J-XY - maybe J-35 - next generation carrier-borne fighter


Bltizo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
If it ends up looking like that then IMO it would be the sexiest, sleekest-looking aircraft ever made.

I don't see any major differences between the FC-31 depicted in that video screenshot and the FC-31V2 that we all know and have pictures of?

Only thing that I see is the canopy doesn't have the reinforcement frame (which might just be artistic license or incompetence), but everything else looks the same
 

sinophilia

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't see any major differences between the FC-31 depicted in that video screenshot and the FC-31V2 that we all know and have pictures of?

Only thing that I see is the canopy doesn't have the reinforcement frame (which might just be artistic license or incompetence), but everything else looks the same

The CGI maybe makes it look much smoother and cleaner. At least to me it does. I wasn't commenting on any overt physical changes in particular. I also think the FC-31V2 looks amazing.
 

sinophilia

Junior Member
Registered Member
1609815111589.png

This certainly looks like one of the sleekest aircraft ever made! It's just not as smooth and sharp as the CGI but I'd still put it up in aesthetics to any other aircraft.

It looks like some generic clean-sheet 'advanced fighter' out of some Japanese Ace Combat type game (don't judge me I don't play those games).
 

Xsizor

Senior Member
Registered Member
Pardon for the unending questions across multiple threads but

1. For what purpose is FC-31 being iterated upon by Shenyang? Three prototypes that never would amount to much seems like too much investment for a non military undertaking. Much of the changes (on the exterior) seem to concentrate on planar stealth and modification thereof.

2. Shouldn't they be testing the FC-31 prototypes in the Huangdicun Naval Air Base in the EMALS test field. Fixing a strengthened Landing gear for EMALS handling would give some valuable inputs on the capability of the aircraft to take off with EMALS push.
(unless it's structural design - of FC-31-
is inherently incompatible with EMALS and can't take the punishment)


3. Isn't it important that J-35 have an aerodynamic device like LERX to induce vortex lift for takeoff? Since it is very sure that it's not going to be a STOL design (is it?).

If it ends up looking like that then IMO it would be the sexiest, sleekest-looking aircraft ever made.
The YF-23 says hi and wants to have a brief conversation with you.
 

sinophilia

Junior Member
Registered Member
Pardon for the unending questions across multiple threads but

1. For what purpose is FC-31 being iterated upon by Shenyang? Three prototypes that never would amount to much seems like too much investment for a non military undertaking. Much of the changes (on the exterior) seem to concentrate on planar stealth and modification thereof.

2. Shouldn't they be testing the FC-31 prototypes in the Huangdicun Naval Air Base in the EMALS test field. Fixing a strengthened Landing gear for EMALS handling would give some valuable inputs on the capability of the aircraft to take off with EMALS push.
(unless it's structural design - of FC-31-
is inherently incompatible with EMALS and can't take the punishment)


3. Isn't it important that J-35 have an aerodynamic device like LERX to induce vortex lift for takeoff? Since it is very sure that it's not going to be a STOL design (is it?).


The YF-23 says hi and wants to have a brief conversation with you.

YF-23 is the J-35s fat ugly cousin that never could:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As for your questions, I really don't have the expertise or knowledge to answer them with any confidence. Perhaps Deino or Bltizo could be of better help.
 

Bltizo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Pardon for the unending questions across multiple threads but

1. For what purpose is FC-31 being iterated upon by Shenyang? Three prototypes that never would amount to much seems like too much investment for a non military undertaking. Much of the changes (on the exterior) seem to concentrate on planar stealth and modification thereof.

2. Shouldn't they be testing the FC-31 prototypes in the Huangdicun Naval Air Base in the EMALS test field. Fixing a strengthened Landing gear for EMALS handling would give some valuable inputs on the capability of the aircraft to take off with EMALS push.
(unless it's structural design - of FC-31-
is inherently incompatible with EMALS and can't take the punishment)


3. Isn't it important that J-35 have an aerodynamic device like LERX to induce vortex lift for takeoff? Since it is very sure that it's not going to be a STOL design (is it?).


The YF-23 says hi and wants to have a brief conversation with you.

1. They're technology demonstrators. Even if they don't represent carrier capable prototypes, the idea of technology demonstrators is to demonstrate new technologies (that may include but not be limited to stealth, FCS, production, materials), which can then expedite future intended prototypes. The reason for iterating the airframes is obvious as well; to iterate the technologies you're demonstrating.

2. If an airframe is designed and built without the existing structure for catapult takeoff (or arresting landing for that matter), as is the case with both FC-31 airframes, you cannot "modify" them for those abilities. You need to design and build a new airframe capable of it instead.

3. We cannot eyeball aerodynamics and kinematic performance. LERX is just one feature that may contribute to that capability. In the case of the carrier derived FC-31 variant/J-XY/J-35, it will of course have catapults to launch it from a carrier. LERX are not present on F-22 or F-35 either.
 

gelgoog

Captain
Registered Member
Pardon for the unending questions across multiple threads but

1. For what purpose is FC-31 being iterated upon by Shenyang? Three prototypes that never would amount to much seems like too much investment for a non military undertaking. Much of the changes (on the exterior) seem to concentrate on planar stealth and modification thereof.

2. Shouldn't they be testing the FC-31 prototypes in the Huangdicun Naval Air Base in the EMALS test field. Fixing a strengthened Landing gear for EMALS handling would give some valuable inputs on the capability of the aircraft to take off with EMALS push.
(unless it's structural design - of FC-31-
is inherently incompatible with EMALS and can't take the punishment)


3. Isn't it important that J-35 have an aerodynamic device like LERX to induce vortex lift for takeoff? Since it is very sure that it's not going to be a STOL design (is it?).
...

The FC-31 was a internal Shenyang prototype program to test new computer design and manufacturing techniques.

AFAIK the original prototypes were not designed for the Navy. Initially they were trying to sell the technology out to Gulf petrostates. Only more recently did Shenyang get a Chinese Naval contract.

We don't know how the Naval aircraft from Shenyang will look like yet.
 

11226p

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don't see any major differences between the FC-31 depicted in that video screenshot and the FC-31V2 that we all know and have pictures of?

Only thing that I see is the canopy doesn't have the reinforcement frame (which might just be artistic license or incompetence), but everything else looks the same
2018-07-02-FC-31-enfin-choisi-par-la-marine-chinoise-01.jpg
The model is pretty much exactly this thing from an exposition 2018 which I think was an updated FC-31v2 concept, so it is different from the FC-31v2, especially the side (weapons?) bay.

More images here:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Top