SAC - FC-31 Grey Falcon Stealth aircraft for PAF : Updates & Debate

[Ghessan]

intelligence does not come easy, one who talk intelligent only worth when he is a big mouth and big mouth be little others hence always harsh and not easy to swallow.

knowledge when come, it stays and bring more of everything only by furthering of it in a sea of the fields of life with time and age. it does not only help learn something respective but open the mind up to a universal level and by understanding of things due to observation which is then correct by a refined brain to the level next to everything.

knowledge is not understood, it is beyond that and surprise every time until you are in a company of "the people" which is hard to find.

challenging knowledge is ignorance which is easily available and sell cheap.

 

[MastanKhan]

https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/is-china-rethinking-the-shenyang-j-31-fighter/

Moreover, the United States has repeatedly suggested that the J-31 depends on several technologies stolen from the F-35, which might also create concerns for fighter customers sensitive to U.S. intellectual property law. The ability of the United States to interfere with arms transactions between China and Russia portends ill for states that try to purchase technologies that the U.S. regards as stolen.

Unlike the F-35, the J-31 has two engines, making it more palatable to the naval aviation community. These engines will reportedly be a upgrade of the WS-13 engine currently used by the JF-17. Given that China continues to struggle with the larger, more complex engines on the J-20, this success may serve to make the J-31 an even more attractive option. Indeed, Perret and Trimble also report that the PLAAF will acquire some number of J-31s, given that the navy will be paying the bulk of development and testing costs in any case.

Problems remain with the J-31. While the airframe seems to strongly resemble the F-35, there is little reason to believe that it integrates the kind of technology suite that makes the F-35 uniquely lethal. Moreover, the J-31 still requires years of development. But at this point, it looks like the PLAN may have a plan for its first real generation of carrier aircraft.

The views expressed here are his personal views and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Defense, the U.S. Army, the Army War College, or any other department or agency of the U.S. government.

@Deino --
you just talk clever---

Here you are denying US govt's reports about china's J31 and US F35 issues---.

 

[araz]

Okay, so I do understand the comparison you made in the US/Israel & Pakistan/China relations - there is a difference when it comes to the F-22 (Raptor) & the J-20. (If) the United States were willing to sell the Raptor to Israel, that ship has sailed & though the Raptor may be the most advanced, capable and expensive jet out there. Its been out of production for nearly a decade. I don't Lockheed Martin jump starting that project with Congress against it. And people should also be aware that the US are not going to take a bullet for Israel either, infact could throw them under the bus for their own interests. The Israel F-16 sale to Croatia was a glimpse that picture ain't that perfect.

The J-20, on the other hand is something new and if there is something we've learned is that the Chinese will do probably anything to piss off the United States. Case in Point: Huawei 5G

I'm not certain if I got your point about PAF - J-20 - Chinese - Own Pilots.

Its either:
a) PAF requesting PLAAF J-20's to be stationed in Pakistan.
b) PAF paying/buying J-20's & have Chinese Pilots to operate them.

Option (A) would make sense (kind of), but what kind of Govt would opt for Option (B)?!!

Personally (& this is my opinion), but I just don't think that the J-20's can only be assessable after/if the Chinese were to come up with a better/next generation jet.

Finally, I would (again) like to come back to the point I raised in my last post. What's so special about the J-20, that the Chinese have put the label "Not for Export". One can/could understand US's stand for the F-22 (Raptor), but China's stand puzzles me...

Does the stealth coating have the DNA of a certain chopper they somehow got their hands on?

