China Unveils Yet Another Stealth Jet: Shenyang J-31

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:52 pm

Questions Abound as China Unveils Another Stealth Jet

The 185 remaining F-22s are not enough.

Stubby · Post by **Stubby** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:18 pm

just buy the j-21, looks like a copy of the raptor anyway

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 4:29 pm

AWST is calling it the J-31. Updated thread title.

It also seems to be closer to F-35 in size, with possible 360 deg thrust vectoring.

China's New Stealth Fighter. Not a repeat from December 2010.

And if you wonder about the detail similarities of the shape to the F-22 and F-35, remember this quote from 2010:

In the past year (2009) alone, Lockheed Martin found “six to eight companies” among its subcontractors “had been totally compromised – emails, their networks, everything” according to Lockheed Martin chief information security officer Anne Mullins.

That must be how they planted that sporadic virus in F-22 OBOGS.

DeltaV · Post by **DeltaV** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 4:49 pm

Time to move on to 6th gen.

Being well-versed in conspiracy theories, I don't discount the possibility that the leaks were intentional, either to feed the Chinese bad info or to ensure funding for the next gen.

http://defensetech.org/2012/01/05/lockh ... n-fighter/

But if the next airplane looks this cool, who cares :) .

Stubby · Post by **Stubby** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 5:41 pm

Now if your economy could afford said beautiful beast.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 5:55 pm

I think L-M, Boeing, N-G all do constant R&D toward future weapons systems. You won't ever see a 6th get fighter though. We already have next gen UCAV's replacing the old F-117's and you can bet they're all a generation past the F-22. There's no reason to ever put a pilot in a fighter plane again.

Sad but true.

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:43 pm

GIThruster wrote:I think L-M, Boeing, N-G all do constant R&D toward future weapons systems. You won't ever see a 6th get fighter though. We already have next gen UCAV's replacing the old F-117's and you can bet they're all a generation past the F-22. There's no reason to ever put a pilot in a fighter plane again.

Sad but true.

I sat in the seat of the F-35 simulator a year ago and I said to the engineer operator, it would not take much and this could fly unmanned. He got a big a$$ grin on his face and said "SHHHHHHH"

kunkmiester · Post by **kunkmiester** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:45 pm

F-22s replaced the F-117 at Holloman, I got out a couple years too early for it. UCAVs might be in the next black project to be revealed though.

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:41 pm

kunkmiester wrote:F-22s replaced the F-117 at Holloman, I got out a couple years too early for it. UCAVs might be in the next black project to be revealed though.

It only makes sense as the airframe now exceeds the capability of the pilots as far as G loading goes. Put the pilot in a INU or van at the base and nobody can beat him.

Stubby · Post by **Stubby** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:32 pm

in the 60s they said planes would not need guns any more and then they found their new fangled machine aka AAMs didn't work very well. Their K/D ratio went from 10:1 in Korea to 3:1 in Vietnam.
A-8 Crusader was having more success the F-4 Phantom until they put an external gun pod on the Phantom.

All this to say this nothing beats the human mind and the Mark 1 eyeball on site. The unmanned is great until your enemy figures out a way to render them useless.

And thirdly, war should not be sanitary. If it is perceived as the horror it is, than more effort will be spent to avoid it in the first place.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:10 am

And then you add passive radar into the mix and stealth seems like yesterdays news. The it will be maneurverability and speed again and maybe active defenses (lasers?). And of course having a huge fleet of UAVs that are expendable and can serve as a first wave to detect and subsequently take out an enemies launchers and other defenses can help (they might not see the radar, but they would still see where the rockets came from, I guess).

djolds1 · Post by **djolds1** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:47 am

Skipjack wrote:And then you add passive radar into the mix and stealth seems like yesterdays news. The it will be maneuverability and speed again and maybe active defenses (lasers?). And of course having a huge fleet of UAVs that are expendable and can serve as a first wave to detect and subsequently take out an enemies launchers and other defenses can help (they might not see the radar, but they would still see where the rockets came from, I guess).

Agreed about passive radar. And in a related vein, the Russians have been doing beaucoup work on radars that crack stealth. I've long thought that stealth is a wasting asset, and that the refusal to sell the F22 as widely as the F15 was lunacy. But that ship has sailed.

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:00 pm

Stubby wrote:in the 60s they said planes would not need guns any more and then they found their new fangled machine aka AAMs didn't work very well. Their K/D ratio went from 10:1 in Korea to 3:1 in Vietnam.
A-8 Crusader was having more success the F-4 Phantom until they put an external gun pod on the Phantom.

All this to say this nothing beats the human mind and the Mark 1 eyeball on site. The unmanned is great until your enemy figures out a way to render them useless.

And thirdly, war should not be sanitary. If it is perceived as the horror it is, than more effort will be spent to avoid it in the first place.

That is the beauty of the new JFS 35 if it is transitioned to UAV. The iIR view is 360/360 (due to the miracle of modern electronics so pilots eyes are still on board but the body is in a safe local. (IDK how much of the ir system is available to the public so I can not expound of it capability's. suffice to say it is awesome.) But i could easily see a pilot winning a hairball dogfight and him being safely at the airbase when the action is going on.

mvanwink5 · Post by **mvanwink5** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:24 pm

Chinese don't have to fight us, just their neighbors. What do their neighbors have? Disputed islands, no military to speak of? Also, weapons are more useful as show, war is expensive and loses customers. For those that think that military expenditures create jobs, one estimate is that for every government job or government contracted job, three are lost in the private sector. But the Chinese seem to be copying the American model in (nearly) all respects.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:31 pm

paperburn1 wrote:
Stubby wrote:in the 60s they said planes would not need guns any more and then they found their new fangled machine aka AAMs didn't work very well. Their K/D ratio went from 10:1 in Korea to 3:1 in Vietnam.
A-8 Crusader was having more success the F-4 Phantom until they put an external gun pod on the Phantom.

All this to say this nothing beats the human mind and the Mark 1 eyeball on site. The unmanned is great until your enemy figures out a way to render them useless.

And thirdly, war should not be sanitary. If it is perceived as the horror it is, than more effort will be spent to avoid it in the first place.
That is the beauty of the new JFS 35 if it is transitioned to UAV. The iIR view is 360/360 (due to the miracle of modern electronics so pilots eyes are still on board but the body is in a safe local. (IDK how much of the ir system is available to the public so I can not expound of it capability's. suffice to say it is awesome.) But i could easily see a pilot winning a hairball dogfight and him being safely at the airbase when the action is going on.

I also got a run in an F-22 sim. It was pretty darn cool as well.

The F-35 look around (I agree, need to limit public discussion) is amazing.
That and the other kit, makes it a formidable foe. F-22 or 35 in a group fight is going to be practically unbeatable. Barring a blast radius nuke, I really do not see anything out there that has a real chance. Planned, not really, luck, maybe.