Home » Aviation » U.S. Pilots Say New Chinese Stealth Fighter Could Become Equal of F-22, F-35

U.S. Pilots Say New Chinese Stealth Fighter Could Become Equal of F-22, F-35

An undated photo of the Shenyang-J-31

An undated photo of the Shenyang-J-31

China’s new Shenyang J-31 stealth fighter — making its debut next week at the Zhuhai international airshow — could eventually become more than a match for American stealth fighters in battle, several U.S. military and industry officials told USNI News.

The J-31 is China’s latest crack at developing a modern so-called fifth-generation stealth fighter — equivalent in ability to Lockheed Martin’s F-22 Raptor or F-35 Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter.

“They’re still in the glossy brochure phase of development, so they still look ten feet tall and bulletproof,” one senior U.S. fighter pilot familiar with the F-35 program told USNI News.
“I think they’ll eventually be on par with our fifth gen jets — as they should be, because industrial espionage is alive and well.”

An undated photo of the Shenyang-J-31

An undated photo of the Shenyang-J-31

Many suspect the J-31 is designed using technology stolen from the Pentagon’s nearly $400 billion Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.

“They sure look like F-35 and F-22s don’t they?” one Air Force operational test pilot told USNI News.

A U.S. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Lockheed Martin Photo

A U.S. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Lockheed Martin Photo

The senior U.S. pilot familiar with the F-35 — who has extensive experience flying the Lockheed Martin F-16 Falcon — told USNI News the Chinese jet is now likely more than match for existing fourth generation non stealth American fighters like the Air Force Falcons, Boeing F-15 Eagles and the U.S. Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

“They’ll probably be a handful right off the bat for all of our fourth gen stuff,” the pilot said.

One former Air Force fighter pilot extensive experience with foreign hardware told USNI News potential air battles might be more about sheer number of jets the Chinese might be able to put into the air versus the superior training of U.S. pilots.

“I worry about numbers more than particular platforms,” the former fighter pilot said.
“I imagine their jets and their weapons are pretty good. Don’t know about the pilots or their capacity to employ.”

Further, the retired pilot noted, airshows are designed to show off weapons to potential buyers, but offer no real information about what jet can really do during an actual combat mission.

“Just remember that airshows are exactly that — airshows.” the former pilot said. “Airshows provide no real clue to capabilities. As such, airshows generally rely on spectacular maneuvers to garner attention without providing substance. No different from the F-15C or the F-22.”

One current Air Force test pilot told USNI News that it would be difficult to gauge just how good the Chinese jet will be.

“Overall at this stage they’re not [operational] so it’s hard, for anyone to truly make a reasonable assessment,” the test pilot said.

There are still many unanswered questions about how the Chinese will operate their aircraft and what kinds of weapons the jets will carry. Perhaps the most important question is how good are the Chinese radars and other sensors compared to their American equivalents.

“How well will organic sensors work to support those weapons?” the test pilot asked rhetorically.

An undated photo of the Shenyang-J-31

An undated photo of the Shenyang-J-31

For U.S. industry officials, the J-31’s debut at the Zhuhai airshow signals that the Chinese are planning on selling the jet on the open market.

“I would characterize the J-31 flying at the Chinese airshow as ‘incremental and measured,’” a senior industry official told USNI News.

“There have been some reports that the J-31 maybe be exported. If so, then showing it off makes even more sense to attract prospective buyers,” the official said.

The Chinese are making a lot of progress in developing their aerospace industry.

However, jet engines remain a weak spot for China.

“They have yet to field many of their “new” designs in any quantities,” the industry official said.
“Time will tell.”

Meanwhile, the Russia’s advanced Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker-E is also making it debut at the Zhuhai airshow.

The Chinese are reportedly interested in the purchase of 24 examples of the modernized Russian-built jet.

There has been much media speculation that the Chinese intend to reverse engineer the aircraft as they have with previous Flanker variants.

“I view the Su-35 buy as a conservative stop-gap measure while they wait for the J-20 and J-31 to enter service,” the industry official said.
“Gotta have aircraft to have an air force.”

  • Jiesheng Li

    Well for starters it has no internal gun or gun pod…(not the the British F-35Bs will immediately have a gun pod)

    • Raptor1

      They don’t NEED a gun, they can’t get close enough to use it anyways – Unless, of course, they classify their childish brushes with our unarmed recon aircraft in International airspace as the ability to get into a knife-fight and win. I’d encourage them to try that with a Raptor, but they have to be able to SEE what’s in the area in order to even try it – It’d just be suicide 🙂

      • Jiesheng Li

        Right so why does the F-22 and F-35 A have a gun?

      • Tommy

        That’s what they thought with the f4. Then in Vietnam they realized THEY NEED A GUN!! Since then every American fighter will have a gun because when all else fails or you’re out of missiles you still have something to defend yourself with. Remember…missiles still can be jammed.

        • Ctrot

          Vietnam was almost 50 years ago, the “that’s what they thought about the F4” has reached and well exceeded its expiration date. The missiles we have to day compared to the Vietnam era missiles are like comparing an iPhone to a rotary phone.

          • Chesapeakeguy

            Tommy’s point about the F-4 and Vietnam is still a valid one. It’s the same kind of mistake some had made within our defense establishment who believed all conflicts would be nuclear after the the A-bomb, then the H-bomb, were developed and deployed. ‘Conventional war’ could ‘never’ happen again according to them, and a big part of our defense policy embraced that for some number of years. While the point about air-to-air missile improvement is also a valid one, guns are used for purposes other than air combat or ground strafing. To force a plane down (to make it land), or to make it identify itself, shots are fired to get the offending plane’s attention. It’s the aircraft’s way of ‘firing a shot across the bow’. I know that doesn’t happen often but it is a real possibility of it happening. And as has also been pointed out, if guns are no longer needed, why do both the US Raptors and the Lightnings have them?

        • H. H. GAFFNEY

          We built the F4E with a gun for the air battles over North Vietnam.

        • Paul

          Raptor1 was not implying that it doesn’t need a gun – He was being sarcastic, I thought that was pretty clear; I should know, I wrote it 🙂

  • Chesapeakeguy

    Gee, they somehow came up with a platform that looks EXACTLY like ours! is that a case of ‘great minds thinking alike’? Yeah, right…

    • bucherm

      Exactly? No, not “exactly”.

      Not to downplay the espionage, but when you have a similar problem(stealth), have similar tools(CAD), you’re gonna come up with a similar solution. In the wild ti’s called convergent evolution.

      • Raptor1

        No matter… By the time they “convergently evolve” an engine that can push their aircraft along fast enough to compete with the Raptor without disintegrating in flight, we’ll be on our third generation of the F119. 🙂

      • sferrin

        That would explain why the X-35, X-32, and McDonnell Douglas/NG entry looked so much alike. Oh, wait. . .

        • bucherm

          The Boeing design was the odd-man out because they were concentrating on solving the STOVL problem over conventional flight characteristics, making it essentially the same aircraft over all three models.

          Lockheed overcame that hurdle by buying the tech from Yakolev. Of the three original designs, only Boeing looked substantially different than the others…and again, because they were concentrating on cost savings rather than performance(as you should know, the end result of the F-35 program is that despite external similarities there are substantial differences between the three models).

          • Ctrot

            The F-35 “Three-Bearing Swivel Nozzle” was in place on the experimental X-35 before Lockheed ever visited Yakovlev. The significance of that visit has been vastly over blown by internet experts.

