J-35A fighter (PLAAF) + FC-31 thread

[doggydogdo]

Sorry, my bad, I mean J-35A land version at large scale. J-35 number is dictate by the carrier.

They share most of their parts, J-35A production line could be converted quickly to J-35 if needed

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

"Muh, just scale up and expand" an aircraft that's already under construction at a high rate is a lot easier than scaling up and expanding an entirely new production line supply chain. The J-35A is still a fairly large aircraft with 2 engines and advanced avionics, producing it at a fairly low scale as the Guancha trio suggested for the PLAAF would not offer much cost savings than J-20As produced at large scale...unless it can be subsidized by exports.

Which part of the "Chengdu AC has already reached its celling/limit WRT the J-20/A/S's production capacity" do you struggle to understand?

Also, I should definitely stress that setting up a new production line in the factories of another entity which is separate/not-native to the entity with the original design and engineering teams of said aircraft (which is what you've suggested in a prior post) is no easy feat and is quite challenging to deal with. This is especially considering that Shenyang AC already have several of their own projects to focus on and work with, including but not limited to the J-15T/TD, J-35/A/AE and J-XDS.

And now you want to add yet another new series of headaches for the Shenyang AC with the J-20 production?

As a matter of fact - Have you ever seen Boeing (with F-15, later on with F-47) and Northrop Grumman (with B-21) responsible for building and assembling Lockheed Martin's F-35 family in their factories as the prime contractors? Or are they just responsible as sub-contractors for the production of certain parts, modules and components of the F-35 family?

Besides, what the Guancha Trios suggested is basically "Here's what we think about the J-35A's production prospect for the coming years may be like, so in case it does happen then we shouldn't be caught off guard". Nowhere in that podcast have they ever suggested that "Yes, the J-35A is definitely going to have a rather low-volume production run only."

As such, once again, if exports is what makes the J-35A make sense, then I can certainly see it being prioritized more so than other new PLA systems.

From the get-go, you have been basing your overall assumption and thinking about the J-35A being produced with export as the dominant consideration. Which is frankly wrong, to begin with.

 

[dingyibvs]

Which part of the "Chengdu AC has already reached its celling/limit WRT the J-20/A/S's production capacity" did you not understand?

Also, I should definitely stress that setting up a new production line in the factories of another entity which is separate/not-native to the entity with the original design and engineering teams of said aircraft (which is what you've suggested in a prior post) is no easy feat and actually very challenging to deal with. This is especially considering that Shenyang AC already have several of their own projects to focus on and work with, including but not limited to the J-15T/TD, J-35/A/AE and J-XDS.

And now you want to add yet another new series of headaches for the Shenyang AC with the production of the J-20?

We are not in the 2nd World War-era anymore where distributing blueprints of the winning design across multiple companies is enough to have every one of those companies to roll out the entirety of the same aircraft designs from their assembly lines. Proper fighter jets of today have gotten way more complex and intricate to enable this to occur.

As a matter of fact - Have you ever seen Boeing and Northrop Grumman responsible for building and assembling Lockheed Martin's F-35 family in their factories as the prime contractors? Or are they just responsible as sub-contractors for the production of certain parts, modules and components of the F-35 family?

Besides, what the Guancha Trios suggested is basically "Here's what we think about the J-35A's production prospect for the coming years may be like, so in case it does happen then we shouldn't be caught off guard". Nowhere in that podcast have they ever suggested that "Yes, the J-35A is definitely going to have a rather low-volume production run only."



From the get-go, you have been basing your overall assumption and thinking about the J-35A being produced with export as the dominant consideration. Which is frankly wrong, to begin with.

So expand the ceiling. I don't know why you think that would be harder than building never-before-built production lines at SAC for the J-35A, not to mention doing the same for a myriad of new suppliers.

If say BYD is supply constrained with Seagulls, do you think it's easier for them to build a new factory to produce more Seagulls, or to build an entirely new model in the same segment? Would it be more cost effective for them to build say 1.5 million rather than 1.2 million Seagulls a year, or build 1.2 million Seagulls and 300,000 of a new model in the same segment?

 

[Blitzo]

I did not say that that's your point, I'm saying that my point is supported by your point. To make it clearer, I agree with your points, but I would take it one step further and posit that because exports further those advantages of the J-35A you listed that it may cause exports to be prioritized.

The reason I posit so is because the advantages you listed are long known. What has changed since then? The export potential of high end Chinese military gear has.

Yeah, so i am disagreeing with you in that case.

I don't think the "strength" or "export potential" has greatly changed for high end Chinese military gear to the extent that it would influence the PLA to adopt J-35A greater than the other prospective factors I mentioned.

Export benefits imo are a secondary or even tertiary tier benefit for the PLA adopting J-35A, imo.

