Very well, I think only time can tell then
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
A closer look at FC-31
No serrations between panels?
From a doctrinal perspective, a land based version makes sense.
Given that the Chinese Air Force is potentially facing over a thousand opposing stealth fighters, WVR engagements may become the norm when 2 stealth fighters meet. Therefore a less expensive J-31 (compared to the J-20) would be preferred. It should still have the same kinematic performance, along with a smaller visual and IR signature. Plus it could be more optimised for dogfighting. I would also expect it to to be designed for a shorter range than the J-20.
And with the introduction of drones such as Loyal Wingmen, whether the controlling platform is a J-20 or J-31 doesn't matter too much.
In terms of the overall force structure, there are approximately 2000 fighter sized aircraft in the Chinese Air Force. So a fleet of 200+ Air Force J-31 would complement the J-20, J-10 and Flanker airframes nicely.
I would expect at least another 100 airframes from the Navy. And 300+ airframes is enough to justify an entirely separate fighter programme.
On affordability. If you accept that the Chinese economy will be larger than the US in the next 5-10 years (or is already far larger today in PPP terms), they certainly have the potential to match US military procurement. Note the US is planning on buying 2400 F-35s in total.
Also note that Chinese military spending today is estimated at 1.7% of GDP by SIPRI. If we are in a Cold War, China could double spending to 3.4% of GDP tomorrow. But that would still be a lower burden than the US which normally is at 3.5%-4%
In addition, the F-35 currently has a monopoly of 5th gen fighter export sales.
A Chinese J-31 competitor would result in greater Chinese influence as an arms provider and greater sales for the Chinese MIC.
The increased competition between the F-35 and J-31 should also result in a lower level of F-35 profitability for Lockheed Martin and the rest of the MIC.
A Chinese J-31 competitor would result in greater Chinese influence as an arms provider and greater sales for the Chinese MIC.
The increased competition between the F-35 and J-31 should also result in a lower level of F-35 profitability for Lockheed Martin and the rest of the MIC.
Indeed exporting the J35 would do wonders for China's defence industry, only thing that worries me is that it uses 2 engines so it will be hard to compete with the single engined F35 in terms of cost even with China's lower production costs. I wonder if it's possible somewhere in the far future to see a single WS-15 equipped J35
Mig-29 used two engines but was cheaper than the F-16.
How do you know? for 5th gen fighter, radar, avotronicsand and engine should take more much significant percentage of the price in compare with previous generations, if one expect these two birds have roughly same performance in these dominaces, then their price would be close, plus a land base may cause extra money to develop, so... how can you tell?
visual, maybe, but I won't expact the total area of these two to have a significant different. keep in mind J-20 is slimer than FC-31, with a relative small wingspan in compare with the other 5th gens. Also, given both fighter are twin engine, it's hard to tell if their IR signal could be significant reduced as well
you sure about that??? J-20 has side weapon bays, and equipped with PL-10, where as FC-31 doesn't even has a single dogfight missle. and both fighters have no cannon as well.
I don't think Chinese designers believe that, otherwise they won't develop J-20 in twin seater version
possible, but please remember, PLANAF also has serval hunderds of fighters other than carrier based J-15 (J-10, Su-30MKK, JH-7), so even this could come ture, I would expect PLAN order more carrier based fighters and placed some on land just for rotation.
I don't think the affordability will become an issue, what matter the most is the time.
given carrier based FC-31 just came out late last year, let's just assume the land base will come out some time late this year (a year different will be most optimisitic though), than its timeframe could be estimated by the production of J-20. J-20 takes 6 years to develop into initial production stage, and another 2 years to deploy to front line brigade, and another two years to ramp up to production speed (assume it's late last year), that's 10 years in total, which is relatively fast already.
assume land based version can borrow a lot of experience from J-20, which reduced it's development dramaticly, like to 7 years, that it will still make it late 2020s' or even early 2030s', but by then I would expect at least some 6th fighter prototypes from both China and US come out ealier...
also, for PLAAF to equip a plane with no significant advantages than current J-20/f-35 in late 20s or 30s make very less sense to me, because by then even Taiwan may get some F-35 already...
Last edited:
I don't know if FC-31 will necessarily be cheaper than J-20. Over the next few years, they will be producing WS-10 equipped J-20s at around 50 units a year. That's higher than they ever consistently produced with J-10s. With that level of guaranteed production, all the vendors involved in the supply chain can make the investment needed to lower their production costs. For example, a mass produced WS-10 could have lower unit cost than WS-21 with much smaller production guarantees. Similarly, maintenance cost for J-20 will come down over time as PLAAF has more experience with it and CAC can make more investment/modifications to lower cost of maintaining things like stealth qualities. So, there is no guarantee that J-20 will necessarily cost more to produce or maintain than FC-31.