          • H. H. GAFFNEY

            I saw the Yakovlev prototype at the now-Russian naval air museum in Murmansk. It was a pretty plane — looked like an F-11 of ours. It never worked.

          • Secundius

            @ H. H. GAFFNEY.

            The Grumman F-11 Tiger, didn’t have Swept-Backed wings.

          • Ctrot

            Yes, the F-11 did have swept wings.

          • PragmaticNotPoliticalSolns

            The Lockheed ducted fan was developed by Paul Bequiva of the Skunkworks. Boeing went with a harrier approach with a high wing design to try and get thermoplastic composites to work. (They did not) In short there were no similarities in fact Boeing never achieved vertical take off with their system.

          • bucherm, Lockheed didn’t get their engine design solution from Yakovlev, the Shaft Driven Lift-Fan design was created in 1986 alongside the Gas Coupled Lift-Fan (both F119 based) which made it’s way into the Boeing X-32. The SDLF you see today is a direct result of the ASTOVL program undertaken by DARPA and the UK MOD.

            The visit to Yakovlev, if anything would have probably had more to do with sensors or EW because many of my fellow westerners like to convince themselves that Russia doesn’t have a very competent industry with regards to that particular branch of technology.

      • Chesapeakeguy

        I stick to my point about how it LOOKS exactly like ours! Geezz..

    • Gregory Dittman

      The reason the F-35 looks the way it does is from computer modeling. 2+2 always equals 4 so likewise, there can only be one best stealth shape for the type of fighter one wants.

      • PragmaticNotPoliticalSolns

        The main reason the F – 22 & F – 35 look the same is the same folks (concept design group General Dynamics / Lockheed Martin) The JSF program was meant yo be a low risk, low tech development effort. Lockheed had a valid design on the F 22 and many of the same requirements for the F35. hence the designs are similar except for the inlet.

        • KAB

          They actually look very different. If you pay attention it’s easy to tell the F22 from the F35.

        • Matt

          They look completely different….

    • Sandy

      socialists and communists are adept at stealing everything – saves them money. Soviets did it all the time – remember the C-141ski and C-5ski?

      • Secundius

        @ Sandy.

        I remember when Stalin order that the three B-29’s interned in Siberia. Be reversed-engineered right down to the Japanese bullet holes in the fuselage and the repair patches cause by Japanese battle damage too…

        • JD

          Really? To remember that you must be at least 100 years old, having risen to the high rank in the contemporary intelligence services to hear such tales and confirm them to be true.

    • PragmaticNotPoliticalSolns

      That us how it is always done. The Mig 29 looks like the offspring of an F 15 & F 18. The key will be the performance of the engines, avionics and of course weapon systems.

    • jannidd

      Anyone within the avionics industry will know that the J-31 CANNOT POSSIBLY be a copy of the F-35. Teh F- 35 is a single engine, while the j-31 is a twin engine. The “guts” of the planes are different, it is impossible, even with documents and blueprints on the F-35, for China to copy the plane. Clearly someone needs more knowledge on avionics and development of fighters. 😉 Tell that to your fellow US media as well.

    • Brian

      Nothing to do with Chinese telecoms/spy infrastructure in US partner country

  • KC135TopBoom

    This just could be a fly-off competition between the J-20 and the J-31 (the J-31 is also called the J-21 and the F-60).
    It could also be that each will have a different mission, so both will be introduced. The J-31 looks to be more of a long range interceptor, so it will mainly go for tankers, bombers, and AWACS type warplanes. It seems to have a limited weapons bay, maybe just a single bay between the engines and amid-ship. The J-20, OTOH looks more like a supersonic medium bomber, mush like the USAF FB-111 was. Both of these Chinese airplanes do not seem to be very ‘stealthy’ aft, around the engine exhaust, like the F-22 and F-35 are. The J-31 also has a ‘stinger’ between the engine exhaust nozzles. Typically this would house ECM, RAWS, or radar detection equipment, none of which a true stealth aircraft would need.

  • Secundius

    Mikoyan Mig-31 Foxhound, first Flight in 16 September 1975, first in Introduced in 6 May 1981. Goal to fly at Mach 3.2, Redline Vmo achieved Mach 2.83. Detection Range of 250-miles, Impressive, only it fighter isn’t smaller then a Boeing 707. First, Operational Status ~2017 CE. What kind of Fighter Program, has a 39-year Testing Period before becoming Operational…

    • Raptor1

      Lost you somewhere, Secundius… What fighter program are you talking about that has a 39 year test program?… The Mig-31 has been operational for decades.

      • Secundius

        @ Raptor1.

        Sorry, My Bad, Typo. Suppose to be MiG-45, which is derived form the MiG-41 , which is derived from the MiG-31, which is derived form the MiG-29, which is derived from the MiG-25.

        • Paul

          Never heard of a Mig-45 – Nor Mig-41, but you may be referring to Project 1.41, which was a prototype (2 built) – It MAY have some characteristics of Mig-31, but certainly is not a derivative.

          Mig-31 is a different beast than the Mig-29 – But yes, the Mig-31 could be considered an advanced version of the Mig-25 (same interceptor role; high altitude and speed, same basic boxy airframe) – But in the end, the Mig-31 as we know has been flying operationally for quite some time – If they want to upgrade it, that falls outside its original development cycle… Otherwise the B-52 is going on a 50+ year development cycle… It’s been upgraded for the past 50 years, but not stuck in development.

  • Raptor1

    So we have a prototype of an aircraft that LOOKS like it’s a legit 5th-gen… What makes anyone think that an aircraft that’s at the stage the F-22 was at more than 20 years ago can compete with the F-22 of today? Nope, sorry, ain’t buying into the hype. We KNOW the Chinese haven’t designed engines worth a squat, let alone an engine that compete with what the Raptor came “standard” with 20 years ago… They have NO experience with operational stealth, and I can guarantee you they can’t approach the Raptor’s avionics and sensors – And let’s not forget that we spent billions integrating/developing the software that holds it all together, an area which the U.S. is second-to-none in. There’s a lot more to building an aircraft than stealing some blueprints and copying photos, especially when you’re talking about the kind of industrial base you need to turn out an aircraft that by its “stealth” definition requires amazing accuracies and tolerances – I think we can all agree that “Made in China” doesn’t mean top-notch product,… Right?

    • Uniform223

      Completely agree with you. Just because it looks like doesn’t mean it is.
      Also something that many people seem to either forget or disregard is that the US has leading experience in LO tech, manufacturing, and strategy. Just because you have a race car, doesn’t mean you know how to drive it.

      • Gregory Dittman

        There are wasp flies, flies that look like wasps for protection. This aircraft will probably be the same thing. There is a lot that goes into the F-35 which is why it’s so expensive Even if China had the exact plans, they still have to face Chinese corruption, general cost, training and commitment. China also has to think about how many it plans to build. My guess is that China plans to make less than 300, what China is calling, stealth aircraft.

        • Natural Order


          These general cost is lower for everything in China, and this is why China owns the U.S.

          • KAB

            Actually, not everything does. Advanced military hardware pretty much costs the same everywhere.

          • Natural Order

            No, they don ‘t

          • jetcal1

            As a general rule, starting out with “Idiot” is not a polite way to start a conversation.
            Are you lacking intellectual or some other form of endowment such as courtesy?

          • Natural Order

            No, idiot.

          • jetcal1

            You must be very upset about something.

          • Natural Order

            LOL… No

          • jetcal1

            Polite discourse is a nice way to start a conversation.

