By Kris Osborn, President, Warrior
The Chinese military has taken a new step with its carrier-launched, stealth fighter jet intended to rival the US F-35C, by formally naming the FC-31 5th-generation aircraft the Gyrfalcon.
The new aircraft, which has been in development for many years but only exists in the form of a few prototypes, closely resembles the F-35 in terms of its fuselage and external configuration. However, not only does the aircraft simply not exist in operational numbers in terms of any combat or “air-fleet” presence, but its capabilities are very much an open, if even unanswered, question.
The aircraft, designed as an ocean-launched multi-role fighter, has been described in Chinese-government-backed newspapers in recent years as a stealthy 5th-generation fighter upgraded with advanced, a soon-to-integrate domestically-built Chinese engine (like the J-20) and a stealthy, F-35-like internal weapons bay. The Chinese papers, such as the Global Times, have also discussed a number of key upgrades to the plane throughout its development.
Should the emerging aircraft operate in any way comparable to a US Navy F-35C, it could go a long way toward closing the PRC’s massive ocean-launched 5th-gen deficit with the US and its allies. However, the US, Japan and South Korea together already operate hundreds of F-35s in the region when forward positioned US Navy carriers and amphibs are considered. Certainly the Pentagon has expressed concerns about China’s growing domestic production capacity, something which might further close this gap in coming years.
However, apart from its mere existence, there are many relevant, if somewhat difficult to discern, answers and questions associated with the emergence of this aircraft. Specifically, to what extent can it truly rival or match US Navy 5th-generation F-35B and F-35C? Answers to these kinds of questions likely occupy some unknown or yet-to-be-answered space, yet they pertain directly to sensing, computing, mission systems, fire control, weapons integration and of course stealth properties.
For instance, even if the FC-31 appears stealthy, that does not instantly translate into an F-35-like ability to sense, target and destroy enemy targets at standoff ranges with long-range high-fidelity sensing. A stealthy FC-31 exterior, which may or may not contain F-35-like radar absorbent materials and composites, does not mean the FC-31s computing, data library or mission data files, are in any way comparable to the F-35, nor does it indicate any kind of similar weapons range, guidance and targeting precision.
Software upgrades, for instance, continue to expand the F-35’s weapons envelope, range and targeting precision, and there are likely questions to answer about many of the FC-31s. US Air Force wargames, such as Red Flag, have for instance shown that the US F-35 is able to see, target and destroy groups of 4th-generation fighter jets from distances where it remains undetectable. The range and resolution of these sensors, coupled with the computing and software enabled weapons capability, suggests the F-35 operates with a unique advantage when compared with other fighter jets. How would the FC-31 compare in these respects? The relative quality of many of its purported attributes would certainly prove less relevant if the aircraft could not see the F-35 while being targeted and destroyed by an F-35. What if it is simply out-ranged?
F-35 Stealth Rip-Off?
As for its external configuration, the FC-31 certainly looks stealthy, and is arguable somewhat indistinguishable from a US F-35, or at very least quite similar. Few are surprised by this as the PRC has long been known for its cyber espionage and specific efforts to rip-off US weapons specs and technologies. Similarities between the PLA’s J-20 and FC-31 and 5th-generation aircraft have on several occasions been noted with concern and discussed in public Pentagon news reports, and a Congressional report on China, called the US-China Economic and Security Review as far back as 2014 cited PRC theft of US military technologies as a serious national security concern as well. The text of the Congressional report also cites numerous public news reports identifying specific instances of US weapons systems and designs which were stolen by the Chinese. Sure enough, the F-35 is mentioned as one of the targeted US weapons systems, as cited in the public Congressional report. The 2014 “U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission” Congressional report specifically cites a Defense Science Board finding that Chinese cyber attacks resulted in the theft of significant specs and technical details of a range of U.S. weapons systems—including the F-35.
Sure enough a quick observers look at the FC-31, shows inlet shapes virtually identical to the US F-35, and the front end of the aircraft with the pilots seat closely resemble and F-35. The FC-31 even appears to have a fuselage-wing-blended gun or weapon of some kind. Its back half, quite significantly, resembles an F-22 to an extent as it has rounded twin-engines and vertically extending fins. An interesting July, 2024 essay in Army Recognition offers a look at some of the key specs associated with the Chinese aircraft.
“Externally, the FC-31 has six hardpoints capable of carrying various weapons, with a total payload of up to 8,000 kg, including bombs and missiles,” the Army recognition essay states.. The existence of the hardpoints suggests that the aircraft may have an F-35C-like Beast Mode capacity to operate as a kind of “bomb truck” weapon, yet external hard-points can increase radar signature and decrease stealth properties depending upon placement and configuration. The Army recognition essay also states that the FC-31 can reach speeds up to Mach 1.8 and hit maximum non-combat ranges of 4,000km. Should these figures be accurate, it would appear the FC-31 is similar in speed to the roughly Mach 1.6 speed of the F-35C, yet possible able to operate at longer ranges. This seems unconfirmed to be certain, yet a range of 4,000km does seem longer than the 1,300 mile combat range of the F-35C. Perhaps this relates to fuel storage capacity, yet a “non-combat” range is typically much longer than a combat range as it suggests an aircraft can travel without the weight or weapons or need to burn fuel at maximum speeds.
The FC-31 “is powered by two Klimov RD-93 turbofans, the same engines used in the Russian MiG-29, providing a combat radius of about 1,200 km with a takeoff weight of 25,400 kg. It can reach speeds of up to Mach 1.8 (approximately 2,200 km/h) with a maximum non-combat range of 4,000km,” the Army recognition essay states. However, the essay also indicates that the PLA will likely replace the RD-93 with a domestically engineered engine as has been the case with the J-20.
J-31 v. F-35 Similarities
As far back as several years ago, another Global Times report said the J-31 showed design improvements at the 2019 Paris Air Show. Photos from the story reveal profound visual similarities between the F-35 and J-31. This is not without precedent, as the Chinese media
itself has noted similarities between the two aircraft.
Portions of a story from the Chinese government’s “People’s Daily Online” as far back as 2013 specifically cites design similarity between the emerging Chinese J-31 and the F-35, writing that the “J-31 and F-35 use the same DSI inlet (non-boundary layer-separated lane supersonic inlet).” The only major difference, the paper notes, is that the U.S. has an F-35B Short Take Off and Landing variant and that the J-31 uses two engines compared to the F-35’s single engine propulsion configuration.
The article’s reference to a “non-boundary layer separated lane supersonic inlet” appears both interesting and significant, as it pertains to designs engineered to manage heat and air movement signatures demonstrated by the aerodynamic phenomenon of air flow surrounding supersonic flight. “Boundary layer” aerodynamics, referring to the air flow surrounding a weapon or platform as it transits, can greatly impact the flight stability and stealth characteristics of an aircraft.
Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
