Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Equation

Equation

Lieutenant General
-r5_-fxvqctu6006336.jpg

J-20 Side bay for references.

3a3f1c0d-4898-4254-8f3e-6d4f886849a6_orig.jpg

J-31 possible "naval" version for graphic references.

bcqamdcccaeqfo5_orig.jpg

F-22 Raptor image for references.

c22-627-30.jpg

Boeing X-32 side bay weapons door. The closest thing to that image with the side bay weapon door directly under the wing.

40402162185_90a468c18a_k.jpg

This looks to be either a whole new model we yet to see or just a simulation test bed.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
SinoSoldier said:
We're overthinking this. We don't even know if the top "flat" portion is even supposed to represent an accurate wing or simply something to make the model "complete". What we do know is that the FC-31 is too small to add a weapons bay on the side, and that the timeline given for the J-XY program leaves no room for such a radical redesign.

BTW there is no proof that the video is from SAC.

I think that the model is that of the J-20's side bay, and that the other portions of the model are not and need not be accurate for the purpose of testing the weapons bay.
Click to expand...
I was not suggesting it is FC-31, but trying to explain why AssassinsMace may have suggested.
 
O

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
Equation said:
3a3f1c0d-4898-4254-8f3e-6d4f886849a6_orig.jpg

J-31 possible "naval" version for graphic references.

bcqamdcccaeqfo5_orig.jpg

F-22 Raptor image for references.

c22-627-30.jpg

Boeing X-32 side bay weapons door. The closest thing to that image with the side bay weapon door directly under the wing.

40402162185_90a468c18a_k.jpg

This looks to be either a whole new model we yet to see or just a simulation test bed.
Click to expand...

That drawing of naval J-31 has unrealistic side bays. They are about half the length of the main bay which looks like it only just fits the length of MRAAMs. F-22 and J-20 side bays are about 70% the length of their main bays which are longer than that J-31. So half the length of J-31 main bay is going to be so short, no SRAAMs in existence can hope to fit unless they are shot out horizontally and the bay doors is just an opening.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
SilentObserver said:
That's too bad, it would have been an interesting tactical bomber. Any reasons for stopping the project?
Click to expand...
If I recall correctly the original decision for what the H-20 would become was between a subsonic stealthy gluing wing with greater range and stealth vs a stealthy supersonic bomber with less range and stealth. The PLA opted to go with the former over the latter. It was purely a matter of priorities and strategic needs, I imagine.
 
SinoSoldier

SinoSoldier

Colonel
latenlazy said:
If I recall correctly the original decision for what the H-20 would become was between a subsonic stealthy gluing wing with greater range and stealth vs a stealthy supersonic bomber with less range and stealth. The PLA opted to go with the former over the latter. It was purely a matter of priorities and strategic needs, I imagine.
Click to expand...

That said, I do strongly believe that an air force like the PLAAF needs a long-range, stealthy strike aircraft capable of hauling large payloads but still retaining enough aerodynamic capability for supersonic flight. The FC-31 or J-XY will not fulfill that requirement since, unlike the F-35C, the J-XY would not be able to hold heavy air-to-surface weaponry in its internal bays. Maybe a "JH-20" based on the J-20 will be developed in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top