          • Korba

            Natural Order: 你确定自己是国家安全的部门。 FBI意识到。

        • Raptor1

          I have a feeling they “plan” on making a whole bunch… But even China knows that money does not just appear; and you need to make a lot of money appear to design, test, and build a true 5th-gen.
          Well now, if they end up with something that they feel is “good enough” and want to make 1,500 of them by the late 2020s, then they will have to face the reality that “good enough” may not be NEARLY enough to counter the matching number of F-35s;… protected by 200 F-22s that come complete with all the capabilities that China is trying to MATCH today, PLUS another 10-15 years of upgrades/mods specifically tailored to counter what WE see them deploying – Kinda funny really ; spend the next ten years fielding an aircraft you’re so proud to have stolen secrets about, only to have to watch as we enhance capabilities to leap out another 20 years beyond your latest and greatest… and then to have to “re-invent the wheel” AGAIN when you see the 6th-gen rolls out. Espionage may allow you to shortcut to a design, but you still have to build, test, operate, and maintain the “thing” you built. And the stolen plans DON’T contain some very important information, like advantageous design features, disadvantages, trade-offs, the software and weapons systems, and the all-important WHYs of their existence.

      • Raptor1

        Well said, 223.

    • Natural Order

      Unless you think everything made in China is about cheap, fragile crap in one dollar stores. Delusions can be very comforting, yes? I serious doubt China is really that incompetent. I think it is just an excuse to foke some money to the Russians, or it does not make economic sense, or good returns on investments, ROI.

      • Negev

        I agree with this comment. Look…China has taken over the manufacturing base of the USA (GM was one of those companies that was eager to introduce advanced process manufacturing, Boeing manufactured parts for the 737 in China, and of course Silicon Valley opened up their technologies in CAD design..(American/EU Corporate Executive transferred US aerospace technologies to make their bonuses). One example of many, Honeywell also was eager to transfer avionics to the PRC. I also was a “special consultant” for China’s Aerospace base–so I am writing from real knowledge. Further, our buddies the FRENCH (Airbus) opened up their Wichita Design group to the Chinese to copy aerospace designs that existed in the BOEING DBMS–now known today as “big data.”. So why is anyone with a brain so surprised that the PRCAF wants equal force against the US, EU, Japan, SoKorea Airforces…Enough said…They have had the capabilities to manufacture, train, and maintain 5th GEN fighters for the last 5 years.

        • Eric

          100% correct plus US/EU greed in between….and money back and forth ~

          • Val Cyril Estuche Estrada

            Fact is, China knows much from the US,European yet US and Europe knows very little from China.

          • Shane Warne

            US knows that China knows what the US and EU knows…….

            Seriously though, in regards to high tech, there aren’t many areas (if any at all, except for a few niches), where China actually surpasses either the EU, US or Japan (let alone all combined). Not yet at least. And honestly, do you seriously think the US will export / off-shore their top secret military engineering projects to China? No. China aren’t going to be surpassing US defence tech anytime soon by stealing US designs in iPods, computers, random non-defense engines and so forth. Nothing amazing there.

          • Doc

            That’s all good and well if we ‘secure’ our information, just look at the OPM fiasco, add to that the Iranian caught with sensitive F35 info on his way home. Finally where do they send their college kids for education, why the USA of course, talk about shooting ourselves in the foot, big business doesn’t care where the money comes from, they’d sell their own mothers, ask GE who supply the Iranians, as Toshiba (Not the larger conglomerate) who gave the Russians the secrets for our submarine propellers…

        • General-Zod

          Of course they do,they steal everything. They deploy a vast army of hackers who are spying and breaking into networks 24/7. And we do business with them to lol

    • Rick Myles

      They have no experience? They have whatever experience we have since they have stolen whatever we have learned and all the revisions we have made.

      • Raptor1

        You can’t steal experience – Unless you steal the bodies of the people having the experience; which I don’t believe has happened at this point anyways..

        • ben

          remember the usdid their own stealing how from britain

    • Springfield operator 1911

      Your right but the problem is- Did the gooks steal the Sensor/Radar/optics as well? They stole everything else, what stopped them from stealing that tech as well?

      • Joe Schmoe

        Simple. It’s under a different level of security. The air frames and other basic information are shown or published openly on the internet or at events. You can literally Google for much of the information. But when it comes to materials sciences, special manufacturing processes, and key hardware blueprints… well they’re not accessible via hacks. I won’t go into further detail.

        • Raptor1

          Joe Schmoe: You’re screen name doesn’t do justice to your obvious grasp on security :-)… Your post above is, in my opinion, spot-on.

      • curtis

        I personally don’t like the word gook That’s what our solidiers called the heroic fighters of Vietnam. please be more respectable to the Chinese.

      • Doann

        Springfield you must be from Ohio or MS….Naïve and Ethnocentric losser

        • Springfield operator 1911

          First of all Dipshit, learn how to spell! I’m in CA and Springfield operator is the one of the .45 cals I own. You think I should respect the Chinese when they are the main culprit of cyber attacks against our country? Maybe you need to go back to where your from, because it damn sure doesn’t sound like its America, “Loser”

    • John Rose

      we should never under estimate our enemys

      • Paul

        True… But the flip side to that is that 1 China may or may not be an enemy (I tend to think not, but that’s just an opinion); and 2. Overestimating an enemy, especially in light of the tremendous amount we already spend on R and D and deployment, can be prohibitively expensive, to the point of being a drain on the economy, case in point being the F-35 itself.

        • Sam

          they are not friends, Red China is not, that is for sure. look at their actions during the Korean War. Under the current goverance, and any governance likely under our lives, China is not a friend of the US constitution.

    • Grimreaper

      This is military call sign grim reaper 55 and is
      like the real thing but I don’t think that you
      can not replace the human solider or even the
      sibborg will do the job but termator is hear and
      verry real and the human mind might be close and redun some how but for now watch the technolgy and how it involves to take over military duties and Jobs and for now my soliders and I sign off for now but see you all
      some day and some how in the furture and
      combat services some how .
      Your solider as grim reaper .

  • sferrin

    Not a single name to attribute quotes to? Really?

  • Tempus Fugit

    the US Air force should purchase 1000 Saab Gripen E/F jet fighters instead of the JSF-35! These could be produced in Boeing factories in the United States and provide good paying jobs for Americans! Later, Boeing can sell these Gripens to foreign countries! …..kind of a F-16 export version for the 21st century!
    Any feed back………………………………..please!

    • Ctrot

      Ridiculous idea.

    • Michael Rich

      Probably one of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard.

  • AKO

    American De-Industrialization

    Continues Unabated

    America’s economic elite has long argued that the country does not need an industrial base. The economies in states such as California and Michigan that have lost their industrial base, however, belie that claim. Without an industrial base, an increase in consumer spending, which pulled the country out of past recessions, will not put Americans back to work. Without an industrial base, the nation’s trade deficit will continue to grow. Without an industrial base, there will be no economic ladder for a generation of immigrants, stranded in low-paying service-sector jobs. Without an industrial base, the United States will be increasingly dependent on foreign manufacturers even for its key military technology.

  • nickRay

    What does it matter? We can’t go to war with China! We’d have to borrow the war budget from them.

    • Jonathan Martins

      Only 7% of the U.S. debt is owed to China. The U.S. was able to fight through World War 2 with massive amounts of debt. Truth be told, debt is insignificant during a total war.

      • nickRay

        No US President would sacrifice Walmart by waging war on their supply chain.250 million American dead? Sure. The Walton family fortune? No way.

    • PragmaticNotPoliticalSolns

      And they need to buy their rice from us and soon oil.

