Printing each part like that may take 20 days. They will need a dozen or so that large industrial 3d printers to make enough parts for one jet per month. That probably explains why the prototype is slow to make.
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
Printing each part like that may take 20 days. They will need a dozen or so that large industrial 3d printers to make enough parts for one jet per month. That probably explains why the prototype is slow to make.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
I don't think the production is slow because of 3D printing but rather that is the development of this project
With no orders SAC has this just ticking over slowly and a nice project at that prototype 3 is rumoured soon
I seriously hope come end of JF17 Block 3 PAF puts in a few hundred million dollars into this project to order in future
There can be no better deal than FC-31 for 5th candidate because let's be honest it's not like Pakistan is going to join F35 as if it would even be allowed
Great buy for PAF especially if it starts supercruising with indigenous engines
With no orders SAC has this just ticking over slowly and a nice project at that prototype 3 is rumoured soon
I seriously hope come end of JF17 Block 3 PAF puts in a few hundred million dollars into this project to order in future
There can be no better deal than FC-31 for 5th candidate because let's be honest it's not like Pakistan is going to join F35 as if it would even be allowed
Great buy for PAF especially if it starts supercruising with indigenous engines
Absolutely Asif, every word true, the FC-31 is a beautiful, remarkable airplane, basic in its inception, and remarkable in its execution,, if the PLANAF doesn't "nurse" this one along,, they are missing an opportunity to roll a 5 gen onto the boat.. the J-20 is NOT optimized for a salt environment, not structurally, not aerodynamically.
the FC-31 will be, and with proper Chinese engines, it will be something to look forward to and be proud of!
Dizasta1
Senior Member
We will just have to wait and see. For now though, it's the Block-lll Thunders that everyone in Pakistan is excited about.
But coming back to J-31s. I really do hope that they receive a powerful, good performance, high endurance engines that will allow the aircraft to supercruise. This would give the aircraft a huge advantage in air combat.
J-31s look poised to take center stage for developing countrie, ad well as small rich nations. Those who want to maintain a small but potent force of 5th Gen combat aircraft.
my point is to support large scale 3d printing as a production method you need much more investment on the toolings and infrastructure. In the traditional method you already can reuse the existing CNCs. As a result even if 3d printing makes better parts quicker, it is unlikely someone invest in 20 or so expensive new equipments just for the prototyping. And if they only use one 3d printers, it still takes a year just to build those parts for one set of prototype.
What makes 31 more resistant to salt environments?
The overall conventional design of the FC-31 closely mirrors every operational carrier launched and recovered aircraft today with the exception of the Rafael,,, which is a short little bugger with close coupled canards, so the center of lift is not far behind the center of gravity......
The J-20 is a commensurately larger aircraft, with the center of lift much further aft, reliant on distant coupled canards to rotate that aft mounted delta into a higher angle of attack to produce the lift necessary for launch and recovery.
the catapult will take care of launch, but not the recovery, the J-20 of necessity will have a higher pitch angle as airspeed is reduced, again partially, but no wholly compensated by the forward distant coupled canards..
Dial in You-tube and watch a 747 come in for approach and flare, then dial up Concord, the nose section must be hinged in order for the flight crew to even see the runway on approach, that nose is pitched "WAY UP THERE!" in order to make enough lift to slow to a safe approach speed.
Finally the FC-31 has a much higher carbon fibre content than the J-20 and dual nose tires, the J-20 has been designed to operate exclusively off long hard surface runways, find one word in Dr. Song's paper mentioning flying this aircraft off the boat?? it's NOT there is it... designed for air superiority, designed for speed, (hence the aft mounted delta)... It really is all about design, and carrier aircraft are always designed to allow an increase in structural strength in landing gear, catapult gear, and arresting gear,,, look at the F-35C in comparison to the F-35A.......
Except those existing CNC can not do the work that these 3d printers can do. Traditional machines can not make a 5 square meter bulkhead in one piece while 3d printer can.
It was stated by an exhibitor in this in 2015 that 3d printing takes 1/5th of the time to make the same structure compared to traditional equipment (if these equipment can do it at all). How could this be slower than traditional method?
Investing 20 new printers are like investing 100 equivalent sets of traditional equipment (forger, CNC, milling etc.) to make the same number of components in the same time span. That would be a saving for the long term, and much faster in production rate.
There is no difference between 3d printers that do prototyping and serial production. They are the same thing. If there is any change of design from prototype to serial, one just change the CAD input data without changing the printer. That is the major point of 3d printer's advantage "going straight from design to production".
The surface of the parts in the photo is 3d printed then milled. While I believe what they say, I am not sure why they are saying you can't CNC the same part. Maybe in other situations, but not the one they've shown. In other words the 3d printers will be additional investment and the parts still requires some existing machines to finish. Since they already have the traditional equipments, a 3d printing based production process contains hidden infrastructure investment.
The issue with a single process of 3d printing is still speed. Unlike in a civilian project you can't go fast because the density and consistency requirement. Yes if you have 100s printers in a large factory working on printing simultaneously it will amazing, that means 3d printing must be mainstream, not nice-to-have, to justify the additional large investment.
I suppose they could've just made a smaller investment for a small number of printers to complete the prototypes and verify the whole procedure in the process. The fact is FC-31 can't be made without 3d printed parts. It leads to the conclusion that without a major fund injection the current prototypes will be slow to make.
Last edited:
