Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

[Klon]

...

The issue with this kind of write-up is that it could be totally correct or totally wrong or anywhere in between.

The part about Shenyang running a media campaign (in cjdby and Aviation Week?) to discourage potential competitors seems pretty unrealistic.

Another point of note is that the ratio of insiders who have taken each side is nowhere close to 1:1, as the above might imply. Other than pb, there are grassroots, angadow, tsqzsl and more (I don't keep a list nor can I describe their credentials) who say it is/will be SAC. Grassroots said that some milestone was passed at the end of last year (I think I posted that one here) and a different one recently; he was the one who mentioned J-35.

 

[latenlazy]

The issue with this kind of write-up is that it could be totally correct or totally wrong or anywhere in between.

The part about Shenyang running a media campaign (in cjdby and Aviation Week?) to discourage potential competitors seems pretty unrealistic.

Another point of note is that the ratio of insiders who have taken each side is nowhere close to 1:1, as the above might imply. Other than pb, there are grassroots, angadow, tsqzsl and more (I don't keep a list nor can I describe their credentials) who say it is/will be SAC. Grassroots said that some milestone was passed at the end of last year (I think I posted that one here) and a different one recently; he was the one who mentioned J-35.

I’m just throwing around ideas for how we can interpret all these mixed signals. You don’t need to take it on authority (and I would recommend not to).

On how realistic a media campaign is...this sort of tactic in either loose or coordinated forms is *quite* common in the world of corporate PR. Most of the corporate press you see out in public is directly managed and tailored in some way. That’s what communications departments and PR firms are for. Chinese SOEs are really no different here. That said, I didn’t say SAC is mounting a media campaign. I said they’re trying to assert control over the narrative. There is a subtle but essential difference between the two.

 

[asif iqbal]

I believe J31 has been selected by PLAN

It’s the obvious choice

 

[Biscuits]

I believe J31 has been selected by PLAN

It’s the obvious choice

Idk. It could be fake rumors but doesn’t the J31 borrow heavily from F35 design ideas or even actual F35 intel? And the F35 is... well, F35.

A navalized J20 would be better if it could be built. Or an entirely new JH-XX series.

Meanwhile, J15s can be fitted with gear from J11D, Su35 and given a stealth facelift like the proposed F15SE.

 

[taxiya]

The issue with this kind of write-up is that it could be totally correct or totally wrong or anywhere in between.

The part about Shenyang running a media campaign (in cjdby and Aviation Week?) to discourage potential competitors seems pretty unrealistic.

Another point of note is that the ratio of insiders who have taken each side is nowhere close to 1:1, as the above might imply. Other than pb, there are grassroots, angadow, tsqzsl and more (I don't keep a list nor can I describe their credentials) who say it is/will be SAC. Grassroots said that some milestone was passed at the end of last year (I think I posted that one here) and a different one recently; he was the one who mentioned J-35.

I’m just throwing around ideas for how we can interpret all these mixed signals. You don’t need to take it on authority (and I would recommend not to).

On how realistic a media campaign is...this sort of tactic in either loose or coordinated forms is *quite* common in the world of corporate PR. Most of the corporate press you see out in public is directly managed and tailored in some way. That’s what communications departments and PR firms are for. Chinese SOEs are really no different here. That said, I didn’t say SAC is mounting a media campaign. I said they’re trying to assert control over the narrative. There is a subtle but essential difference between the two.

You two are both right IMO.

1. The write-up could end up both right and wrong, essentially making it not adding anything new and useful for now.
2. I don't believe there is a deliberate media campaign from SAC. Such campaign is putting pressure on PLA decision making procedure from outside of the protocol, which is a serious breach of state and party discipline. The last time a high-ranking official doing this was Bo Xilai who is at least two grades above SAC's boss (Provincial governor vs. a Bureau chief of ministry) and a "princeling". Now he is sitting in a prison cell for the rest of his life. Everybody after him should be very well aware of not to be seen of doing such things again. Media campaign in the west is totally legal as it is the right of a private company. Similar thing in China may not be illegal by state law, but is a breach of party law and consequence is equally severe.
3. The sources in these write-up may be true insiders of mid rank, they see PLA visiting and money, they interpreted it positively to their own satisfaction. They talk loud. It is human nature, but means nothing until PLA actually places order. FC-31's fate is far from unique. There were many weapon systems in the past started as a private venture of many institutes (an early anti-ship missile HaiYing-x), but adopted by PLA later on. There were also many similar ventures never got PLA orders and ended up in export. SAC sources here could be just hoping for the good.