  • old guy

    This is your USAF undercover intel friend translating the interview’s objective.

  • Secundius

    There’s a BIG difference between “Could Be” and “Is”.

  • john

    This plane might be the equal of a F-35 in a decade. Stealth technology, the software that runs the platform and networks it to other platforms, and the sensor capabilities cannot be built in under a decade or two. It will never ever be a competitor to the F-22. However, like the article stated, numbers do matter.


    They still have lousy old Soviet engines. And their test ranges do not appear adequate to test their stealth. And where are they going to operate? Attacking who?

  • madskills

    Wasn’t a Yugo a copy of another car? So we don’t know if they got the metallurgy right, the software right, the engines right, the electronics right, the weapons right. Yeah they are equal, just like a Yugo was equal to a Toyota.

    • R’ Yitzchak M

      One thing might work for them.. compatibility to the F-22 is a pure fantasy but trough economic scale of productivity China is a major COMPETITOR and if need to be they can sacrifice all “butter” to relocate into the production of GUNS. Remember Porshe’s Tiger Mark IV, and Panthers, FW-190’s ME-262 were far superior to the Shermans, T-34 or anything allies could produce but NUMBERS did make the difference.
      Given time China will be a major and very aggressive contender.

      • Joe Schmoe

        Fair argument. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if China produced superior equipment later this century, reversing that metaphor. China has more potential adversaries than allies including Russia, India, Japan not to mention the entire West- and the more it grows and uses its power to expand… the more the rest of the world will backlash.

        • R’ Yitzchak M

          Joe Schmoe there is an interesting “entropy” in conventional wisdom vis a vis China. It is an fact I could hardly factor in my conventional outlook of anything that could make any sense.. think of this IF CHINA MADE ONE YEAR OF CROP LOSS IT WOULD TAKE THE WORLD 400 YEARS TO FILL THE “GAP”.. That was one shocker I heard some long time ago.. China is global anomaly; you could not conventionally scale that threat.. On Alliances you mentioned.. you would really bank on them? Pakistan? Russia? Malaysia? Indonesia? They are perhaps just a “noise” makers a “DRAG” perhaps but on whose side? China has something that works for them, they do remember and they have excellent ability to learn and to adapt in order to MATTER. The worst thing is to underestimate the enemy ESPECIALLY in the “game” you are not familiar with. All our learning references are of “compatible SCALE” of economy, military, and political arena. Von Clausewitz “On War” elaborated mechanisms of conventional attrition in the “dynamics-economy of warfare” but nothing of this scale. Productivity is the ONLY tangible parameter by which you might get some idea of “conventional” assessment. BUT it is still illusion to take that as a “conventional” “IF”.. I believe the biggest ace in the China’s sleeve is our “ARROGANCE” we have no clue what makes a great empire to exist for 5000 years we as a western civilization can count perhaps from a 550 BC up to now? Perhaps even.. ? It is not to “glorify” but to assess a clearer assessment what WE are truly facing today as a potential threat. China WILL move it does need RESOURCES, it is asserting the sphere of influence in Africa, Pakistan and Asia in general. It still has to develop a navy.. but I would not hold the breath on that one.

          • Joe Schmoe

            I agree. I wouldn’t be surprised if China dominates into the future- it only makes sense that a billion productive people will get their due. That said, I also wouldn’t be surprised if it goes through periods of civil unrest or even another civil war after taking an economic hit. It’s one thing to say that China and the Chinese are an anomaly, but to believe that power does not corrupt and divide would be a big mistake. The more educated and wealthy the average citizen is (as is the trend there), the more power they will hold in groups. It’s practically a saying that the Chinese government is more afraid of its own citizens than it is about about external intervention (hence the lingering police state). Couple that ferment with growing bourgeois power, and the government will either crack down harder on them, inciting violence, or fall apart due to infighting. Either way, it won’t be smooth sailing outside, nor inside of China.

  • publius_maximus_III

    Looks like the Chinese are sticking with a dual-engine design like the F-15 Strike Eagle and F/A-18 Hornet, while we are going with an “all our eggs in one basket” design in the F-35 program. Which concept has better survivability in combat, more weight with less maneuverability (2 engines) or less redundancy with lower reliability (1 engine)? Which path would Confucious have choosen?

    • Gregory Dittman

      China also has more concerns for errors. Corruption is rampant in China. My guess is that the Chinese government may think it’s a stealth fighter, when it’s just a con by the manufacturers. The only way to know if you truly have a stealth aircraft is to fly it over enemy territory and see if the enemy can spot it.

    • Secundius

      @ publius _maximus_III.

      To quote the word’s of the comedian Ron White. “How far do you get on a two-engine plane with only one-engine working, as far as the crash site”.

      • Raptor1

        That’s why he’s a “comedian”, because he makes jokes. I’m pretty sure he wasn’t implying that a 2-engine plane is unsurvivable… And I’m POSITIVE he wasn’t implying that having 2-engines is worse than a single engine – As mentioned, he’s a comedian, not an idiot.

    • R’ Yitzchak M

      And F-22 if you had flown 2 engines comedy a side you thank G-d that something is still keeping you flying that plane instead of “flying” that BRICK.

  • Secundius

    Nah, it’s most likely our trusted Israeli Allies. After all the Tried and Failed too sell the “PHALCON” Advanced Airborne Early Warning System designated for the Grumman E-2D “Advanced Hawkeye”, to the ChiCom’s.

    • R’ Yitzchak M

      US Israeli most trusted ally sold and manned (trained) 5 E-3 AWACS’s to Saudis (our “trusted allies”) of 18 terrorist that MURDERED 3,000 Americans 15 were Saudis AND the PRINCE THAT financed that MURDER went scot free.. oh yes as a aspiring “diplomat” (REWOKED 6 months EARLIER) allies?

  • R’ Yitzchak M

    No comparison to F-22 (except its looks want to-be) First heated exhaust elements, instead of circulated & cooled exhaust. Today there is much emphasize on IR signatures of the airplane. Also interactive radar surface of F-22 fuselage for the passive radar detection with link 16 array interaction with surrounding assets like Growlers, XB-47 etc.. electronic capabilities of F-22 are true paradigm changers. Also supersonic cruse that does NOT affect surface temperature changes are still years ahead of competition.
    Yes it looks alike but there is still a LONG ways to go. “Minute” difference do make the difference between extremely expensive casket and a game changer. F-35 IS different story altogether.

    • publius_maximus_III

      Yitzchak — Agreed about that “ace” of a totalitarian government. A country that can get away with building ghost cities full of completely empty high rise condos would certainly have no problem shifting its production priorities away from pleasing the People (with say, more automobiles) to building military hardware out the kazoo instead.

      • R’ Yitzchak M

        Pulius_maximus_III that is a quite substantial factor and there are few examples in history to put that in a context. First there is an anecdote where German POW asked a Russian soldier: “How come we were superior soldiers better trained and equiped but you prevailed?” Russian asked the German showing him a horse manure: “Can you eat this…??” German looked with disgust “NO!!” and Russian replied well that is your downfall.. II Example was a Napoleon he used conscripts ti fight the best trained professional armies in Europe and prevailed.. hjow? Conscripts DID NOT KNOW that taking of the hill is “game is up” and no professional army would go trough attrition of tactical losses 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 (depending on terrain) conscripts charged irrespective of losses.. so that was Napoleon. Simple but with enough “dedication” did made the difference. Strtategicly we have to factor a major paradigm shifts in comparison with Vietnam, N. Korea and China quite different players and totally different economy of scale (economically and militarily). Russian players are quite corrupt like case with Milosevic which was their undoing.. china had quite few models to learn from, and are more intelligent to factor that in their equation.