A few random thoughts regarding your post. Firstly I dont think China is where it needs to be to take on a fight with the US. The Huawei point you mentioned is a life or death situation for the Chinese telecom industry but it will not translate into a full blown war or possibly even a full blown trade war with the US. Neither sides can afford it and at some stage depending on the relative strengths in the argument of both sides compromises will be made. Idont think Chinese naval developments are quite there to match the US. However push coming to shove, the Chinese can give the US A bloody nose if not a full blown knock out in this game either. So I think this is aggressive posturing which will be used to gain a relative strength or weak posture which can then be used to negotiate a trade settlement. I think it would be extremely unwise of either parties to indulge in aggressive actions so beyond posturing to gain strength HOPEFULLY(there are stages of aggression and the risk is one or the other party may lose their nerve and then send things into a spiral of no retuurn) nothing much more will happen.
J20 vis a vis Paklands is an interesting scenario. Iagree that China will not part with it but at what stage do the stakes go high enough for China to reconsider is an interesting analytical dilemma for us arm chair generals. Ex CAS in hks last speech gave some parameters for project Azm. If I remember it said 6k km range which only J20 can cover. J31 is fast approaching its end of life and without support from PLAN might die a slow death. Iwill gladly accept otherwise but my memory suggests that it does not have the requisite range to qualify for PAF. So PAF may either get J20 in limited numbers to maintain parity and then continue on Azm as a single engined fighter or if things improve significantly may go for the TFX/ chinese single seat offering as joint production. Where the money for all of this is going to come from is anyone's guess. I dont for my sins see Paklands economy improving in the short to middle term.
A

 

[Deino]

I knew would bring again these BS report and as I already said - in fact offered to as an explanation for our dispute - these reports are all politically biased, aimed for a certain public interest to spur opinion and not a fact. Every Lockheed Martin designer know that they are not a copy, ... only you still think so.

but again, it is all on the definition of "copy" and IMO a C919 is not a copy or an A320 or B-737 even if they are even more similar than the F-35 and FC-31. Therefore holding this opinion the FC-31 is a bold-by-bolt copy of the F-35 is plain stupid.

And by the way, quoting Nationalinterest.org and Dave Majumdar as a reliable source says everything.

But yes, tell the world how stupid I am, bring out my name just to rub my face in the dirt to let me ... anyone with a common sense agrees with that statue below.

Nuff said

https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/is-china-rethinking-the-shenyang-j-31-fighter/
....
Here you are denying US govt's reports about china's J31 and US F35 issues---.

Again more blablabla from You, several issues I do not question and even agree, but the point of calling it a copy is plain stupid and even more ridiculous is to think Pakistan can simply say I want and China jumps and delivers, even more the blue-prints of the FC-31 & WS-19 so that You can "easily develop a single engines type". That is so much utterly nonsense ....

 

[MastanKhan]

and even more ridiculous is to think Pakistan can simply say I want and China jumps and delivers,

Hi,

Pakistan asked and china has---. The 054's---possible delivery to start next year---the submarine possible delivery to start next year---. That is close to 6 billion dollars +++ deal---.

 

[LeGenD]

@Deino

I agree with you in this, FC-31 is not a clone of F-35 and/or F-22 upon a closer look. In fact, FC-31 is technically more similar to Su-57 (LO design).

J-20 is China's true experiment in developing something close to American 5th generation aircraft but still a vastly different design. China have defined its own jet design classes actually.

 

[Ultima Thule]

@Deino

I agree with you, FC-31 is not a clone of either F-35 and F-22 upon a closer look. In fact, FC-31 is technically more similar to Su-57 (LO design).

J-20 is China's true experiment in developing something close to American 5th generation but still a vastly different design. China have defined its own jet design classes actually.

What F-31 is more similar to Su-57, please explain how, and there are no clear definition on VLO/LO designs, J-20 is VLO design similar to F-22 in frontal aspects but in rear aspects we should wait until WS-15 will install on J-20 in 2023 @LeGenD

 

[LeGenD]

What F-31 is more similar to Su-57, please explain how, and there are no clear definition on VLO/LO designs, J-20 is VLO design similar to F-22 in frontal aspects but in rear aspects we should wait until WS-15 will install on J-20 in 2023 @LeGenD

Have a closer look:-

Both are vastly different designs, and FC-31 is not VLO (not even close).

