SAC FC-31 Stealth Fighter: News & Discussions

[Beast]

But apparently the manufacturers of T-50, which by the way have far bigger experience in making planes, apparently do not know what they are doing. Nice logic there mate!

They lack the technology, under fund and suffer a brain drain with many talents leaving the country.. Its a sad fact for the reality of Russia. In these world, money talks! I believe if Russia has the ample fund and massive investment on their facilities for aviation. They will make T-50 better.

When you keep on dumping money and has the full support of government. Sooner or later, you will advance and succeed on that area.

 

[Manticore]

so , whats the initial verdict based on physical shape of the fighter ? any significance of angles and their effect on stealth & operational ceiling in comparsion e f22/pakfa/j20/f35

i didnt have time to go through this thread -- plz give me a summary or link up a good article

ty

 

[gambit]

Ah, you're using Viet logic quite copiously I see. Your diagrams, once again, while true, have no point. No one ever questioned the fact that engines on a fighter are designed differently from a cargo jet.

In other words, you did not understand at all the sources provided.

The point is that there are many changes on the J-31 from the F-35. Do those changes reflect adaptations to different engine layout or are they genuine aerodynamic improvements? Or both?

This is where you are wrong. If you enlarge the wing area, it may not be because you discovered a new method of aerodynamic exploitation, it may be because you do not have sufficient propulsion.

Either way, you have no good foundation, other than empty platitudes and hope, that this new Chinese fighter is a superior design to the American ones.

 

[gambit]

so , whats the initial verdict based on physical shape of the fighter ? any significance of angles and their effect on stealth & operational ceiling in comparsion e f22/pakfa/j20/f35

i didnt have time to go through this thread -- plz give me a summary or link up a good article

ty

You should know better by now than to ask such question.

What is the best demonstration of body armor? Shoot it.

What is the best demonstration of an airfoil? Put it on a design and fly it.

What is the final determination of a complex body's radar cross section (RCS)? Measure it.

 

[ptldM3]

They lack the technology, under fund and suffer a brain drain with many talents leaving the country.. Its a sad fact for the reality of Russia. In these world, money talks! I believe if Russia has the ample fund and massive investment on their facilities for aviation. They will make T-50 better.

When you keep on dumping money and has the full support of government. Sooner or later, you will advance and succeed on that area.

Sure we do, keep telling yourself that. By that token I can also state the same thing about China but that would just be an opinion and a very foolish and naïve opinion at that since I have no connection to Shenyang so I can’t say what technology they have in their possession, or what kind of funds they spent or who (brains) are working for them.


So how does Russia lack funds when they just approved 650 billion dollars of new equipment purchases, not counting research and development.

And explain this 'brain drain' when Russia has the highest number of college graduates in Europe.


The fact is most Chinese on this board and other boards haven’t have the slightest clue about aircraft design or 'stealth' what they think they know, they really don't know or they put a nationalistic twist to things to the point where its utterly ridiculous, example: The pak-fa is not stealthy because of its two piece canopy, when the J-31 comes out, none of the Chinese members that crucified the pak-fa for its canopy dare say a thing about the J-31, in fact now the opposite is happening, a two piece canopy isn't all that bad. Furthermore, other features that many Chinese criticized on the pak for being 'unstealthy' seem to all of the sudden become stealthy overnight.

You may put the pak-fa down and laugh at it which seems to be acceptable behavior by many Chinese fan boys but most reasonable people with an understanding in aviation would know the genius in the design. The pak-fa is one of the closest things you can have to a flying wing without being a B-2, the design is heavily centered around high lift, low drag with weight being the center piece characteristic with the flat/thin fuselage as the hallmark of that design feature. In terms of aerodynamic performance building an aircraft that utilizes high lift, low drag, low weight to its fullest potential will create an aircraft with great range, great payload, high maneuverability, high supercruise, ect, the list just goes on.

The Su-27 is one of the greatest designs for an aircraft even to this day, with the SU-27 setting no less than 40 world records. The pak-fa surpasses the SU-27 in almost all aspects, yet we have some anonymous Chinese fan boys that are claiming that the pak-fa and the Russians don’t know what they are doing

 

[Beast]

Sure we do, keep telling yourself that. By that token I can also state the same thing about China but that would just be an opinion and a very foolish and naïve opinion at that since I have no connection to Shenyang so I can’t say what technology they have in their possession, or what kind of funds they spent or who (brains) are working for them.