        • publius_maximus_III

          Isaac — Let’s hope the PLA is not training its fighter pilots to eat horse manure, and that they’re an all-volunteer outfit and not suicidal conscripts.
          I think one big advantage we have over the Russians is that we only share an ocean with China; they share a very long land border. I’m sure the U.S. is light years ahead of the Chinese in carrier design and operations. So for now, Vladimir Putin needs to be more wary about their new J-31 “stealth” fighter capabilities than we do.

          • R’ Yitzchak M

            Agree they all ready had a conflict on Ussuri River pragmatically China will have to pay for Siberian resources few trillion Dollars or few million soldiers it is not hard gues what the comrades will choose. It is obvious that everyone is on Russian case today.. not to be able to develop navy in order to become another competetive empire. There is a difference between regional power and empire that empire have means to PROTECT their spheres of influence and their access to trade. Crimean war was made to “teach” Russia not to get involved in the Balkans France, Britain, Turkey and Germany wanted to join (if needed) to prevent Russia of helping Serbs, Bulgars and Greeks against Ottoman Tyrany.. I WW, was “just” a natural growth – order of the same philosophy , WW2 everyone agreed is just a continuation of the WW1 in those two wars there were allies agains the axis today everyone is the on the same “page” revisionism and revanshism goes along the “new” German “SPHERES OF INFLUENCE”? So China will walk trough Russia.. what then will happen with the Europe? Last time when Europe faced Mongols inspite of all technological and cultural flare of Europe did not ammount to much? The biggest mistake one could make is to underestimate its opponent Germans did it few times before? I do not mean Russia but the China. Russia has no chance by conventional means.. with the non conventional she can hurt quite a bit. Russian potencial targets are well spred ours are well concentrated.

  • onenil

    Chinese engines and avionics are still crap so I wouldn’t get worried for quite some time.

    • Robert A. Little

      Today, they are crap, today. Ten years ago they were flying Mig 15’s; today they are test flying the J-31. Look twenty years ahead. The few F-22′ we have will have exceeded their airframe hours, the F-35 will be mature on the way to over ripe, and what will our Congress have accomplished? What will the Chinese have accomplished in the next 20 years. Think people.

  • Butch Meisner

    Of course “US military and industry officials” are saying this. Stoking fears of losing air superiority virtually guarantees the Congress will allocate billions of more taxpayer dollars to make sure that doesn’t happen.

  • Colt

    And yet we still allow the Reds to send their children over here to get educated at our top schools. China is as big (if not a bigger) a threat to America as those Islamofascists. Just read what their war planners have said about their goal to dominate the world.

    • Joe Schmoe

      Do a little more research on how that actually benefits the US more than China and other countries for that matter. They tend to stay here, or return with family in tow later on. Unfortunately, we often can’t produce such engineers with our own education system.

      • State Run Media

        The Chinese students who do study abroad in the US are the elite of the elite when it comes to education. The richest families (typically from Shanghai or Hong Kong) come to the US and U.K because China’s education system is terrible. The Chinese educational system is extremely geared toward taking multiple choice tests. Mostly to portray the CCP in a good light when it comes to the PISA tests, which are no where near a good indicator of a good educational system. This results in students that are very good at filling out exams but lack critical thinking, creativity, and problem solving skills.

  • ObamatheIllinoisIdiot

    Cardboard and glue.

  • Aaron_Burr

    Back in my day when dinosaurs ruled the earth my squadron was flying F4Bs and everybody was so worried about the Mig-25 Foxbat. Mysterious. Very fast. Turned out that the thing was a lead sled that could go fast in a straight line but couldn’t maneuver and unless it could get in a long range missile shot would have been totally helpless in a dog fight.

    I’d wait until we can see a few operational J-31s before losing any sleep over them.

    • Robert A. Little

      If you have, say, a formation of four F-22s, you have a total of 32 missiles; In this scenario the Chinese approach would seem to be to field forty planes. If the U.S. builds even half of the expected 2400+ F-35’s, that would be 1200 or so, many of which will go to foreign nations. There is no possible way to maintain our present responsibilities with this number of fighters, and with the New Republican Party now firmly in charge of the budget, there exists a reasonable expectation of even greater cuts in military spending on new technology. The Old Republican party is, of course, the reason our military is tired and worn out, why we have so many binding agreements that cover the entire globe. The next two years will be interesting: we’ll see the 50th attempt to kill the ACA, more continuing resolutions that disrupt the military budgets and cause costs to soar, more sequestration, possibly an impeachment, but we won’t see new funds for energy weapons, or full funding for the few programs that show promise of actually providing this country with a competent military and we won’t see veterans receive the health care they deserve.

      • Raptor1

        Robert, the Republican Party which you bash upon as the cause for our aging equipment also BUILT the military that’s been fighting the past 10+ years. Republicans historically support a strong military, Reagan was a prime example of that – Much of the equipment in regular use was procured under, or designed during, a Repub’s tenure as Pres.

        • R’ Yitzchak M

          Raptor you are right Reagan almost broke the the whole economy by allocating a major economical resources into production shift to INFRASTRUCTURE and next generation military solutions.. The cost of military was much less than cost of war so that was the best investment into a healthy future in recent time. BUT!! He oppened a “FREE TRADE” which I am totally for BUT!!! Fair trade foremost there is no “free trade without FAIR TRADE”. Reagan penalized Japan with tarifs up to 25% for “dumping” (selling their cars for lesser cost than they did for their domestic market..) now China still using slave labour and “almost” slave labour IT IS UNFAIR “competetive” edge against the domestic INDUSTRY and labour while transfering production and ECONOMY AT LARGE to our foremost competitor AND future contender – foe? It was a Reagan’s and Bush “wisdom”.

      • Joe Schmoe

        CUDA missile.

  • valwayne

    So while Obama guts our military and lets the Chinese get away with stealing all of our most secret technological secrets the Chinese are taking full advantage of our weak failed President, and the window he is giving them to surpass our nation. Everywhere you look 6 years of Obama has led to disaster, and our adversaries are happily taking full advantage. This means folks that not all that far in the near future the U.S. will NOT have the #1 military. Obama will have destroyed that, and that means if we have to defend ourselves or our allies that we may well fail, and how many will die?

    • Dave_TX

      Are you willing to pay taxes at a rate that will support the military capabilities you demand?

    • R’ Yitzchak M

      Since R. Reagan China was getting all kind of goodies, and especially G. Bush Senior III Stage rocket sequencing separation, Italians gave them accurate re-entry guidance system .. etc. etc. Global “community” disfranchised U.S.A. labor, industry, know how toward the “new” global “society” void of national interests and borders a “GLOBAL WILLAGE”, Germans tried the very same concept 2 previous “sessions” and world voted no a categorical no with over 50 million of victims who can voucher for that.. it is sad really sad that to all those veterans who spilled their blood and bones can see the same macabre storm gathering again. Who failed to learn from history is cursed to repeat it again.

  • consolacion barcenas

    It is not surprising. Americans are more like braggarts. Show offs. While they prattle on, the Chinese have been quietly stealing our technological, military and state secrets. Plus one thing that the Chinese have that Americans have. Discipline. It is only a matter of time before this country will cede leadership role to China.

  • Armand Rodriguez

    Why steal it when the administration will give it to them for free?