On the other hand, there are also significant reasons for PLAAF to order FC-31. It helps SAC's case that PLAN will already be funding most of the costs in getting J-35 into production and also establishing the supply for J-35. Those are things that PLAAF does not have to fund anymore. It would require a lot less money to develop a land based version. Most of the supply chain should be the same. Since they've already done a lot of testing in the FC-31 program, a land based prototype can start flying in a couple of years and join service by 2026-2027. Remember, J-20 went from first 2011 protytype to joining service in under 3 years. FC-31 should also have certain late comer advantages. It could potentially take the lessons from J-20 and have better all around stealth performance. It could also be using newer generation stealth technology that would be easier and cheaper to maintain. One could argue later J-20 variants will also incorporate those advances. Regardless, it's quite conceivable for FC-31 to be as good in A2A combat as J-20. Although, the latter would always have more range/payload and multi-role utilities. The two seater version of the latter would also be a better fit as an EW aircraft or a distribute AWACS.
More importantly, there are industrial reasons for PLAAF to order FC-31. Based on production level of 50 a year, PLAAF could have 500 J-20s by the end of this decade. Over next 20 to 25 years, we could possibly see 1000 J-20s produced. Even if they get 6 large CATOBAR carriers, I think 300 is probably the upper limit of the number of J-35s they would need over the same time frame. While SAC will also get more orders for flanker variants over the next few years, it will still leave them quite a large gap vs CAC. In order to keep SAC somewhat in parity with CAC, I think PLAAF will also have to order a lot of SAC. It also gives them a chance to match US productions of F-35s. As we've seen with F-22s, small production run really increases cost of maintenance, reduces reliability and adds pressure to early removal from service. Having SAC consistently getting orders from both PLAAF and PLANAF will help keeping the FC-31/J-35 cost down while also supporting a healthy second major aircraft producer.
There is also certain export considerations for land version of FC-31. I don't think J-20s will get exported. If they want to be competitive in the export market, a land version of FC-31 seems to be a necessity. Just think about all the Arab countries that need a 5th generation aircraft but won't have access to F-35.
On the other hand, there are also significant reasons for PLAAF to order FC-31. It helps SAC's case that PLAN will already be funding most of the costs in getting J-35 into production and also establishing the supply for J-35. Those are things that PLAAF does not have to fund anymore. It would require a lot less money to develop a land based version. Most of the supply chain should be the same. Since they've already done a lot of testing in the FC-31 program, a land based prototype can start flying in a couple of years and join service by 2026-2027. Remember, J-20 went from first 2011 protytype to joining service in under 3 years. FC-31 should also have certain late comer advantages. It could potentially take the lessons from J-20 and have better all around stealth performance. It could also be using newer generation stealth technology that would be easier and cheaper to maintain. One could argue later J-20 variants will also incorporate those advances. Regardless, it's quite conceivable for FC-31 to be as good in A2A combat as J-20. Although, the latter would always have more range/payload and multi-role utilities. The two seater version of the latter would also be a better fit as an EW aircraft or a distribute AWACS.
More importantly, there are industrial reasons for PLAAF to order FC-31. Based on production level of 50 a year, PLAAF could have 500 J-20s by the end of this decade. Over next 20 to 25 years, we could possibly see 1000 J-20s produced. Even if they get 6 large CATOBAR carriers, I think 300 is probably the upper limit of the number of J-35s they would need over the same time frame. While SAC will also get more orders for flanker variants over the next few years, it will still leave them quite a large gap vs CAC. In order to keep SAC somewhat in parity with CAC, I think PLAAF will also have to order a lot of SAC. It also gives them a chance to match US productions of F-35s. As we've seen with F-22s, small production run really increases cost of maintenance, reduces reliability and adds pressure to early removal from service. Having SAC consistently getting orders from both PLAAF and PLANAF will help keeping the FC-31/J-35 cost down while also supporting a healthy second major aircraft producer.
There is also certain export considerations for land version of FC-31. I don't think J-20s will get exported. If they want to be competitive in the export market, a land version of FC-31 seems to be a necessity. Just think about all the Arab countries that need a 5th generation aircraft but won't have access to F-35.