Pivot stabs (see F-22 as another example) on the J-35A:
Hinge stabs (see F-35 as another example) on the J-35A:
J-35A fighter (PLAAF) + FC-31 thread
- Thread starter ACuriousPLAFan
- Start date
Hinge stabs (see F-35 as another example) on the J-35A:
Rick noted that we've never seen similar footage for the J-20. A key difference here is that the J-35 is intended for export, and this will naturally result in different publicity.
More
Here is a rough translation of the above:
The tail sting is part of the fuselage, when horizontal stablizer is turned, the sting stays straight.
FC-31 2.0 with pivot
J-35A with pivot
J-35A with hinge type.
The horizontal stablizer is one piece in the yellow outline. The red outlined part is the hinge. There is no sting.
First prototype 31001 with hinge. When horizontal stablizer is turned, there is no sting.
There is nothing wrong with "psyops", i.e.:
1, there is national goal of world class military, and it's outright reporting to the population. Unlike western type democracies, ironically, there's a concept of accountability.
2, there is a certain important foreign country, which doesn't even spot anything wrong when it speaks about peace through strength, etc.
Projecting strength is important, unless you really want to use it.
Thank you both for the explanations and images, they were exactly what I was looking for.
Is there a known/speculated functional difference between the two types? I can see that pivot-type is called "fancy" and I believe hinge-type was said to be cheaper?
I understand the J-35 and J-35A prototypes suggested they would finalise with different types, but now apparently they have both settled on the hinge-type (to increase parts commonality)?
The size of the composite material processing center is humongous. That is 2.7B RMB investment for 136k m2 area.Rick noted that we've never seen similar footage for the J-20. A key difference here is that the J-35 is intended for export, and this will naturally result in different publicity.
More
Titanium alloy and processing center is also a 1.5B RMB investment, altough of just 31k m2 area.
Both entered production in 2024 or scheduled to have one so.
It is interesting to see that CFRP is so much wider used than Titanium alloy on SAC aircraft since it had mostly been producing flankers in the past, which was mostly Titanium and aluminum if I remember correctly. J-11B and J-16 both likely used some composite material, but the text here is pointing more to next generation aircraft, so J-35 and JXDS, which should be using mostly composite materials based on this.
I made a post about the difference, probably in this thread some weeks ago. The pivot type is better in performance up to mach 1 and then better again somewhere in higher mach number. Hinge typle is better in transonic and just above mach 1. So pivot type is better overall by a good margin particularly in low speed. One quoted advantage of hinge type is its smaller size and lower demand of force needed. But by the look of J-35 and pivot type J-35A, it is not much bigger than hinge type, so hinge's advantage seems not worth for its performance. It's never about cost.
This is unprecedented.
Serial production of the J-XDS won't begin until the early, if not the mid 2030s, which means CATIC must be projecting a torrent of J-35 export orders given what SAC and other AVIC subsidiaries/affiliates are likely spending in totality on CAPEX to construct this aerospace city, which is by no means a misleading name given the footprint.
AVIC most likely expect the J-35 to become the MiG-21 of its generation in terms of global proliferation, and TBF, it's a reasonable outlook.
The alternatives are either immature (e.g. Su-57), or subject to the terms and conditions (and whims) of US foreign policy (e.g. F-35, KF-21). Moreover, the amount of production capacity that's visibly in play imply economies of scale that should make the J-35 highly competitive in terms of pricing, on top of capabilities and politics, against both Western and non-Western alternatives.
You're very much on target, but it's more than just accountability, it's legitimacy.
Weapons systems like the J-35/A empower Chinese sovereignty in a world where vassalhood under Washington with Trump at its helm is increasingly undignified and untenable, in terms of domestic politics, everywhere from to to .
For Beijing, sovereignty translates to national dignity and political legitimacy before domestic constituents.
Likewise, (would be) foreign buyers of the J-35/A recognize that they're paying for sovereignty, as much as they're paying for a stealthy airframe, if not even more so.
I suspect one reason why CCTV is unusually transparent about the J-35/A is because the anchor export customer is paying extra for local assembly to not only maximize sovereign use of their J-35 derivative, but also to enhance regime legitimacy before domestic constituents. However, local assembly will inevitably make it even harder to preserve the J-35's "secrets," so might as well as be transparent.
I get where you're coming from. There's absolutely value to disinformation, especially if you're fighting a hybrid or cold war, and TBH, that's where the US and China are headed, assuming they're not there already.
However, when it comes to industrial capacity, there's no need for China to make any effort in projecting strength, especially when the US government will take care of it themselves. Case in point:
Equation
Lieutenant General
Because the West keeps China's COMAC from entering their market to compete by not certifying the plane.