Chinese SAC - FC-31/J-35 5th Gen Stealth Aircraft

So the cost of a rear EISA doen't justify losing an aircraft? Just because the Russians couldn't do it doesn't mean Pakistan and China can't do it?


Come on! Pakistan can do without China almost nothing ... forget it and as I said, high-off-bore-sight targeting makes this option no longer necessary.
 
Hope the J31s will have at least one reverse facing missile on the wing or fuselage so that if there is an enemy plane on its tail the rear plane can easily be shot down by the reverse facing air missile.
The F-35’s solution to this problem is to carry 4 towed decoys. I guess the towed decoys could have a section added to make them a little maneuverable should the cord need to be detached and the decoy made to intercept the incoming missile. As for shooting down an enemy plane, better to have side bays where a highly maneuverable ever missile can turn to hit the enemy fighter.

Although a directed energy countermeasure (like a laser defense) could be used to blind an enemy fighter pilot if it gets too close and holds still long enough.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Has now been posted almost the third time! So why again??
 
Hope the J31s will have at least one reverse facing missile on the wing or fuselage so that if there is an enemy plane on its tail the rear plane can easily be shot down by the reverse facing air missile.

How about one missile facing upwards and one facing downwards to shoot at enemy aircrafts up and below. Possibly long range laser weapon will be most suitable.
 
Interesting!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Can you explain this @Deino @Zarvan @MastanKhan . Does this mean J35 airforce version will be a variant of the J35 Navy version which is nearly ready, so this means rather than spending 10+ years on building/testing a new airforce plane China will be able to get airforce version ready within 4 years time if everything goes well ofcourse, which is around 2028 time.
 
How about one missile facing upwards and one facing downwards to shoot at enemy aircrafts up and below. Possibly long range laser weapon will be most suitable.


Can we please stop with this nonsense in a thread about the J-35?
If you really want to discuss such an aerodynamic nonsense, then please start a new thread in the Air Warfare section.


Can you explain this @Deino @Zarvan @MastanKhan . Does this mean J35 airforce version will be a variant of the J35 Navy version which is nearly ready, so this means rather than spending 10+ years on building/testing a new airforce plane China will be able to get airforce version ready within 4 years time if everything goes well ofcourse, which is around 2028 time.

As it seems, yes ... the J-35A at least from the few images known shows the same aerodynamic refinements like the revised naval variant! All what's different - similar to F-35A to F-35C - is the smaller wing & tail and the different landing gear.
 
Come on! Pakistan can do without China almost nothing ... forget it and as I said, high-off-bore-sight targeting makes this option no longer necessary.
The F-35’s solution to this problem is to carry 4 towed decoys. I guess the towed decoys could have a section added to make them a little maneuverable should the cord need to be detached and the decoy made to intercept the incoming missile. As for shooting down an enemy plane, better to have side bays where a highly maneuverable ever missile can turn to hit the enemy fighter.

Although a directed energy countermeasure (like a laser defense) could be used to blind an enemy fighter pilot if it gets too close and holds still long enough.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

This system is also on the EF and decidedly catered to radar guided systems. Today's infrared detection systems on missiles such as the Python, ASRAAM, 9X-II combined with their high off boresight maneuverability are pushing flares to the limit in their utility and active jamming is the name of the game. Helicopters already employ this but for them it is an easier task with relative velocities compared to constantly maneuvering fighters.

Putting a dazzler on the missile seeker is not an easy feat but a solution - but at the end - if you let an aircraft armed with any of these missile merge with you it is highly likely you will die unless you are this overbuilt all aspect stealth like the F-22.
 
Can we please stop with this nonsense in a thread about the J-35?
If you really want to discuss such an aerodynamic nonsense, then please start a new thread in the Air Warfare section.




As it seems, yes ... the J-35A at least from the few images known shows the same aerodynamic refinements like the revised naval variant! All what's different - similar to F-35A to F-35C - is the smaller wing & tail and the different landing gear.
If the PAF will be getting the export version of the PLAAF A Model; the AE, will the jets be equipped with the same (100 kn) engines WS-19, such that when even more higher thrust WS-19 engines become available, the engines can we swapped at the next overhaul/mlu?

 
This system is also on the EF and decidedly catered to radar guided systems. Today's infrared detection systems on missiles such as the Python, ASRAAM, 9X-II combined with their high off boresight maneuverability are pushing flares to the limit in their utility and active jamming is the name of the game. Helicopters already employ this but for them it is an easier task with relative velocities compared to constantly maneuvering fighters.

Putting a dazzler on the missile seeker is not an easy feat but a solution - but at the end - if you let an aircraft armed with any of these missile merge with you it is highly likely you will die unless you are this overbuilt all aspect stealth like the F-22.
Engaging an ir guided wvr missile close in is the ultimate challenge in difficulty. Perhaps a miniaturized hit to hill system (like the Lockheed MHTK) will be used, but more likely finding a way to getting out of the threat environment will be more optimal.
 
Can you explain this @Deino @Zarvan @MastanKhan . Does this mean J35 airforce version will be a variant of the J35 Navy version which is nearly ready, so this means rather than spending 10+ years on building/testing a new airforce plane China will be able to get airforce version ready within 4 years time if everything goes well ofcourse, which is around 2028 time.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

If FHN tweet he quoted is true then J-35 is already about to enter mass production that means my timeline was right all along. And I had no information, I only based on the fact that Air Chief has said we are inducting J-31 so it can be 4 to 5 yeas away at best 2.5 years away. J-31 is coming was announced at start of this year so by 2.5 to 3 years it should be here by mid or end of 2026.
 
If the PAF will be getting the export version of the PLAAF A Model; the AE, will the jets be equipped with the same (100 kn) engines WS-19, such that when even more higher thrust WS-19 engines become available, the engines can we swapped at the next overhaul/mlu?


PAF will probably get J35AE with WS13IPE (less powerful but more mature) engine.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Back
Top