 

[latenlazy]

Even PLAAF plan to replace legacy airframe 1 to 1, like you said, only need 7 years with current J-20 production rate.
Why you need to shorten it to 5 or less by adopt J-35A at larger scale? Are we in war time now?
What do you do with the production line and workers after 5 years?
Tech is advancing every year quickly and we're at the brink of CCA revolution not to mention 6th gen.
Ramping up production like no tomorrow is not a wise investment.
On the contrary, If CCA concept actually works this approach would be a disaster.

Maybe just maybe you want your numbers up and your Air Force properly trained before any shooting starts. Besides given previous fleet sizes were themselves partly a consequence of constrained resources there may be a desire to expand the tacair complement.

 

[dingyibvs]

Yeah, so i am disagreeing with you in that case.

I don't think the "strength" or "export potential" has greatly changed for high end Chinese military gear to the extent that it would influence the PLA to adopt J-35A greater than the other prospective factors I mentioned.

Export benefits imo are a secondary or even tertiary tier benefit for the PLA adopting J-35A, imo.

I think we'll just have to see how things shake out. Chances are we won't have a definitive answer for a long time to come. However, if the PLA inducts many J-35As without many exports, or if the opposite happens, then we could have some secondary evidence pointing one way or another.

Most immediately, the discussion arose from a separate discussion re: when exports will start to happen. The timing won't prove anything but that could be the first sign.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

So expand the ceiling.

How about go wring a nearly-dry piece of towel first?

I don't know why you think that would be harder than building never-before-built production lines at SAC for the J-35A, not to mention doing the same for a myriad of new suppliers.

Because Shenyang AC is ALREADY committed to the production run of the J-35/A/AE family right now. This is in addition to all those concurrent projects and products (J-15T/D, J-16/D, J-35/A/AE & J-XDS) that Shenyang AC is dealing with.

They don't need newer additions which are non-native to them to worry about.

If say BYD is supply constrained with Seagulls, do you think it's easier for them to build a new factory to produce more Seagulls, or to build an entirely new model in the same segment? Would it be more cost effective for them to build say 1.5 million rather than 1.2 million Seagulls a year, or build 1.2 million Seagulls and 300,000 of a new model in the same segment?

The problem with your analogy is that the Seagull is designed, engineered and produced by BYD. Whether there is a new factory to expand Seagull production or not, BYD is both responsible for the design and engineering of the Seagull, and being the owner + operator of that new factory.

Meanwhile, the J-20/A/S is the product of the Chengdu AC as its prime designer + contractor, whereas the J-35/A/AE is the product of the Shenyang AC as its prime designer + contractor. Both Chengdu AC and Shenyang AC are separate entities, despite being subsidiaries under the AVIC umbrella.

The correct analogy for your suggestion would be Geely asking BYD to build Xingyuan for them because they have reached capacity celling with their Xingyuan production, all while BYD already have Seagulls, Dolphins and many other models in mass production, plus newer BYD models in development.

 

[latenlazy]

So expand the ceiling. I don't know why you think that would be harder than building never-before-built production lines at SAC for the J-35A, not to mention doing the same for a myriad of new suppliers.

If say BYD is supply constrained with Seagulls, do you think it's easier for them to build a new factory to produce more Seagulls, or to build an entirely new model in the same segment? Would it be more cost effective for them to build say 1.5 million rather than 1.2 million Seagulls a year, or build 1.2 million Seagulls and 300,000 of a new model in the same segment?

J-35 production was happening anyways with the naval variant, and by all accounts the J-35’s production design seems to be pretty modularized so I expect most if not all of the production line to be relatively version agnostic. SAC’s already built out a lot of extra floor capacity while CAC is currently still in the middle of expanding theirs, and SAC’s production line for the J-35 is clearly already more or less ready to go, but there’s no rush yet for the J-35 naval variant, so SAC should in fact have prompt unused latent capacity that CAC doesn’t yet have, especially as CAC is also in the midst of retooling for the newer J-20A.

 

[00CuriousObserver]

Speaking of which, the Vietnamese delegation visiting the AVIC booth at LIMA and looking at the J-35 and J-10CE

 

[Nevermore]

Even PLAAF plan to replace legacy airframe 1 to 1, like you said, only need 7 years with current J-20 production rate.
Why you need to shorten it to 5 or less by adopt J-35A at larger scale? Are we in war time now?
What do you do with the production line and workers after 5 years?
Tech is advancing every year quickly and we're at the brink of CCA revolution not to mention 6th gen.
Ramping up production like no tomorrow is not a wise investment.
On the contrary, If CCA concept actually works this approach would be a disaster.

Compared with the Americans, China's five gen of fighters are still too few now and in the future.It is almost impossible for the sixth generation fighter jets to become combat ready before 2035. Future fighter jets cannot solve current problems.