My conclusion is,

1. Nothing new this round.
2. The door is still open.

 

[latenlazy]

You two are both right IMO.

1. The write-up could end up both right and wrong, essentially making it not adding anything new and useful for now.
2. I don't believe there is a deliberate media campaign from SAC. Such campaign is putting pressure on PLA decision making procedure from outside of the protocol, which is a serious breach of state and party discipline. The last time a high-ranking official doing this was Bo Xilai who is at least two grades above SAC's boss (Provincial governor vs. a Bureau chief of ministry) and a "princeling". Now he is sitting in a prison cell for the rest of his life. Everybody after him should be very well aware of not to be seen of doing such things again. Media campaign in the west is totally legal as it is the right of a private company. Similar thing in China may not be illegal by state law, but is a breach of party law and consequence is equally severe.
3. The sources in these write-up may be true insiders of mid rank, they see PLA visiting and money, they interpreted it positively to their own satisfaction. It is human nature, but means nothing until PLA actually places order. FC-31's fate is far from unique. There were many weapon systems in the past started as a private venture of many institutes (an early anti-ship missile HaiYing-x), but adopted by PLA later on. There were also many similar ventures never got PLA orders and ended up in export. SAC sources here could be just hoping for the good.

My conclusion is,

1. Nothing new this round.
2. The door is still open.

Any real campaigning that’s being done is probably insider baseball with the firm’s connections, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was either some formal or informal mention within the firm to talk up their lead when they can in order eek out as much advantage as possible. Psychological warfare between firms in China is not unheard of. If it wasn’t clear already my speculations really lean hard on the informal stuff because it’s very clear that there are dual elements of discretion and promotion at play in a lot of these dodgy public comments and reactions.

 

[taxiya]

Any real campaigning that’s being done is probably insider baseball with the firm’s connections, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was either some formal or informal mention within the firm to talk up their lead when they can in order eek out as much advantage as possible. Psychological warfare between firms in China is not unheard of. If it wasn’t clear already my speculations really lean hard on the informal stuff because it’s very clear that there are dual elements of discretion and promotion at play in a lot of these dodgy public comments and reactions.

I agree that there is a gray zone to play. A proudly loud-talking employee can not be charged for indisciplinary act.

 

[Franklin]

At least according to this article there mayby new life in the J-31 fighter program as the PLAN is looking for a replacement of the J-15. And the PLAAF said also to be interested in a few J-31's.

Is China Rethinking the Shenyang J-31 Fighter?

The Chinese military has been lukewarm about the J-31, concerned that its performance did not merit domestic acquisition.

According to a new report from Bradley Perret and Stephen Trimble, the Shenyang J-31 stealth fighter is once again on the menu for the Chinese military. The J-31 is the second stealth aircraft developed by Chinese industry, after the Chengdu J-20. This news is mildly surprising, as for the past few years the Chinese military has been lukewarm about the J-31, concerned that its performance did not merit domestic acquisition.

Apparently, the PLAN is unsatisfied with the performance and growth potential of the J-15 as a carrier-based fighter. In itself, this should not be surprising; the J-15 is a copy of the Russian Su-33, itself developed from a land-based fighter originally introduced in the mid-1980s. China is building a fleet of new carriers, and it seems that the PLAN is interested in something newer than an adapted 35-year-old platform. In any case, China appears to have specific concerns about the stability of the J-15 in landings, a major problem for a carrier aircraft.

