a F-35 like striker. It is enough for it to internally hold A2A load, ashm will just have to go external or let J-15 carries them. J-35 primary purpose should be air-superiority, with ability to hold SDB internally.
Supercruise depends on two things, drag and engine dry thrust at that speed and altitude, if you don't have op engine then you better have low drag. I just suspect FC-31 needs to further reduce drag, I have good reasons though of course I can be wrong.

i think J-35 can further improve in
1) Add ETOS
2) large wings (like F-35 type c) to increase ~1 ton fuel (~400km range)
3) more powerful engine (In progress)
4) Dual seater for version?
5) further development of smaller size missile (In progress)
6) Electronic warfare version ?
7) Able to control UAV ?

 

[enroger]

i think J-35 can further improve in
1) Add ETOS
2) large wings (like F-35 type c) to increase ~1 ton fuel (~400km range)
3) more powerful engine (In progress)
4) Dual seater for version?
5) further development of smaller size missile (In progress)
6) Electronic warfare version ?
7) Able to control UAV ?

Those things are reasonable. I'm a little conflicted on larger wing span though, it is better for low speed handling, very important for carrier ops; but it adds drag at high speed.... just have to wait and see.

 

[Deino]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1262041109284499460

 

[Deino]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1262041109284499460

IMO the most important news is, that this image was taken at the CFTE at Xi'an-Yanliang and no longer at SAC at Shenyang-Beiling.

 

[PeacefulWar]

IMO the most important news is, that this image was taken at the CFTE at Xi'an-Yanliang and no longer at SAC at Shenyang-Beiling.

Is it possible that J-35 become an JV project between SAC and CFTE?

 

[Deino]

Is it possible that J-35 become an JV project between SAC and CFTE?

No

First of all this is not the J-35 and second CFTE is not a future operator but simply the state-owned test-facility and -establishment.

As such it could be that the PLA (PLAN and PLAAF) might be indeed involved in this project and that SAC got a contract for this.

 

[PeacefulWar]

No

First of all this is not the J-35 and second CFTE is not a future operator but simply the state-owned test-facility and -establishment.

As such it could be that the PLA (PLAN and PLAAF) might be indeed involved in this project and that SAC got a contract for this.

My bad.
I meant XAC

 

[Rank]

 

[Deino]

View attachment 634171

...we know V2 sincs 2016. So what's so special?

 

[StormBreaker]

View attachment 634171

Bhai, It is third, Not second.

 

[Rank]

...we know V2 sincs 2016. So what's so special?

It's a 2nd prototype of V2, not V1 nor you call it V3 ... there is a difference between versions and amendments in prototype...

V1-1
V1-2 (Updates in V1-1)
V1-3 (Updates in V1-2)

V2-1 (Version changed when major updates across the platform including design, structure, internal and external components)
V2-2 (Updates in V2)

It happens when you just only get information from the internet LOL

If I will take your logic, then F-35 probably has more than 100 prototypes ... If you start calling every single change and amendment "New prototype"

Bhai, It is third, Not second.

Your answer is above buddy!

 

[Deino]

Bhai, It is third, Not second.

Tes, but only since we've never seen the true second one before and always thougt this is the second while it was in fact the third