SAC FC-31 Stealth Fighter: News & Discussions

[Korean]

engines definitely rd-93 at the moment, but the huge gaps around suggesting designed for larger larger diameter engines..

Chinese jets do not drop their engines to below like western jets; the engines are pulled out from behind and you need a "cap" to hold the engine in position. This is why you see the gap because the caps are not there.

 

[giant panda]

 

[UTONY]

Thanks, you know what is says in those small letters in eagles claws?

In the seal, it is engraved as "中航工业" which means AVIC (Aviation Industry Corporation of China).

 

[no_name]

I think J-21 was in competition with J-20 but lost out, so they adapted it to become the J-31 for export and also to see if the PLAN/PLANAF would be interested. I don't think they use J-21 term anymore.

 

[qinglong-china]

 

[cirr]

We need a clear picture of the front.

 

[Dazzler]

You know what these RD-93 hints at?

1. This plane is meant for PAF and is the one Sir PShamim talked about

2. There is no suitable medium thrust engine to equip the prototype (my reservations on this since they found WS-10G for J-20 out of nowhere).

Either way, these are interesting times and, more to follow...

 

[Liquidmetal]

I wish our Chinese brothers develop this technology too for these 5th Gen aircraft:

BBC News - How 'smart helmets' help pilots in the cockpit

so no need for HUD etc and have total situational awareness.

As a combination with powerful radars and suitable AA missiles, Pakistan would be silly not to join this project.

 

[gambit]

Because the F-35 design is most optimized for SVTOL, and pays the price in terms of acceleration, range, and max speed.


The Chinese engineers may not have had a choice because the F-35 is a highly draggy design that needed 40,000 lbs of thrust.


But two engines take up more space, leaving less room for fuel. The F-35 with 8.5 tons of internal fuel gets only 590 nm combat radius; and it is actually failing to achieve that range target. If the Chinese F-35 has two engines, then its fuel capacity is even lower.

The better solution was learn from the F-35 data and design a new airframe that fixes the design compromises of F-35, but the Chinese engineers decided to not to take that path, as it appears that stealth and time to market were more important than the most optimal airframe design.

Designing an aircraft -- ANY aircraft -- is an exercise in prioritizing competing demands. The final product is always the result of compromises from that priority list. You are using the wrong words -- 'defects' and 'flaws' -- to describe this process.

As far as the F-35's combat radius goes, its predecessor, the F-16, is no better and yet look how spectacular that fighter turned out.

 

[LvpAK]

a little small in shape , 2 wheels in the front leg,designed for navy? may be prepared for next carrier.

 

[monitor]

 

[gambit]

Is it a VTOL?

For a twin engine? No. Not because of mechanical complexity although it would be challenging, but 'No' because of asymmetric thrust.

In any multi-engine aircraft, each engine is already off centerline and if there is one underperforming engine for any reason, the pilot would have to do either:

1- Reduce thrust in the other engine(s) to match.

...Or...

2- Induce counter yaw via the vertical stab.

Now imagine the potentiality for disaster of one severely degraded engine coming in and try for a VTOL transition, as in a vertical landing. Now imagine what happens if one engine quit. Remember, both engines are off centerline in their thrust.

 

[a1b2c145]

鹘鹰---Falcon eagle

China usually names her air fighters after all kind of dragons！！！！！！！！！！ that's interesting！！！！！！

 

[gambit]

鹘鹰---Falcon eagle

That make no sense. Either it is a 'falcon' or an 'eagle'. Each is a bird-of-prey. There is no such beast as a 'falcon eagle' or 'eagle falcon'.

 

[帅的一匹]

Here he finally comes......what a pity!