%2Bfifth%2BGeneration%2BStealth%2BFighter%2BJet%2Bfrom%2Bits%2Bflight%2Bplaaf%2Bpakistan%2Bair%2Bforce%2Bpaf%2B(3).jpg)
Above you see a photo that the Chinese Military Review blog calls a refined model of the J-31 developed by AVIC.
What does this tell us?
Just spitballing here but the Chinese have full access (whether we like it or not) to the F-35's specs. They probably were able to steal the results of its testing and know its true capabilities.
Does this indicate that the F-35 isn't as stealthy as is being claimed? Does it mean that they desire a higher level of stealth than is available in its current form? Are they having trouble with the stealth coating and are trying to refine the shape to get it up to standard?
I have no idea.
I'll let you aviation guys fight this out, but I find it interesting. Could we finally see the Chinese move...even if its just a little (and I understand that some will say that this is just an attempt to make the J-31 look more like the F-22)...from stealing to innovating?
Time will tell.
Ok what makes it a F35 clone ? Bear in mind that edgy shapes and matching angles are basic stealth features that are public knowledge and featured by every stealth craft.Diverterless Engine intakes are already in use in J10 .Changes seem to be in line to developments on J-20
ReplyDeleteHas anyone taken the time to determine the angle of wing-sweep in that design?
ReplyDeleteThere was a new study out last month by CSBA titled "Towards a New Offset Strategy." In it, among many long term strategic recommendations, they called the F-35 "semi-stealth." They prefer full stealth (large aircraft w/o vertical tails) long range strike aircraft - like LRS-B - over short ranged tactical aircraft like F-35. They suggest curtailing F-35, and canceling the F-35C outright, and replacing them with Advanced Super Hornets. This is the think tank that Bob Work sat, not some contractor supported organization like Lexington Institute.
ReplyDeleteAs for the J-31, the engines suck and are smokey - not something that should be on a stealth aircraft. Copying engines is many orders of magnitude more difficult than imitating an air vehicle shape. The Chinese have actual Russian engines in their possession, and they still have a difficult time counterfeiting those, so....
ReplyDeleteIn mean time Russians are testing the new gen engine for PAK-DA one thing that is a bit funny is that ex commies Russians and Chinese are doing private venture R&D developing whole aircraft on company budgets while in the US and EU must R&D are 100% on taxpayers shoulder
Deletehttp://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/russia-tests-engine-for-new-bomber-405805/
They key element of F-35 -- they can be used as unmanned drones after a few software updates. Unlikely chineese copycats can do that.
ReplyDeleteHope you're joking. Otherwise it's just more useless capabilities adding to the expense and diluting the plane's operational focus still further. If we need drones, engineer a drone. It'll be better performing AND much cheaper.
DeleteThe danger isn't in the Chinese innovating, because that's culturally hard for them. The danger is in them refining our more roughly hewn (and expensive) technology ideas into cheaper, more efficient systems.
ReplyDeleteTake the F35, run it through the Chinese refinement mill a few times, and you'll see a much more focused, dangerous aircraft at half or less of the cost.
No need to get F-35 specs Sol, the equations for radar wave refraction are public domain (Russian in fact), all they need is the basic shape, which everyone that has a camera can get, then program the equations into a computer and tweak. If the US can take Russian public domain info and make a stealth fighter, I'm sure the Chinese can raid the Russians too.
ReplyDeleteThe more "Top Secret" thing is the hull material composition. Won't be surprised if the Chinese are close to getting or already have a sample to reverse engineer.