So how does Russia lack funds when they just approved 650 billion dollars of new equipment purchases, not counting research and development.

And explain this 'brain drain' when Russia has the highest number of college graduates in Europe.


The fact is most Chinese on this board and other boards haven’t have the slightest clue about aircraft design or 'stealth' what they think they know, they really don't know or they put a nationalistic twist to things to the point where its utterly ridiculous, example: The pak-fa is not stealthy because of its two piece canopy, when the J-31 comes out, none of the Chinese members that crucified the pak-fa for its canopy dare say a thing about the J-31, in fact now the opposite is happening, a two piece canopy isn't all that bad. Furthermore, other features that many Chinese criticized on the pak for being 'unstealthy' seem to all of the sudden become stealthy overnight.

You may put the pak-fa down and laugh at it which seems to be acceptable behavior by many Chinese fan boys but most reasonable people with an understanding in aviation would know the genius in the design. The pak-fa is one of the closest things you can have to a flying wing without being a B-2, the design is heavily centered around high lift, low drag with weight being the center piece characteristic with the flat/thin fuselage as the hallmark of that design feature. In terms of aerodynamic performance building an aircraft that utilizes high lift, low drag, low weight to its fullest potential will create an aircraft with great range, great payload, high maneuverability, high supercruise, ect, the list just goes on.

The Su-27 is one of the greatest designs for an aircraft even to this day, with the SU-27 setting no less than 40 world records. The pak-fa surpasses the SU-27 in almost all aspects, yet we have some anonymous Chinese fan boys that are claiming that the pak-fa and the Russians don’t know what they are doing

You shall have long known J-31 is a export version which suppose to be inferior. If you keep talking about the 2piece canopy thing then you already admit J-20 is indeed superior becos it is the stealth endorse by PLAAF.

We dont care abt J-31 is good or bad.. Becos J-20 is the top of the cream for PLAAF. Conclusion, yr T-50 is still inferior , understand! LOL...

CHina, Japan and USA for the last 3 years are vying the top 3 spot for super computer ranking..

It is no surprising, supercomputer aid design of 5th gen stealth fighter. Super computer also helps in making nuclear weapon. Surprising, nulcear weapon and stealth fighter are the 2 thing gaining headline in the last few years about PLA military capabilites.

As for the technology, I bet you do not know. China now possess the most powerful hydraulic press in the world. Hydraulic press is critical in making huge aircraft component and parts for aeronautic engine. It is the continue dumping of R&D fund by the state that China able to achieve such feat.

As for Russia, the technology stagnant after the fall of Soviet Union.. Your boast of USD650 billions for Russia armed force is nothing becos this is consider peanuts compare to China military fund. Please take note the USD650 billion fund is stretch over a long period of time and not just a year budget. In the end, its still under fund for a huge country like Russia.

Its funny you compare Russia to Europe but dare not compare Russia graduate against CHinese ratio. I bet China dump out more graduate and PhD than the whole Russia and Europe combined. I the end, we still beat you..

Su-27 design is great , no doubt about that. A great product of Soviet Era times..
P-51 Mustang is also great for its time... Shall we move on??

 

[Manticore]

You should know better by now than to ask such question.

What is the best demonstration of body armor? Shoot it.

What is the best demonstration of an airfoil? Put it on a design and fly it.

What is the final determination of a complex body's radar cross section (RCS)? Measure it.

so if we cant even find any thing just by eyeballing the design , if posters cant summarize any constructive point from the discussion on this thread , what have the members done here for the past 600 posts?

 

[gambit]

so if we cant even find any thing just by eyeballing the design , if posters cant summarize any constructive point from the discussion on this thread , what have the members done here for the past 600 posts?

There are some things you can find that will give you good cause to call a design as 'non-stealthy' or 'stealthy'. A single vertical stab, for instance. This is pretty much an immediate dismissal out of the low radar observable area.