FC-31 is technically similar to Russian jets (look at the entire aft/rear section), even frontal cone, radar system and engines in use. There is some difference in S-duct aspect mainly.

LO = 1.0 m^2 - 0.01 m^2 uniform RCS range
VLO = 0.001 m^2 and lower uniform RCS range

 

[Ultima Thule]

Have a closer look:-

Both are vastly different designs, and FC-31 is not VLO (not even close).

FC-31 is technically similar to Russian jets (look at the entire aft/rear section). Even frontal cone and radar structures are technically similar to Russian jets.

LO = 1.0 m^2 - 0.01 m^2 uniform RCS range
VLO = 0.001 m^2 and lower uniform RCS range

and what about lots of bumps on F-35 fuselage they should increase RCS from all angle, Stealth first rule that fuselage clean and smooth surfaces as much as can, that F-22/FC-31/J-20 using this rule, F-35 has bigger RCS than those jet, i thinks @LeGenD

 

[LeGenD]

and what about lots of bumps on F-35 fuselage they should increase RCS from all angle, Stealth first rule that fuselage clean and smooth surfaces as much as can, that F-22/FC-31/J-20 using this rule, F-35 has bigger RCS than those jet, i thinks @LeGenD

FC-31 prototype (31001) have such a clean bottom and surface because it is not finalized and lacking in key war-fighting technicalities (tech-demonstrator).

F-35 in the images I provided in my earlier post, is/was operating with "radar reflectors."

---

F-35 operating in VLO mode for reference.

Absolutely clean bottom is not necessary to ensure VLO output, and neither technically feasible in a complex war-fighting machine. Nevertheless, F-35 have smooth and shapely edges all around, and look at its aft section (VLO-compliant engine design; details below*).

Su-57 have two very long and sharp protruding edges in comparison, and look at the aft/rear section (not VLO; traditional Russian).

---

Both F-35 and F-22 operating in testing phase(s) below.

---

VLO design philosophy is a very complex domain with lot of minute details that are not clear to public.

---

*One of the largest sources of RCS is the engine + exhaust nozzles combo.

Engine of F-35 is designed to have a small thermal footprint and deflect radar waves with its carefully designed serrated exhaust nozzles.

Unusually long exhaust pipe which narrows down the viewing angle from where hot & highly-reflective parts are visible to an IRST/radar and there is also a radar blocker in the exhaust pipe.

 

[Ultima Thule]

FC-31 prototype (31001) have such a clean bottom and surface because it is not finalized and lacking in key war-fighting technicalities (tech-demonstrator).

---

F-35 operating in VLO mode for reference.

Absolutely clean bottom is not necessary to ensure VLO output, and neither technically feasible in a complex war-fighting machine. Nevertheless, F-35 have smooth and shapely edges all around, and look at the engine rear (VLO design format).

Su-57 have sharp protruding edges in comparison, and look at the aft/rear section = not even a semblance of VLO in there.

---

Both F-35 and F-22 operating in testing phase(s) below.

NOTE: F-35 in the images I provided in my earlier post, is/was operating with radar reflectors.

---

VLO design philosophy is a very complex domain with lot of minute details that are not clear to public.

---

One of the largest sources of RCS is the engine.

Engine of F-35 is designed to have a small thermal footprint and deflect radar waves with its carefully designed serrated nozzles.

Unusually long exhaust pipe which narrows down the viewing angle from where hot & highly-reflective parts are visible to an IRST/radar and there is also a radar blocker in the exhaust pipe.

