Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator

Jeff Head said:

Two things I have observed when it comes to the J-31.

1...in the press, they are completely unfamiliar with it, and so many outlets, even if they have defense oriented names, simply pass on the foolish rumors that have heard...or more likely, in what passes in many places for modern journalism, what they find on blogs on the net for it.

I would not worry too much about such. There are some credible places where true analysis goes on...sadly, I have not found DefenseNews typically to be one of those places.

2...Many in the Chinese fanboi culture simply want the J-31 to succeed so badly, that they go to almost any length to project that success.

I am not saying it will not succeed, I am saying that as of now, it has not gone anywhere. And it has been out there now for well over three years. No more prototypes, no international interest, and no indication to date that the PLAAF or PLAN are seriously interested. That might change...but I will wait on something official at this stage before projecting great success for the design. Surely building more prototypes will be an initial visible indication of more movement on the project. I would at least wait for that.

Heck, the YF-23 was an unbelievable great design. Two prototypes were built. But it lost to the F-22 and as much as many of us in the US would love to see it re-incarnated...at this stage it is very highly unlikely. I fear the J-31 may go that same path.

Click to expand...

I think the article makes it pretty clear that the FC-31 project will not go on unless it finds a buyer. This implies that the PLANAF has another 5th generation fighter project in the works (hint: JayBird's CGI).

SinoSoldier said:

I think the article makes it pretty clear that the FC-31 project will not go on unless it finds a buyer. This implies that the PLANAF has another 5th generation fighter project in the works (hint: JayBird's CGI).

Click to expand...

I assume you are referring to the navalized J-20 rather than the navalized SAC's-J-XX-proposal.

If the Navy does take on naval J-20 rather than a navalized FC-31/J-31, then I wonder if the Air Force will still be willing to take on FC-31 as its medium weight stealth fighter and fund its development alone without investment from the Navy as well... assuming they even have a medium weight stealth fighter requirement in the first place.

SinoSoldier said:

I think the article makes it pretty clear that the FC-31 project will not go on unless it finds a buyer. This implies that the PLANAF has another 5th generation fighter project in the works (hint: JayBird's CGI).

Click to expand...

The new FC-31 model has a new set of fins, the new color, etc look more like J-20. And the new 10-ton engine, if successful, will be fit on JF-17 as well. If there is a customer then it will be even better. But even without, I assume FC-31 may always exist as a test platform of some technology solutions, with relatively smaller investment because of sharing with other programs

I don't really see why the PLAAF would need a medium weight stealth when it has the J20 and J10B. Anything the J31 can do, you can do better with a mixed force of J20 and J10Bs for the same price.

I have always said going full stealth was a mistake on the part of the USAF. It is simply not necessary, and is prohibitively expensive.

I am thinking the PLAAF is studying the F35 programme with keen interest, but mostly as an abject lesson in what not to do as opposed to it being something they would seek to emulate.

And I think that might be hurting the J31.

Its strong outward resemblance to the F35, and the allegations and insinuations that it was developed with the help of stolen F35 tech, irrespective of whether its true or not, may be working against it when it comes to the PLA.

SAC are still determined to carry on with it, but I think they are going ahead with their own money rather than getting much if any government or PLA funds to help with development.

The slow pace is down to SAC having to generate the cash for the programme from its own profits, and also probably down to cost saving measures, whereby they are waiting to try and ride the J20's bandwagon.

The PLA and Chinese government is pouring a lot of resources and funds into the J20 project, and much of that does not go to CAC directly.

A significant part of the J20 funding is going to subcontractors and resource institutes to develop all the avionics, radar and other subsystems and materials for the J20.

For these companies, obviously the J20 would be the top priority, however, all the knowledge, skill and equipment the developed and gained during the J20 programme would be transferable to other programmes.

So, rather than pay a significant amount of money for a separate company to develop, say a new AESA radar, specifically for the J31 and in parallel with the radar being developed for the J20, SAC is probably going to the same subcontractors that are working on the J20, and asking them to apply the skills and expertise they learned and developed while working on the J20 on their J31.