Those are the major MACRO STRUCTURAL mechanisms of radiation. Some of them we can eliminate, as in installing twin canted vertical stabs to eliminate the corner reflector. Some we can control, such as installing absorber to reduce surface radiation. Some we can do both by installing absorber as well as reorienting/reconfiguring the structure to reduce radiation back to source direction, such as edge treatment.

But once we have treated all the macro structural radiators to the best extent our design allowed, it will be the MICRO STRUCTURAL mechanisms of radiation that will give the aircraft away, albeit at a less distance than when compared to the macro structures.

These micro structural radiators are panel gaps, exposed screws, accidental gouges from careless maintenance, or simply poor workmanship from manufacturing. If the overall design still have major structural radiators than can give the aircraft away, then all the micro structural radiator treatments will be a waste of resources, finance and human. The opposite is EQUALLY true and important. If there are enough micro structural radiators to give the aircraft away at a tactically disadvantageous distance, as in within enemy missile capability, then all the macro structural radiator treatment were for naught. You will just die at 100 km from the target instead of 150 km.

Bottom line for designing a low radar observable body is this: Eliminate all radiation if possible, and if not possible, deny the adversary radar any radiation.

You can deny by redirection and that is where shaping comes in. You eliminate by absorber but it is a weight penalty so your absorber application will be frequency and bandwidth limited. That is why you must have a balance of both.

There is no way for anyone to 'eyeball' a design that has hints of low radar observable attempts and make a definitive declaration that said design is X or Y meters square RCS at Z distance. The current attempts by the Russians and China have high macro structural treatments. No use in denying that. But the US have set the standards with the retired F-117 and its RCS is still (feloniously) unknown.

 

[ptldM3]

You shall have long known J-31 is a export version which suppose to be inferior. If you keep talking about the 2piece canopy thing then you already admit J-20 is indeed superior becos it is the stealth endorse by PLAAF.

The ‘export version’ argument is simply silly. Almost all aircraft are export aircraft, the J-31 is no different. Shenyang is trying to market the aircraft and its biggest potential buyer would be China, so now explain to everyone why Shenyang would use a supposed downgraded version of the aircraft for marketing.


And did not say anything that implicates a two piece canopy as being bad, read again.

We dont care abt J-31 is good or bad.. Becos J-20 is the top of the cream for PLAAF. Conclusion, yr T-50 is still inferior , understand! LOL...

Prime example of Chinese chest thumping. I take it that you have tested both aircraft to come to that conclusion? I remember looking through a manual for an F-15, the manual was about 2 inches thick and a great deal of the content was about performance. The point I’m trying to prove with the F-15 manual is that even with all the information available about the F-15, most people like 99% would not know more about the F-15’s performance than what they find on Wekepedia. And most people would probably be shocked to know that there is a 2 inch thick manual that covers the aircraft’s performance.

Both aircraft probably had thousand of people involved in the design stages which includes everything from basics structural design to aerodynamics, RCS control to subsystems such as radars, ECM’s ect. The performance of both aircraft is a mystery, yet we have some people that can judge performance based on picture.

CHina, Japan and USA for the last 3 years are vying the top 3 spot for super computer ranking..

And…..?

It is no surprising, supercomputer aid design of 5th gen stealth fighter. Super computer also helps in making nuclear weapon. Surprising, nulcear weapon and stealth fighter are the 2 thing gaining headline in the last few years about PLA military capabilites.

Again what is your point? Many major engineering companies use supercomputers, if they are not domestic than they are foreign. A supercomputer that was ranked #1 last year would probably not even break the top ten this year, a company that ranked 1st last year may drop to 7th this year.

As for the technology, I bet you do not know. China now possess the most powerful hydraulic press in the world.

Wow amazing…not really.

Hydraulic press is critical in making huge aircraft component and parts for aeronautic engine.

This just demonstrates that you don’t know what you are talking about. It’s not the 1950’s, modern aircraft are almost exclusively made from CNC machining. Most components are cut using laser or water pressure. Carbon fiber composites and similar technologies are the same, they are machined.

As for Russia, the technology stagnant after the fall of Soviet Union..

Sure, tell yourself that. Russia is pathetic, China is strong. China has the money and research, the brains and the talent. yet you still use old Russian engines

So much for all your money and engineering.

Your boast of USD650 billions for Russia armed force is nothing becos this is consider peanuts compare to China military fund.