  • Dave Davis

    We don’t have to go to war with China to find out how we fare against these. I agree that this definitely smells of a marketing platform. Sell a few to Syria, NK, or anyone else we may bump heads with in the sky. I’m sure that will prove interesting.

  • Cjones1

    I believe that China’s nationalists will try to develop what is best, but those who want freedom for their country will work with us to deter the Communist advantage.

  • Rick Myles

    The US just refuses to take cyber warfare and espionage seriously. The Chinese are stealing the USA’s lunch and we refuse to respond. I fully expect China to establish space based laser weapons eventually (actually building Reagan’s Star Wars). When they do it will render the USA’s ICBM’s and nuclear deterrent useless. While the USA has abandoned its space program entirely under Obama. Another mistake.

    • Did Obama abandon the space program? I thought Congress was responsible for funding?

    • anthg

      The US doesn’t advertise its cyber warfare capabilities to the world. Nobody is going to make our ICBM’s defenseless. What about our Subs. Most of our Nukes are at sea. No cyber threats there. Its overblown. Did you know lightning can cause an EM Pulse? You don’t have to explode a bomb to make one. You can even make EMP’s that cover , say 100-200 yards. don’t worry about cyber attacks.

    • General-Zod

      The US will be fine in that department The Chinese have nowhere near the capability that we do n that regard. NASA is a division of the US Airforce. Which is a Military wing. Don’t forget that.

    • State Run Media

      This may look like a 5th generation aircraft but it’s likely not. The CCP loves to release propaganda bolstering their military capabilities even though most of their military is comprised of outdated Cold War tech or copied Russian designs.

    • State Run Media

      This may look like a 5th generation aircraft but it’s likely not. The CCP loves to release propaganda bolstering their military capabilities even though most of their military technology is comprised of outdated Cold War tech or copied Russian designs.

    • Doc

      Yep and there goes our satellites, think about that, 85% of our comms is through sats, think about our GPS system that our ships and aircraft use for targeting… oh dear.

  • PerryM

    Obama killed man space flights and American astronauts hitch rides on Russian lift vehicles.

    Maybe Obama will do the same to our manned fighter jets?
    Made in china

    think of how much money can be spent on Muslim outreach programs…..

    • Secundius

      @ PerryM.

      Hey, slick. The reason Obama killed ORION. Was that Contracting Companies, CEO’s were get large sign-up bonus. For something this wasn’t even on the “drawing boards”, yet.

      • Big Papa

        Hey slick, Orion is scheduled to fly next month… that’s pretty good for a program that “Obama killed.” Obama cancelled the Constellation Program, FYI.

  • JEFFofTX

    Could become equal?!? Now that’s funny!

  • attackslack

    ‘U.S. Pilots Say New Chinese Stealth Fighter Could Become Equal of F-22, F-35’As a long past, old as the hills, former military pilot, I’m having a good laugh and saying “doubtful.”

  • leobatfish

    The good news Chinese pilots are probably subpar. When have you heard of a formula one driver that was chinese?

  • Steve Sykes

    There is no such thing as a “dangerous machine”. There are only dangerous men. So long as we can consistently produce the most dangerous pilots, we have nothing to fear in the air.

    It is in our national civilian leadership where we have a sucking chest wound, that threatens our survival.

  • des mond

    Just don know why western writers like to brag that Chinese advanced planes are the results of episonage. If this really is the case either the west is that stupid to be spied upon so easily or that China is the only country in the world to be that good at stealing western secrets. Surely many others are equally good at stealing (including US and Russia). So we can see that these biased western writers only have so much of logical mentality.

  • Hkinsey3

    Don’t worry about the Chinese stealth fighter. If we have another president like Obama we will have a stealth Air Force. You won’t be able to see it, touch it, hear it or locate it on radar. Mainly because it isn’t there. Worry about that!

    • Robert A. Little

      So, your stand is that the administration – the executive branch – enacted the sequestration. Good going you. The U.S. has roughly 308 military bases within the U.S., about 1170 outside. After the end of a war (two here), the military is left with tired equipment, and must replace it. That is the case here, with the aviation assets of our country old and tired, Navy ships old and tired, helps in all services old and tired. Sequestration at this point has been a continuing disaster, since our military STILL has to attempt to enforce a worldwide presence.

  • Marjus Plaku

    Why would anyone be afraid of Chinese jets? They are no where near equal the latest F-16 much less F-35 or F-22. Think toyota versus Ferrari.

  • Jerrick Kant

    Will the J-31 have VLO qualities to rival the F-22 and F-35? NO.
    Will it field sensors (radar, EW, EO) comparable to the F-35? NO.
    Will it feature sensor fusion comparable to the F-35? NO.
    Will its flight characteristics rival the F-22? NO.

    Will its flight characteristics rival the F-35? YES.
    Will it be cheap? YES.
    Will it be cost-effective? YES.
    Will it replace the PLA’s 3rd gen fleet in high numbers? YES.
    Can China field enough of them by 2025 to threaten US local military supremacy (in the South China Sea and East China Sea)? POSSIBLY.

    The F-22 has registered very lopsided victories against previous gen aircraft in training exercises. The F-35 will register lopsided victories when it participates in similar exercises. However, the margin of dominance against 4th gen Chinese fighters will hugely shrink when the J-31 is fielded.

    All the same, this isn’t about a head-to-head clash against the F-35. This about the Chinese inducting a credible fighter in numbers significant enough, to challenge the USN’s freedom of operation in the Asia-Pacific region. Plus, it may be exported to states potentially hostile to the West.

    If we look at the bigger picture, there’s a different fact of life emerging – China’s GDP has already overtaken the US GDP in PPP terms. In nominal terms, it’ll overtake the US GDP within a decade. The US may have a (shrinking) advantage in terms of technology and human capital, but that’s made up to a large extent by China’s low cost advantages.

    Simple fact is – if you want to prevent Chinese hegemony in Asia, you need to ‘contain’ it (you can couch it in less inflammatory terms), the only viable option is an informal pan-Asian coalition; US-Japan-India supported perhaps by Vietnam, Singapore, Australia, Philippines and maybe South Korea.

    By all means pay attention to the military developments, but better start cracking on that diplomacy as well.

    • R’ Yitzchak M

      F-35 is a dud (VERIFIED DUD) it is a single engine, J-31 has 2, any failure over the Chinese or Indian Ocean area PILOT IS LOST. Survivability on 2 over one engine is substantial. Electronic warfare i.e. Growlers, E-2D, E-3, P-8A Poseidons are a substantial players in such enviroment BUT! F-35 is NOT STEALTH it is “stealthy” IR signature is substantial especially on F-35C model.. Majority of the sensors today are shifting to the high resolution IR sensors with substantial TAR (Target Acquisition Range) main work is still to be developed on lock-up on target (with still some lingering issues of “discriminations” betwen targets and decoys.) But F-35 is colosol mistake that will take the decades for NATO to recover from. And definitelly is not a platform for Chinese theatre. Too expensive and to little.. Super Hornets perhaps cost effective platform perhaps for now. But new V/A-XX looks promissing incorporating F-22 and B-2 technology into a true paradigm shift.. That one could be a game changer depending on cost as well.

      • Jerrick Kant

        – All naval pilots wear inflatable jackets to survive ejections over sea. The twin engined F-18s safety record is not that much better than the single engined F-16s.

        – The single-engined Harrier has flown for 45 years in 6 navies over every ocean in the world.