Sir you are too much inspire USA tech, F-35 bottom bumps for underside of its fuselage might increase its RCS from below, Russian has no $$$ to build true 5th gen VLO designs, if you thinks FC-31 in development stages then why you compare it to F-35/Su-57 which are more complete projects currently @LeGenD

 

[LeGenD]

Sir you are too much inspire USA tech, F-35 bottom bumps for underside of its fuselage might increase its RCS from below, Russian has no $$$ to build true 5th gen VLO designs, if you thinks FC-31 in development stages then why you compare it to F-35/Su-57 which are more complete projects currently @LeGenD

US is the driver of innovation worldwide including in China, and the undisputed leader in the domain of aeronautical engineering. China have to prove its mettle in this domain on the other hand.

F-35(x) Block-3f (approved for mass production) have a uniform RCS of 3.8 mm (0.0003 - 0.0004 m^2 range) in VLO mode = information declassified by the Air Force Magazine source in 2019 recently.

What can you tell about the uniform rcs of FC-31 in person just from pictures? Any insider source? Any finalized design? NOTHING, just wild assumptions. The jet looks far from complete to me TBH.

Fixed this image in my previous post - bottom technicalities of F-35 - a very well-equipped warfighting machine on the whole.

 

[Avicenna]

Americans are drivers of innovation worldwide including in Chin, and undisputed leader in aeronautical engineering - do I have to highlight this simple fact to you?

F-35(x) Block 3f (mass production variant) have a uniform RCS of 3.8 mm in VLO mode = information declassified by the Air Force Magazine source in 2019 recently.

What do you know about FC-31 in person? Any concrete uniform rcs figure? Any finalized design? NOTHING, just wild assumptions. The jet looks far from complete to me.

That is a complete and a very complex war-machine.

No one can touch the US when it comes to aerial warfare.

 

[Humble Analyst]

Hi @Deino

I have yet to see an article about J31 that does not say it to not to be a copy of the F35---.

The reports presented in front of the US congress / senate say the same thing about the stolen design---.

They don't know---but the great @Deino knows it all---even though the chinese were spanked hard for stealing the design features of the F35---but as they did not inform you---it did not happen---.

Deino---I know what I know---I just bring out your name just to rub your face in the dirt to let you know---if pakistan wants it---it will get it from china---just like the 8 sub contract---just like the 4 type 054's in production---an over 6 billion dollar deal---.

These are just 3 links at random on the web comparing the j31 to be a design of the F35---.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...lth-fighter-vs-chinas-new-j-31-who-wins-13938

https://www.businessinsider.com/9-p...t-version-of-the-f-35-stealth-fighter-2018-10


https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/g23303922/china-copycat-air-force/

Shenyang J-31 and the U.S. F-35

VCG AND YICHUAN CAO/NURPHOTOGETTY IMAGES
Like the F-22, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was also compromised by Su Bin, leading to China’s J-31 program. This jet, still under development, possesses a greater operational range and larger payload capacity than the F-35 it was based on. There is an expectation that the J-31 will become China’s primary carrier-based fighter once it reaches full production, replacing the PLA-N’s troubled J-15 once it enters service. Like the J-20 program, the J-31 is limited by China’s inexperience with stealth aircraft.

Aesthetically, the J-31 seems to borrow heavily from both the F-35 and F-22 programs, suggesting that it may be lighter and more maneuverable than America’s top-tier fighter. But it does lack some degree of the F-35’s stealth characteristics, as well as the American jet’s real claim to fame—a sensor suite that offers the pilot greater awareness of the battlespace.

In many ways, the F-35 serves not only as a fighter, but as a data hub. There is no indication that China’s J-31 has been able to fuse such a large variety of feeds into a singular manageable interface. That means the F-35’s ability to fight from beyond the horizon won’t be found in its Chinese knock-off.


https://nationalinterest.org/blog/t...lth-fighter-vs-chinas-new-j-31-who-wins-13938

China is not eager to share the stealth technology with Pakistan at the moment and this is the reality

 

[Readerdefence]

China is not eager to share the stealth technology with Pakistan at the moment and this is the reality

Hi my friend if I may say to add precisely not eager to share at the moment and specifically with J20
Thank you