{"id":786,"date":"2025-09-21T07:56:37","date_gmt":"2025-09-21T05:56:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/?p=786"},"modified":"2025-06-08T12:33:30","modified_gmt":"2025-06-08T10:33:30","slug":"what-to-know-about-chinas-new-j-35a-stealth-fighter-as-a-potential-us-f-35-competitor","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/?p=786","title":{"rendered":"What to know about China\u2019s new J-35A stealth fighter as a potential US F-35 competitor"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"uk-panel uk-margin\">The development of the J-35A traces back to the J-31\/<strong>FC-31 Gyrfalcon<\/strong>, a project initiated by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SA) and the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) as a self-funded, export-oriented model. The J-31 prototype first appeared in 2012, generating considerable interest.<\/div>\n<div class=\"uk-panel uk-margin\">Over time, the J-31 underwent multiple design changes, including forward-swept intake ramps, DSI bumps, and oblique vertical stabilizers, aiming to create a competitive fighter for the global market. Initially targeted for export, the model eventually attracted attention from the PLA, particularly the <strong>People\u2019s Liberation Army Navy<\/strong>\u00a0(PLAN), which evaluated a carrier-capable version under the designation\u00a0<strong>J-35<\/strong>. The naval variant completed its maiden flight on October 29, 2021, featuring modifications like a launch bar and folding wings for carrier operations<\/div>\n<div class=\"uk-panel uk-margin\">\n<p>Significant changes between the earlier FC-31 demonstrator and the J-35A, a land-based variant of the J-35 naval fighter, include a new radome without a pitot tube, an Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), updated nose and main landing gear bay doors, a modified Diverterless Supersonic Inlet (DSI), and a redesigned canopy. The airframe now includes a gun pod, a wide-area heads-up display, and a Luneburg lens to assist with radar signature management. Observations indicate that the fighter\u2019s twin vertical stabilizers and twin-engine configuration include a serrated nozzle, which could be powered by either the WS-13 or the RD-33-derived WS-21 engines, both of which offer similar performance levels.<\/p>\n<p>Alongside the domestic J-35A variant, an export version, the J-35E, has been developed. However, the carrier-based J-35 variant currently lacks an international market, as few nations possess the extensive resources required for naval operations. The naval J-35 version could provide carrier-based capabilities, though this would be feasible mainly for nations with catapult launch systems, thus narrowing its potential market.<\/p>\n<p><span id=\"ezoic-pub-ad-placeholder-910\" class=\"A2O4W8X6IK\" data-method=\"placement-service\"><\/span>Military analyst Li Li, quoted by China Central Television News, states that the J-35A\u2019s induction marks an expansion in the PLAAF\u2019s stealth capabilities, positioning it alongside the J-20. This step could align PLAAF\u2019s capabilities with the U.S. Air Force, which operates the F-22 and F-35 stealth fighters. Within the PLAAF, the J-35A joins an informal fleet lineup known as the \u201cFour Musketeers,\u201d comprising the J-10C, J-16, J-20, and the new J-35A. Notably, this reveal coincides with the 75th-anniversary celebrations of the PLAAF, during which the air force will feature 36 different types of equipment through flight demonstrations and static displays.<\/p>\n<p>The J-35A\u2019s release on U.S. election day has led to comparisons with the American F-35A, particularly due to similarities in stealth characteristics and specific design elements. Images depict the J-35A positioned in a shelter typically used by the PLAAF, emphasizing its role as a land-based model. However, the new J-35A could potentially serve as a main carrier aircraft in a naval variant, which would align with China\u2019s expanding capabilities in both aerial and maritime domains.<\/p>\n<p>Reports over the years have noted speculation that the J-31\u2019s development, which led to the J-35A, may have drawn on data from the U.S. Joint Strike Fighter program, which led to the F-35, though these claims remain unverified. Some Russian aviation experts have asserted that the J-31 is a domestic design, independent of existing Western aircraft. The design&#8217;s evolution, including stealth capabilities and multi-role features, indicates a continued focus by China on producing advanced fifth-generation fighters.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"uk-panel uk-margin\">\n<p>The F-35 and J-35A display clear visual distinctions that suggest differences in design priorities and potential roles. The F-35 has a rounded, gently sloped nose, while the J-35A&#8217;s nose is sharper with a more defined chine line. This difference is also evident in the canopy shape: the F-35 features a single-piece, bubble-style canopy with a smooth curve, whereas the J-35A\u2019s canopy is slightly more angular and has a flatter profile.<\/p>\n<p><span id=\"ezoic-pub-ad-placeholder-912\" class=\"A2O4W8X6IK\" data-method=\"placement-service\"><\/span>In terms of engine exhaust nozzles, the F-35 uses a polygonal design intended to enhance certain performance characteristics, while the J-35A, typically seen with a rounder exhaust, reflects a different approach in nozzle configuration. The intake designs also vary, with the F-35 featuring larger, straight-sided intakes positioned close to the fuselage, and the J-35A\u2019s narrower intakes angled slightly outward, giving it a distinctive shape.<\/p>\n<p>The wing shapes and positions add further contrast between the two aircraft. The F-35\u2019s trapezoidal wings integrate with the fuselage in one configuration, while the J-35A\u2019s trapezoidal wings are larger and have a different placement, possibly reflecting considerations for carrier-based operations. The tail fin design diverges as well: the F-35\u2019s vertical stabilizers are shorter and blend closely into the fuselage, while the J-35A\u2019s stabilizers are taller and angled outward, resembling other designs in China&#8217;s stealth aircraft lineup, such as the J-20.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the landing gear differs in structure and placement. The F-35 has thicker landing gear, positioned in alignment with its structural design, while the J-35A\u2019s landing gear may be adapted for carrier operations, following certain design conventions observed in other Chinese aircraft. These distinctions suggest each aircraft&#8217;s design reflects specific operational requirements and design philosophies, with the F-35 and J-35A each incorporating elements that align with their respective priorities and roles.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The development of the J-35A traces back to the J-31\/FC-31 Gyrfalcon, a project initiated by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SA) and the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) as a self-funded, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1162,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[33,28],"tags":[31,186],"class_list":["post-786","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-air","category-military-tech","tag-china","tag-j-35a"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/China-J-35A.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/786","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=786"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/786\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2083,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/786\/revisions\/2083"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1162"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thedefencenews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}