        – The F-35 is designed to be low observable in the IR spectrum as well. Its engine may have a very high turbine inlet temperature, but its got a high bypass ratio along with which its nozzle has evolved from LOAN program tested on the F-16.

        – IRSTs are still very limited in terms range compared to radars (especially new gen AESAs). Their performance is unreliable dependent as it is on whether conditions. Its doesn’t have the radar multi-function or IFF interrogation capabilities.

        • R’ Yitzchak M

          Jerrick Kant narrative of your justification of safety record of F-35A not F-35C mentioned above, is to support your narrative? First engine failureS (many on this F-35C an F-35A and D’s in general are quite few). Inflating raft in Indian Ocean under challenged area of control .. good luck with that. Any bird impact in your engine there is HIGHER CHANCE that you will lose your 110 – 135 MILLION Dollars bird and good chance pilot as well. On IRST check the newer data Ruskies as well we are moving very aggressively into IR and PASSIVE AESA modes of operation, the newest missiles are also developed along the line of those technologies. On IRST they DO HAVE still LINGERING issue of perfecting thee lock-up on beyond the horizon targets (in excess of 100 miles). In todays aviators folklore there is a saying “who first turn the radar is a dead man” because you are advertising you are there and with a half decent gear of DRFM (Digital Radio Frequency Memory -jammers) will take you out of action. Today there is a major effort across the combat arena to enable Meteors, AIM-9x and AAMRAMs to be able to engage in both IR and passive radar environment that modern AESA are equipped for. Passive radar homing is the most promising and interesting. But IR signature of F-35C is abysmal F-35 significant but not THAT BAD. Bear in mind that “significant” is sufficient enough in modern warfare environment. You probably very well know all this but narrative to defend the dud that will cost quite few lives down the line for the POLITICAL REASONS. There was POLITICAL HYSTERIA involved in SCRAPING the production of F-22 in order to put all eggs into a single F-35 BASKET (case). Eventually reality check will be harsh, I just wander would those politicians would be called to account?

          • Tailpipe

            What a joke! The information presented here by the author, Dave Majumdar, is interesting, but several grammatical errors make for a very uncomfortable reading experience. The obvious lack of quality control in the editing phase before final publishing is astounding. If DefenseOne aspires to be a first-rate online publication, the author and DefenseOne editors and staff are failing miserably in reaching the bar. This is a lack of attention to detail – one error in an article might be expected from time to time as outfits gather information from multiple sources and rush to meet deadlines, but having multiple errors in a single article make is inexcusable.

      • anthg

        The J-31 needs 2 engines because chances are that one PRC Engine will fail miles from your one aircraft carrier.

    • Uniform223

      let me just reiterate how lopsided the F-22 victories are in training. Last week I was fortunate to attend the Nellis AFB open house Airshow. I got the chance to speak with an F-15 aggressor pilot and said that normally 14 F-15s will duel against 4 F-22s. On average 12 F-15s will be downed before they even get close to the merge. If the F-15 is still considered the West as the standard for air superiority then what does that make an F-22, dominance.

      • Raptor1

        Precisely… Well put.

  • Ronsoppinion

    It would seem there is an of espionage at work here, Chinese hackers have been trying for years to get information on the stealth material used, Lockheed Martin took years to perfect this stealth material so it is pretty obvious knowledge has been gained by espionage, 30 years ago China was a land of bicycles and rickshaws so how come they can build a copy of the Lockheed Martin F35.

  • old guy

    O that it was true….BUT most of the arguments that I have seen here do not tell the story. True, the Russkies stole everything from C-47 to B29 but the Yak and Tup and Mig fighters (especially the MIG-29) there was enough innovation to really startle the US ( I was with an A/C company for a while. A/C like the “Bear” the Antonev 200 are still around due to brilliant design. We have NOTHING to compare to the Beriev 200 water bomber. How about helicopter pioneering. Denigrating a potential enemy to build up ego is dumb (remember the stories about the poor Viet Cong peasants, who were making their weapons in cave factories?). Given, the VSTOL principles are well known and lead to similar looking aircraft for similar missions, but the REAL problem is what is the state of their electronic, control, defensive and kill systems, that don’t show in a possibly Photoshopped picture.

  • Ronsoppinion

    Don’t forget the lesson of History learned by Germany with sophisticated Tiger Tanks against T34s, the Tigers were outnumbered 5 to 1, so no matter how good the Tigers were they were overwhelmed, the same applies to the F35 up against J-31, if there are 2000-3000 J-31 in years to come we have a problem.

    • Joe Schmoe

      They haven’t even broke 250 with the J-10. I think we’re looking a little too far ahead there.

      • Ronsoppinion

        The West is more technologically advanced I agree, what has really changed things in China and Russia’s favor is the amount of espionage going on, in this magazine recently it told of a Chinese man living in Canada who got the plans of the F35 by hacking the Internet, he sent them to China, I have long contacted defense industries not to have secret information connected to an outside telephone line to no avail.

      • Ronsoppinion

        Hi joe, the West is more technologically advanced I agree, what has really changed things in China and Russia’s favor is the amount of espionage going on, in this magazine recently it told of a Chinese man living in Canada who got the plans of the F35 by hacking the Internet, he sent them to China, I have long contacted defense industries not to have secret information connected to an outside telephone line to no avail.


    As they once said “Quantity has a quality on it’s own!”

    • R’ Yitzchak M


  • DollarFray

    One can only hope we guard this technology better than we’ve done with other industries we’ve handed over to China – rather than assume that China cannot catch up or reverse engineer everything. For decades, they’ve commited entire cities dedicated to educating the best and brightest of their hyper-ambitious youth.

    • R’ Yitzchak M

      Very good assessment, they
      MAIN resource are their people and EDUCATION.. time works in their advantage..
      they are occupied with basic science our boys with “liberal arts”
      like “male” “white” “privileges” gay rights,
      “class struggles” etc etc Harvard University has its own
      “political” dogma, Georgetown University HAS OVER 90% of NSA, CIA
      and State Departments C.E.O’s are graduates of that university a single
      largest influence on us foreign policy held by the single source and single
      NARATIVE. A single narrative, single policy, and single mantra not to be challenged
      by the “nuisance” of REALITY something like Bengasi, Taliban, Arab Spring etc.
      etc. Reality will never compromise their political agenda. If someone wants to
      make the real change and give us a chance to cope with the ensuing reality and
      future challenges is to DEPOLITICISE CIA, NSA, State Department by totally dismantle
      and reorganize those institutions but in the mean time to utilize and embrace
      US Navy – Marines intelligence and prevent ANY MONOPOLIES to the “truth
      handling” from ANY PARTICULAR GROUP. Diversify academic input and
      intensify professional military INTELIGENCE at list at the beginning strategic
      issues vi sa vis foreign affairs. We have the resources to gather the truth but
      political “filtering” of the truth becomes the TERMINAL “POETRY”

  • Ken Morgan

    nice kit car! made in china, a military on crutches

  • China has no pride. The J-31 looks exactly like an F-35 with two engines. The Russians are still quite pissed by the Chinese Flanker clone J-11. China pretty much copied Russia’s Su-27 bolt-by-bolt.

    The smokey engines kind of gives you a clue of the quality of this J-31. The airshow maneuvers are kind of lame too. No vertical climb or high angle-of-attack maneuvers. Just some barrel rolls and a lot of smoke circles.

    This article is pure propaganda BTW. The J-31 is far from equal with it’s western counter parts. A lot of the technology like the F-35 DAS system, supercruise engines, thrust vectoring, stealth and IR reduction technology, and high boresight data-linked missiles are features that are very hard to copy. I think the Americans are still a decade ahead in stealth fighter technology.