This is on equipment purchase, unless you have data that compares Chinese equipment purchases its best you say nothing. And annual budgets are not the same, especially when large conscript armies spent a considerable amount of the annual funds just on feeding and housing expenses. Case in point, you made a very vague and general claim that Russia has no funding and now you can’t support that claim. Can you give me Sukhoi’s budget? Or Saturn’s budget? Or Phazatrons’ budget?

 

[conworldus]

I am confused....

 

[Beast]

The ‘export version’ argument is simply silly. Almost all aircraft are export aircraft, the J-31 is no different. Shenyang is trying to market the aircraft and its biggest potential buyer would be China, so now explain to everyone why Shenyang would use a supposed downgraded version of the aircraft for marketing.


And did not say anything that implicates a two piece canopy as being bad, read again.

J-20 and F-22 being top of the cream of both airforce. USAF already refuse export of it.. China has so far no talk abt export of J-20. Both uses single canopy. J-31 known as F-60 long known to known as export version being shown on last Zuhai Airshow.

Again what is your point? Many major engineering companies use supercomputers, if they are not domestic than they are foreign. A supercomputer that was ranked #1 last year would probably not even break the top ten this year, a company that ranked 1st last year may drop to 7th this year.

Clearly you do not understand the contribution of Supercomputer and their contribution to military. There is reason why US pour in significant amount of resources and money in maintaining the edge. Super computer helps in RCS calculation and simulation of 5th gen stealth. Russia which never touch even the 3rd spot in supercomputer??? now you know why T-50 is never stealthy.

Wow amazing…not really.

Really? Show me Russian recapture the top spot?

This just demonstrates that you don’t know what you are talking about. It’s not the 1950’s, modern aircraft are almost exclusively made from CNC machining. Most components are cut using laser or water pressure. Carbon fiber composites and similar technologies are the same, they are machined.

Hydraulic press is still critical in especially large aircraft component. CNC can the most do in medium or small aircraft components. But comes to high thrust engine. Powerful hydraulic press is still needed.. This is one of the reason that plague China large aircraft manufacturing and engine for so long until now.

Sure, tell yourself that. Russia is pathetic, China is strong. China has the money and research, the brains and the talent. yet you still use old Russian engines

So much for all your money and engineering.

Most russian bought engine are used on old airframe which redesigning to fit WS-10A is wasteful. PLus Russian is willing to sell at reasonable price. Why not?

Latest J-11B all so far is fitted with WS-10A only.. Even the lastest J-16 prototype are running WS-10A. Even our J-20 are flying with WS-10X.. Not you russian engine.We don't care abt export model. They are not critical. Fitting with Russian engine is more of cost saving .

This is on equipment purchase, unless you have data that compares Chinese equipment purchases its best you say nothing. And annual budgets are not the same, especially when large conscript armies spent a considerable amount of the annual funds just on feeding and housing expenses. Case in point, you made a very vague and general claim that Russia has no funding and now you can’t support that claim. Can you give me Sukhoi’s budget? Or Saturn’s budget? Or Phazatrons’ budget?

Everybody knows Russia ecomomy. Besides raw material export. Russian hardly sell anything useful. So where is your large fund comes from? Even the 650 billion is pathetic and spread over a period of 10 years. It's hardly enough.

If sukhoi has such great budget, it need not ask India to pump in fund, right? what can Indian contribute to your T-50 besides money?

 

[manqiangrexue]

Gambit, if I am just hoping that this aircraft is superior to the F-35, then you are just hoping that it's not. My theory: Aerodynamic differences were intelligently made to improve aerodynamic performance (although some had to be made for the obvious change from 1 to 2 engines). Your theory: Differences were made to compensate for poor engine performance. There is just nowhere else to go from this. No evidence suggests wither way. Stop trying to win. I said both are alternate theories and that's exactly what they are. Yours is NOT superior.

I don't know why you posted all those diagrams again of an un-stealthy aircraft. Clearly, the J-31 does not feature a single vertical stabilizer. Stop hiding behind your diagrams. If you say I don't understand something, then explain it. If you don't then it's not that I didn't understand; it's that saying I don't understand is your last ditch effort to confuse people who aren't sure if I'm right in calling your BS.