For a while, it appeared that China would attempt to export the J-31 in an effort to crack into the extremely limited export market for 5th generation fighters. At the moment, that market is entirely occupied by the Lockheed-Martin F-35, which runs afoul of defense budgets and export controls. But China doesn’t have a great track record exporting high-end fighter aircraft (it’s been better with mid-range aircraft) making the J-31 a substantial risk for customers.

Moreover, the United States has repeatedly suggested that the J-31 depends on several technologies stolen from the F-35, which might also create concerns for fighter customers sensitive to U.S. intellectual property law. The ability of the United States to interfere with arms transactions between China and Russia portends ill for states that try to purchase technologies that the U.S. regards as stolen.

Unlike the F-35, the J-31 has two engines, making it more palatable to the naval aviation community. These engines will reportedly be a upgrade of the WS-13 engine currently used by the JF-17. Given that China continues to struggle with the larger, more complex engines on the J-20, this success may serve to make the J-31 an even more attractive option. Indeed, Perret and Trimble also report that the PLAAF will acquire some number of J-31s, given that the navy will be paying the bulk of development and testing costs in any case.

Problems remain with the J-31. While the airframe seems to strongly resemble the F-35, there is little reason to believe that it integrates the kind of technology suite that makes the F-35 uniquely lethal. Moreover, the J-31 still requires years of development. But at this point, it looks like the PLAN may have a plan for its first real generation of carrier aircraft.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[WW4]

America analysts often suffer from a superiority complex that seems increasingly unjustified. But I find reading their pieces instructive nonetheless, as they are an out-of-date look at the US's edge, and are almost predictive about what hurdle China will jump next.

From 2000-2010 they liked to talk about China's 'paper tiger' military and its obsolete tech. There was a broad dismissal of China's capabilities, and the view was that they would never come close to challenging US might.
From 2010-2015 discussion shifted. OK they admitted, maybe China could produce a few token modern assets, but they were far away on numbers and the integrated systems needed to use them
From 2015-2018, since it became clear that China was in fact mass producing some really good assets, they have resorted to nitpicking and talking about specific subsystem issues (e.g. WS-15 not being ready etc...)

This J-31 article is typical, with it's throw away line at the end about there being little reason to believe China can integrate the tech suite needed to rival F-35. I'm surprised he resisted talking about F-35's 'unprecedented sensor fusion' - Lockmart's favourite sales line for the plane. It is notable that he didn't point out the stealth or kinematic performance of F-35 as being an edge, because American analysts used to. Maybe they are willing to accept that China can now do stealth, and that they may know something about aerodynamics too (not that F-35 has set the bar very high on this front). Which leaves tech suite's and (IP theft?) as the last drums to beat (although given J-31 was designed with good visibility, it doesn't need to integrate video cameras the way F-35 does, so it can afford to have a less complicated sensor fusion package in any case).

I'm not Chinese. But it takes real denial to believe that it is beyond China to integrate various sensor feeds. China now produces technology that is cutting edge in many fields, including optics, radar, computing, software, sensors and many other industries necessary to achieve sensor fusion. J-20 has EOTS and MAWS. If anything, the analyst should be saying "there is little reason to believe China CANNOT integrate the tech suite needed to rival F-35".

China might still be a little behind at present, but given F-35 will be the dominate fighter in the US inventory out to 2050 (unless they cancel it after the first 500 are produced), one should reasonably anticipate that it will at a minimum catch up along the way (and soon).

Maybe by 2020, once all the XX-20 projects are proven to be successful, American analysts will have the courage to ask their own military why its systems and procurement have fallen behind!

 

[gelgoog]

...
I'm not Chinese. But it takes real denial to believe that it is beyond China to integrate various sensor feeds. China now produces technology that is cutting edge in many fields, including optics, radar, computing, software, sensors and many other industries necessary to achieve sensor fusion. J-20 has EOTS and MAWS. If anything, the analyst should be saying "there is little reason to believe China CANNOT integrate the tech suite needed to rival F-35".
...

The Grippen NG is supposed to have sensor fusion and the software was written in Sweden. Which is a country with 10 million people.
It depends on how complicated you want the thing to be really.