Currently, publicly known information indicates that the J-11 can only carry a 2+2 configuration of FOX-3 missiles under its wings. Only the J-15/J-16 can carry two additional FOX-3 missiles, achieving 3+3 configuration (furthermore, based on the pylons used, it is speculated that the J-15/J-16, like the Su-30, can deploy FOX-3 missiles on the outer underwing stations) achieving 4+4.
If there is a desire to enhance the J-11’s payload capacity, Gaijin could consider adapting the ventral twin FOX-3 pylon from the J-10C for use on the J-11, as this pylon is similar to the ventral twin FOX-3 pylons used on aircraft like the Su-27SM and Su-30 .
Since there is no evidence that the Su-27SM can use the ventral twin FOX-3 pylon of the Su-30, there is reason to believe that the J-11/15/16 could also use the ventral twin missile pylon of the J-10C.
China is not export the J-11/J-15/J-16 Flanker series, as this would violate the prior agreements between Sukhoi and China. In fact, China had already exceeded the restrictions set by Sukhoi after the production of the J-11B. To maintain this delicate balanced relationship, China will not export its domestic Flanker series for the time being.
At present, the J-35A (not naval J-35) is likely the fifth-generation fighter jet that China is considering for export. Its predecessor, the FC-31, was once earmarked for export – a result of losing out to its competitor, the J-20, in the domestic program. Much like the F-22, the J-20 is not an export option for China.
it’s not related project, the losing one is what known as Snowy Owl, which based on an early CN-RU cooperation project. FC-31 is a project decided by Shenyang itself, focus on exporting market, then it meets the need of new low-coast 5th gen fighter and navy fighter, so it became a formal national project.
For chinese fighter exports they were very limited up until now because of previous agreements.
For Su27 derived planes as others already explained, they didn’t want to risk their relationship with Russia.
There is also second level of this which was engine availability as their even domestically clean sheet designs of J-10 and JF-17 were powered by engines under export control from Russia (RD-33/93 for Jeff and AL-31 for J10 and flankers). Russians wanting to protect their avenues of export with Su-30 obviously didn’t allow those.
They would’ve probably made a big splash on export market as multi role small fighters that were perfect for previous customers of MiG-29, F-16 and Mirage and didn’t come with as many strings attached like french or american upgrade options. J-10C and J-35 will probably get some exports in coming years while J-20 is probably out of reach of typical chinese customers
JF-17 still uses RD-93 series, because RD-33 series is widely used, cheap parts are easily achievable and many mechanic have the knowledge to deal with it.
current J-10CE all uses Chinese WS-10B, as a high-end positioning product.
but if customer want, they can also change to AL-31 series, UEC just released 31FN series 5 for J-10C, for protentional J-10CE customers.
which is what i said, but those wouldn’t be released for export if Chinese domestic options weren’t available. Now they just try to possibly cut in on revenue since they will no longer be able to block competition to Su-30/35
Similar to Chinese import of Su-35, russia wanted them to get the most air frames knowing they would be reverse engineered what was deemed better but seeing the horizon of domestic industry only missing few components (like engine development) they cut their loses and agreed to a very small order to get some cash while still possible
at that time it’s not like this. SU-35 is more like a back up plan at that time, same as J-11D, many different plan is pushed at one time to ensure the growth of air force. at that time, reverse engineering isn’t such important, more like reference and comparation, also, back up plan. Chinese are starting some truly new different design language, full reverse engineering means giving up what already done.
and now time, the communication between CN and RU plane is going into another new condition. the navy AL-31 on J-15T is said to be some kind of agreement, to help maintaining UEC’s navy engine line, in exchange of some experience in navy engine or some other unknow things. Current relation is no longer so competitive.
Yeah, given how tight the belly pylon on the J10C has to be to fit the missiles between the landing gear doors, there’s definitely much more space between the Flanker Intakes than there is on the J10C with the aforementioned landing gear doors. It’s 100% a cool idea and I would think there is no reason the J11/15/16 couldn’t use a similar or the same staggered pylon between the intakes… hope we can get solid proof at some point though, would be wicked cool.