You just showed a picture of a civilian jet engine for no reason at all. Also, you showed that radar reflects off a single vertical stabilizer design also, for no reason at all as well(other than in the realms of Viet logic). If not, explain right now what that reason is.

Old confused man with your BS Viet logic, everyone is sick your your crappy diagrams that don't mean jack diddly squat. You're a fraud. You didn't fly anything. You are an attention wh0re on this forum and you desperately want to be respected. You're not getting it because 1. You post BS and cover than up as pertinent information and 2. you are a worm for fighting (or pretending to have fought) for the country that destroyed your own. Just for number 2, there is nothing that you can do to bring yourself respect from others because you don't respect your own blood.

 

[Icecreamcart]

Gambit, if I am just hoping that this aircraft is superior to the F-35, then you are just hoping that it's not. My theory: Aerodynamic differences were intelligently made to improve aerodynamic performance (although some had to be made for the obvious change from 1 to 2 engines). Your theory: Differences were made to compensate for poor engine performance. There is just nowhere else to go from this. No evidence suggests wither way. Stop trying to win. I said both are alternate theories and that's exactly what they are. Yours is NOT superior.

I don't know why you posted all those diagrams again of an un-stealthy aircraft. Clearly, the J-31 does not feature a single vertical stabilizer. Stop hiding behind your diagrams. If you say I don't understand something, then explain it. If you don't then it's not that I didn't understand; it's that saying I don't understand is your last ditch effort to confuse people who aren't sure if I'm right in calling your BS.

You just showed a picture of a civilian jet engine for no reason at all. Also, you showed that radar reflects off a single vertical stabilizer design also, for no reason at all as well(other than in the realms of Viet logic). If not, explain right now what that reason is.

Old confused man with your BS Viet logic, everyone is sick your your crappy diagrams that don't mean jack diddly squat. You're a fraud. You didn't fly anything. You are an attention wh0re on this forum and you desperately want to be respected. You're not getting it because 1. You post BS and cover than up as pertinent information and 2. you are a worm for fighting (or pretending to have fought) for the country that destroyed your own. Just for number 2, there is nothing that you can do to bring yourself respect from others because you don't respect your own blood.

Mate, better to forget about it. Let him insult all the Chinese he wants. If he feels he needs to, let him. You're just making him feel better, reaffirming his idea of all Chinese posters being 'juvenile delinquents' unworthy to talk to without spitting or insulting..

Let's just enjoy the new plane. I'm hoping for the plane to take flight within the next few weeks.

 

[Banglar Lathial]

Gambit, if I am just hoping that this aircraft is superior to the F-35, then you are just hoping that it's not. My theory: Aerodynamic differences were intelligently made to improve aerodynamic performance (although some had to be made for the obvious change from 1 to 2 engines). Your theory: Differences were made to compensate for poor engine performance. There is just nowhere else to go from this. No evidence suggests wither way. Stop trying to win. I said both are alternate theories and that's exactly what they are. Yours is NOT superior.

I don't know why you posted all those diagrams again of an un-stealthy aircraft. Clearly, the J-31 does not feature a single vertical stabilizer. Stop hiding behind your diagrams. If you say I don't understand something, then explain it. If you don't then it's not that I didn't understand; it's that saying I don't understand is your last ditch effort to confuse people who aren't sure if I'm right in calling your BS.

You just showed a picture of a civilian jet engine for no reason at all. Also, you showed that radar reflects off a single vertical stabilizer design also, for no reason at all as well(other than in the realms of Viet logic). If not, explain right now what that reason is.

Old confused man with your BS Viet logic, everyone is sick your your crappy diagrams that don't mean jack diddly squat. You're a fraud. You didn't fly anything. You are an attention wh0re on this forum and you desperately want to be respected. You're not getting it because 1. You post BS and cover than up as pertinent information and 2. you are a worm for fighting (or pretending to have fought) for the country that destroyed your own. Just for number 2, there is nothing that you can do to bring yourself respect from others because you don't respect your own blood.

This is true. As far as I can see from the information in this thread, not enough information has been made public to draw any definitive conclusions about this good looking plane.

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

The pak-fa is one of the closest things you can have to a flying wing without being a B-2

Very True!!! same thought had come to my mind when I saw the pakfa prototype for the first time.