  • patrick moran

    I’ve seen the green tail and red star of the YAK 38 numerous places in the Crimea. They were monuments to the pilots killed flying them. The problem was they had a tendency to roll over and go out if control close to the ground. Having seen and sat in one, I was told that the model I was in would automatically eject the pilot if it started to roll too fast. Engine, nozzle and ducting problems were extensive. Hopefully the taxpayers didn’t have to pay too much for this technology. That being said, the Chinese had the originally approved F 35 plans within six months. They appear to have built the original two engine design which we changed to one engine to save money. Of course, the F 35 would have been a much more capable and survivable aircraft with two engines.

  • Larry Genovese

    How can we be smart enough to develop this technology but stupid enough to allow them to steal the plans??

  • oblivion328

    An equal to the F-35? So it can’t fly in the rain or at night, catches fire, and can be outmaneuvered by pretty much every other jet fighter out there?

  • mike rose

    The administration is allow this espionage to go on. They are doing nothing to maintain our advantages. Back when I worked on the M1A1 tank, we would only allow non vital elements to leave the plant to be built elsewhere.

  • I would say allowing oneself to be fooled is more a foolish act than fooler’s act. After allowing technology to be stolen, and then complaining about it is no use! Give me a break! we are not talking about small programs here and there. This is America’s super secret stealth program. And if there is a problem in that setup, then it shows how fragile is America.

  • Jonathan Jones

    This is nothing at all to worry about. Here is a fun little factoid: Phased Radar array’s make stealth technology obsolete. Stealth only works at certain band widths, and works against conventional radar systems. However, Phased Radar scans multiple frequencies at once, and can scan all radar band widths over it’s scanning cycle. A Russian scientist that defected in the 90’s revealed that the Phased Radar the Russians had developed for ground use and for use in the MIG 31 could easily see, and track stealth aircraft. And if it can be seen, it can be shot down. The U.S. developed stealth, so the Russians developed something that made stealth obsolete. To the uneducated, stealth fighters seem like a really great idea, until you find out it has been rendered useless by a 30+ year old Soviet radar (and most of the U.S. fighters have a version of phased radar, just not as powerful as the MIG 31’s is).

  • opensource

    China needs more experience in combat. They might have the modern jet fighter but their force needs more experience. What’s the use.

  • Mcdonald

    Let me see we americans aré so proud of our own Stuff that we forgot about the trillions of debt we have why do we want that f35 jsf project if we can’t even handle our debt as a nation the last thing we need is that the Mexicans starts lending us money then u should be scared the f35 project has been around for more than a decade and I haven’t seen not even a wing of it but just a bunch of prototypes for training issues gosh we Americans are blinded by our own misery

  • NeilMarshall

    If they copied the design from the F-35, that must surely be good news, as the Lockheed aircraft is basically useless.

  • lost_4_words

    The answer to this for the US will be remote controlled stealth fighter jets. Anyway, the J-31 will be selling like hot cakes on eBay before you know it. Fow dallah feefty or best offuh??!!!!

  • Donelo Santiago

    The F35 will do just fine and whens the last time the USA had a dogfight with anyone? This is getting ridiculous—-

  • demo demo

    fucking chinese, they always copy other countries properties.

  • Pepot

    Quote,” THE CHINESE ARE REPORTEDLY INTERESTED IN THE PURCHASED IN THE 24 EXAMPLES OF THE MODERNIZED RUSSIAN BUILT JETS”. Pretty simple on that Chinese INTENTION. What really happens is because any Aerospace company in China cannot design and built their own as years had passed. Time and time again they RELIED ON REVERSED ENGINEERING. They pretend to buy may be (2) OF THOSE FROM Russia, dis assemble it then started to copy fabricate the Spare Parts. The Fuselage are easy for them to manufacture (Aluminum, and High Quality Flexi Glass), Weapons. The Engine from Russia, Avionics and Radars maybe foreign supplied. They have money to buy those from any supplier from Europe and Israel. Just like any other food menu. After years of assemble and disassemble, manufactured the parts, test then finally like food cooked in the oven,PRESTO a new look alike of F-22 and SU 31
    comes out ready to fly and arrogantly without SHAME ON THEIR PART to show the world like, HEY, I GOT A NEW JET FIGHTER BUILT BY US AND READY TO TAKE CHALLENGE ON YOUR VAUNTED F22 AND SUKHOI 31″. To the disgust of U.S. Aerospace and Russian companies. Really disgusting to have your own design hacked and copied.

  • QuM3

    Lockheed is pathetic for allowing the plans to be hacked and stolen by the Chinese.

  • richardb

    China needs to get creative everything they haves is a cheap knock off lol

  • staff office

    The Chinese (as with everything) stole designs and tried to copy a US Raptor.
    But the facts remain that they can make it look like a US fighter but is sure won’t act like one! There engine technology is decades behind the US, there avionics are garbage and buggy, and QC is almost non existent in China! Also there pilots are absolutely inferior to US pilots. They have no where near the training programs US pilots have. What they can’t steal and copy they attempt to come up with there own solutions but those are always a train wreck.

  • pyroromancer .

    The J-31 and the F-22 are two very different machines. Just look at the J-31 “rudders” on the wings and tail fins. The F-22 doesn’t have those, it relies on “vector thrusting.”

    The J-31 is imperfect as far as radar stealth actually goes, because of those ole 4th gen rudders. Other advantages of true fixed wing aircraft is higher maneuverability at higher speeds. RIght now the F-22 is the only fighter jet in the world that can sustain Supercruise.

    If China truly stolen the plans to the F-22 they should feature no rudders. It’s a a mere mock up from visual data gathered about the F-22.

  • Insanity_Claus

    As of the date of this article, The J-31 was not operational. All the Chinese showed was that they could make a jet in a similar shape of the F-22. There is enough video on YouTube that they could re-engineer the shape. But having the ability to carry deployable missiles within that shape, and the advanced radar detection system in the nose is not easily replicated. Also, if you look at the rear of the J-31, you can see that it is a conventional jet engine with no ability to vector the jet stream, meaning that it cannot turn as tightly as the F-22. The F-22 would blow the J-31 out of the sky easily. The only thing they have is a stealth shape, but they could still be detectable because of their engines, which look to me to be an average jet engine.

  • Calvin Loyal

    Obviously it’s better than the 35. Not sure about the 22 though

  • trebor86

    I hope they’ve improved their quality control. Most of the Chinese electronics manufacturing equipment was held to horrible quality standards.

  • Socrates47

    to what extent is the Defense Department playing up the Chinese threat to build up its inventory? It has happened before during the Cold War.

  • cranky_1970

    In the coming age of ultra cheap precision munitions, passive detection radar, and rail guns I just don’t see much of a role for manned fighter aircraft.

  • Benjamin

    They don’t need spies to get geometrical information on the F-35. All they need is a bloody picture! Which the US has already provided.

  • Artemous Hue

    No matter how advanced a Chineese jet is, it is still made in China. Itll fall apart in the sky.

  • OttoDog

    The reason the Chinese want to buy 24 Flanker-Es is the same reason the Russians bought 21 Rolls-Royce Meteor engines in 1947.,….

  • OnlyOneWing

    Not even close. The air-frame of the F-35 is the least complicated part of the plane, that only took months to create. The J-31 has no other 5th generation features other than “possibly” stealth.

  • Anonymous

    It’s a counterfeit!

  • Anonymous

    It’s a F-35 counterfeit