The save a lot of development costs, since the vast majority of the research and development would have been paid for already by the J20 programme. However, that comes at the cost of delayed delivery, since for all these subcontractors, the J20 will always come first.

plawolf said:

I don't really see why the PLAAF would need a medium weight stealth when it has the J20 and J10B. Anything the J31 can do, you can do better with a mixed force of J20 and J10Bs for the same price.

I have always said going full stealth was a mistake on the part of the USAF. It is simply not necessary, and is prohibitively expensive.

Click to expand...

Yes, I've also been wondering if it might be better for the Air Force to forgo a medium weight stealth fighter that would be purchased in large numbers, and use that to fund more J-20s (and J-20 upgrades), to get an early start on 6th generation R&D, to purchase more J-10B/C, more J-16s and J-11Ds, and EW/ECM and AEW&C aircraft... but also to fund development and production of both the H-20 bomber and also the H-18 bomber as well.

Instead of buying 1000 FC-31s over two or more decades (each of which may have relatively short range in the westpac theatre of combat and would likely require substantial tanker support), they can instead develop and purchase a relatively large number of survivable, relatively long range, offensive bombers instead.
H-18 in particular, may also be suited to act as an uber long range stealthy interceptor/missiler to supplement and support the fleet of J-20s, J-10B/C, and J-11B/J-11D/J-16 in air to air combat as well.

One thing the USAF has got right imo, is looking to make LRS-B a much more multirole node in its overall systems of systems approach. The Chinese Air Force should consider it with H-20 as well, and forgo FC-31 in exchange for going full throttle (or reviving, if it were cancelled) the H-18 platform.
SAC also gets work in the form of continued flanker production and being prime contractor for H-18. CAC gets work in the form of continued J-20 production and support, as well as J-10 production. That sets both up well to retain skills and compete for 6th generation as well.

I think from what we see today, I can say that FC-31 is an export oriented project backed by the government, the government has no intention (so far) to field it in PLA. For that reason, it will not progress very much before it get substantial interests or commitments from potential customers. For example, a commitment from Pakistan would be a trigger to speed up. Any suggestion of using the number of prototypes built so far to judge its death or not is missing the point. Of course, it may never get foreign commitment, then it will be dead, but it is too early to judge now. Actually, I will use FGFA's progress as a marker to predict FC-31, that is to say I expect FC-31 pickup speed if and when FGFA gets a prototype built.

There are two things I also want to lay down as the bases for thinking about this project:

1. If the government want it to be in PLA as the first goal, it would have invested through military budget. This is not the case, it is a pure "commercial" SAC investment.

2. The project does have endorsement from the government. Remember, SAC is fully owned by the state, it does not have its "own" money really, its major project and budget have to be approved by the state. This means that the government is serious with the project. I believe two reasons, first and foremost strategic benefit (all the 3rd world countries or allies), second commercial profit.

It does give an impression that the SAC has been riding all along (ok maybe that is a bit unfair, I did say that it was an impression), first on the J-8, then Su-27 and derivatives, and now J-31.

If J-31 is marketed for low end. Then it only makes sense to acquire them in sufficient numbers. So SAC may be trying to gain by having CAC walk the minefield for them first, then quickly fill at a lower tech level and aim to sell in bulk.

I think maybe it will be better for SAC and CAC to work together in an innovator/manager setting. CAC can concentrating for developing new planes and exploring cutting edge technologies + some manufacturing , SAC can manage the manufacturing and subsequent maintenance/incremental upgrades, and the different variants. They both can share profits.

Ex vice president of AVIC has confirmed that the FC-31 is capable of supercruise.

SinoSoldier said:

Ex vice president of AVIC has confirmed that the FC-31 is capable of supercruise.

Click to expand...

What's the definition here? Mach 1.3 or 1.5?

GrassRoot and EastSun's finally finish their artwork.This is what they think the next generation Shipborne fighter jet will looks like.( Disclaimer: Not official just their own work)