Shenyang FC-31 demonstrators / J-35 naval fighter / J-35A land-based version

lancer21 said:
Well apart from the different tails, the baseline aircraft is still visually very similar to J-35 except of course many detail improvements.
Click to expand...

As a demonstrator J-31 1.0 was a bit crudely crafted and the all black paint job with silver nosecone didn’t do it much favor. J-35 incorporated the best aesthetics from both the Raptor and F-35, with the exception of the hump behind the cockpit.
 
The new situation in the Middle East presents the largest window of opportunity yet for J-35A exports, which may not close for a long time.
 
Deino said:
Finally …


View attachment 785659View attachment 785660View attachment 785661View attachment 785662View attachment 785663View attachment 785664View attachment 785665View attachment 785666View attachment 785667
Click to expand...
me-and-bro-celebrating.gif
 
Okay so why the different code names for the J-35? Blue Shark for PLAN (unofficial) and Cloud Dragon for PLAAF, it is going to be confusing for some people out there to begin with.
 

China’s Aircraft Carrier Capability Just Made A Stunning Leap Forward​

www.twz.com

China's Aircraft Carrier Capability Just Made A Stunning Leap Forward

China has simultaneously debuted its J-35 stealth fighter, J-15T fighter and KJ-600 radar plane operating from its first catapult-equipped carrier. The J-35 and J-15T naval fighters and KJ-600 radar plane are all now conducting operations aboard the carrier Fujian, as it prepares for service.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 
FighterJock said:
Okay so why the different code names for the J-35? Blue Shark for PLAN (unofficial) and Cloud Dragon for PLAAF, it is going to be confusing for some people out there to begin with.
Click to expand...
PLAAF tends to name their recent fighters in relation to dragons, vigorous dragon, mighty dragon, now cloud dragon.

While the PLANs J-15 was named the flying shark, so naming the J-35 something with shark creates a continuity. (although white shark (白鲨) or perhaps even bull shark (牛鲨) would have been cooler than simply naming it blue shark.)

See it like this, the USN had many feline designations and the USAF bird of prey. This is similar, just with sharks and dragons.

It furthermore makes sense when one realizes that the dragon is a national symbol of China, similar to the Bald Eagle in the United States.
 
Last edited:
Having read the J-50 thread and seeing someone comparing the J-50 visually to the Su-57 I actually came to notice that the J-35s pleasing proportions are kinda reminiscent of it's European cousin. In fact, in terms of proportions it shares more similarities with the Su-57 than with the F-35 which it's being accused of copying (although looking completely different). The Eurasian jets are proportionally longer and less stout than their American counterpart.

To emphasize what I mean (not to scale):
retouch_2025092602121196.jpg IMG_20250926_023759.jpg IMG_20250926_023816.jpg IMG_20250926_023841.jpg

Is this some valuable discovery? Not really, but I found it intriguing. It certainly makes sense that both are considered beautiful though, given that they share similar aesthetic traits and proportions. One could say that SAC carried over the looks when they transitioned from Sino-Flankers to their all new stealth fighter.

Other interesting details include the fact that the J-35s canopy starts significantly after the imaginary line drawn by the DSI. Furthermore, similarly to the Su-57 it seems to have made some sacrifices to rear visibility. Or perhaps it's considered less important. On top of that the F-35s landing gear is positioned further forward compared to it's Chinese counterpart. On the F-35 the doors open more or less parallel to the canopy, while on the J-35 the landing gear doors are positioned further back. The EOTS is another obvious difference.

Obviously the J-35 is overall flatter and has two engines and a bit of a small tail between them, it should be easy even for amateurs to tell them apart at a moments notice when they are familiar with either aircraft. So the engines and proportions should be the major difference one should look for.

So this has become a rather lengthy tangent on the appearance of the J-35, F-35 and a cameo from the Su-57. Again, it's nothing particularly important, but I just assumed some would enjoy the direct comparison of the general shape, proportions and details present on these aircraft. And maybe this can serve as an entry guide for people who have difficulties to tell the two apart. Not necessarily forum members, but guests who stumble upon this thread on their search for more info about the J-35.
 
Last edited:
Tomboy said:
Interestingly J-35A uses WS-19 from the get go but J-35 uses WS-21. It's also odd how WS-19 which is comparable to WS-15 technology is actually in active service sooner than it despite the head start.
Click to expand...

Didn't even know there were two different engines being used.

Is there any info on these engines and their differences? Is the WS-19 possibly earmarked for another PLAAF platform, so that for reasons of commonality it may make sense for the PLAAF?
 
Scorpion82 said:
Didn't even know there were two different engines being used.

Is there any info on these engines and their differences? Is the WS-19 possibly earmarked for another PLAAF platform, so that for reasons of commonality it may make sense for the PLAAF?
Click to expand...
WS-19 is a cleansheet design similar in technology as the WS-15, iirc decently credible rumors say it could do up to 127kN while WS-21 is just a interrim engine which is based on the WS-13 which itself is based on the RD-93. Also WS-19 is probably not used on anything else, it's designed to be a medium sized engine but as PLAAF do not operate any other fighters that use engines of this size, it's probably not used on anything else. J-35 will probably switch to WS-19 along with the rumored 2D nozzle.
 
Tomboy said:
WS-19 is a cleansheet design similar in technology as the WS-15, iirc decently credible rumors say it could do up to 127kN while WS-21 is just a interrim engine which is based on the WS-13 which itself is based on the RD-93. Also WS-19 is probably not used on anything else, it's designed to be a medium sized engine but as PLAAF do not operate any other fighters that use engines of this size, it's probably not used on anything else. J-35 will probably switch to WS-19 along with the rumored 2D nozzle.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the explaination. With hintsight of the J-15s engine choice vs PLAAF J-11/16 the navy version may simply be powered by a more proven engine and the WS-21 might be a navalised version (corrosion protection), while the newer WS-19 on the newer J-35A PLAAF version may lack it (adaption to naval ops). Just conjecture, but it might be an explanation for the different engine choices.

Btw 127 kN seems quite a lot for an engine of this size.
 
Also WS-19 is probably not used on anything else, it's designed to be a medium sized engine but as PLAAF do not operate any other fighters that use engines of this size, it's probably not used on anything else.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Kinda makes it a chinese F414, as in Super Hornet and Boramae. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_F414
 
EmoBirb said:
Is this some valuable discovery? Not really, but I found it intriguing. It certainly makes sense that both are considered beautiful though, given that they share similar aesthetic traits and proportions. One could say that SAC carried over the looks when they transitioned from Sino-Flankers to their all new stealth fighter.
Click to expand...

It'd be interesting to see the J-50 added to this (using the most recent references).
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom